Mechanized
Member
So journalism isn't a job then?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kotaku: YouTubers Say They Can't Make Money Covering Call of Duty: WWII
- Thread starter LordOfLore
- Start date
So journalism isn't a job then?
Adam_Vania
Banned
EDIT: i wrote something here about journalists, then realized what i was replying to had nothing to do with my initial reponse. i was responding to a post asking why youtubers are "any less legitimate than a musician or an actor. They serve no purpose to the world besides entertainment". my point is those people create, youtubers react. youtubers are consumers, artists are producers.
The latter.
Saucycarpdog
Member
Unfortunately as long as advertisers wield all the money for both YouTube and YouTubers, they will always get the final say in everything.
The automated ad tool YT uses for videos isn't going away anytime soon.
The automated ad tool YT uses for videos isn't going away anytime soon.
killer rin
Member
Are you making a wage you can live off of by doing it? Yes? Then Its a real job. That is the only question that matters
But YouTubers aren't creating companies. They're putting out products in an actual company's marketplace (YouTube). They're never going to be not at the mercy of Google's whims in this space. If I opened a store in a mall, I still have to obey the malls regulations. If I have a successful show on a TV network, I am held to the standards and whims of the network. That's the issue for YouTubers. They don't own any part of YouTube and are, generally, replaceable cheap labor.
LordRaptor
Member
Okay, so?
Play a different game if thats what the people paying your wages want, or play the same game and don't earn as much money because the people paying don't want to pay for that.
Its a job. You're supposed to take it seriously because its your livelihood.
Okay, so?
Social mores change.
5 years ago having tranny surprise open in a browser screenshot was a GAF meme and you could make topics about "traps" and post pictures of Poison and Brigit, and today you'll get banned for that shit.
And GAF posting isn't even a job that you expect to take seriously because its not your livelihood.
Okay, so?
If your job is predicated on ad revenue, then you have to do things to keep advertisers happy.
If you can't be arsed to source your own advertisers who are simpatico with whatever it is you want to do that makes regular advertisers gunshy, then you have to put up with what they want because they're paying your wages.
If you're being paid by advertising, you already sold out. Deal with it.
always crazy bacon
Banned
becuse being a youtuber and founding a company are exactly the same right?
ronaldthump
Member
why can't it be a long term job? If there's an audience. Why not.
Please don't tell me playing video games for an audience is journalism. Even editors at Giant Bomb or IGN would laugh about this notion.
Journalism on YouTube is super ace of course. If it's good and based on facts, real journalism.
That again goes back to the notion that YouTube is a society-changing tool. A technology to share your art, thoughts, work. YouTube as a system just isn't thought-out enough for everything it wants to be. It can't. The old times of the Wild West are over, but it's not professional enough to be a new era media house some make it out to be.
What does it want to be? Current-state YouTube can't survive for mature content. (Kid content can be really questionable as well of course.)
AcademicSaucer
Member
It can be but you are betting your future on a corporation that doesn't give a fuck about you.
A shitty comparison remains a shitty comparison, no matter how much you elaborate on it. You cannot compare YouTube to a regular office environment because that's simply not what it is. We're not talking about co-workers interacting with each other here, we're talking about customers consuming an entertainment/educational/etc. product and the content in question is not part of an office conversation, it's part of that product. If you absolutely have to compare it to an offline example, I guess you could compare it to a bookstore. But, of course, even that's not a great comparison because it doesn't include the advertisers.
That's a very unfair and inaccurate generalisation of the YouTuber community. There are plenty of YouTubers who create either entirely original content or content that's at least original enough to be considered its own artistic creation.
Mechanized
Member
So, like most jobs?
killer rin
Member
Dude, have you seen the current world climate? No corporation gives two shits about you. Not your employer, not a random corporation you interact with. Atleast with YouTube you can attempt to diversify your earnings so that you aren't beholden to YouTube alone
I see. Just curious, what kind of respectable journalists are there on YouTube?
LordRaptor
Member
I mean, if you want to say that a comparison to literally every job on the planet is a shitty comparison while still maintaining that Youtube is a real job, okay.
Every job has codes of professional conduct.
Everyone who works for a living has various rules they have to obey to get paid, explicit or otherwise.
Even big name hollywood stars have had to do shitty projects they didn't want to for cash or been overruled on a decision at some point in their career.
Mechanized
Member
You don't have anything of value to add here.
Your argument is "yeah, so, deal with it". All of your comments come off as anger and jealousy. Maybe youtube should adapt with the times? Hmmm? Protect the people it essentially employs? The reason why it is so popular?
Seems like that concept is too much for you to grasp. So please stop acting like a child.
Adam_Vania
Banned
yeah i'm one of those. i create a lot of original content. i also create a lot of culture jamming stuff. obviously there is tons of original stuff on youtube.
i'm not talking about those people, those people aren't the topic of discussion here. this is about youtubers as shorthand for "people who play and talk about video games". cos this thread is about that. it's about those people being upset that they can't make money off those games. it has nothing to do with people making original content.
LordRaptor
Member
People who work for a living are beholden to the rules set by their employer.
That's not "acting like a child". That's the reality of working for a living.
If you're a trust fund kid, or a lottery winner, or a dilettante, sure, do what the fuck you want, it doesn't matter.
ClosingADoor
Member
Youtube does not employ these people though. They are free to go anywhere they want if they don't agree with Youtube on its policies. They don't get a salary, they don't have an employment contract.
I remember hearing of some actors being stuck in a contract they hated. But they knew what they were getting into - sort of.
Basically it was something to the extent of "we'll fund your next movie you want to write and direct, but you've got to do the next 3 films we put you in."
That's how Rock wound up doing Tooth Fairy and other shit like that. Actually, now that I think about it - that's how Disney worked a lot a few years back.
Lister
Banned
I don't think they are "blaming" the WSJ. They are simply saying it was the trigger for the change.
Largely the issue is not demonetization, is just LESS monetization.
Video playing Minecraft/Roblox/etc (no swearing) 1000 views = $1
Video talking into a camera about WWE/Wrestling (no swearing) 1000 views = 10 cents
The biggest problem right now is the lack of communication from YouTube on what's appropriate and what's not.
SciencePilot
Member
YouTube also loses out on money when advertisements are not shown. They would love to show as many ads as possible.
The reason they pulled back is they were recently faced with am advertiser boycott and then went really safe as a stopgap solution. I'm sure they will work on improving the amount of ads shown as soon as they can so they can earn more money themselves.
The reason they pulled back is they were recently faced with am advertiser boycott and then went really safe as a stopgap solution. I'm sure they will work on improving the amount of ads shown as soon as they can so they can earn more money themselves.
bigdaddygamebot
Member
The only thing that matters to Google, and therefore Youtube, is how much money it can make. So far, it hasn't been making much; the bulk of what little it does make for Google comes from the cut they take from advertisers. Without advertisers there is no Youtube as the sheer server costs alone would be too much for Google's shareholders. So, when advertisers start pulling out of their contracts with Google due to them finally realizing what they've attached their names to, Google has to do something.
Now, what they've decided to do is very haphazard in many different ways, but now that advertising on Youtube is starting to work like advertisement everywhere else even the most open system will have some Youtubers losing their previous revenue streams. Without advertisers there is nothing Google can do to "protect" the people using Youtube to earn an income.
No problem! I'd recommend his other videos as well; even if you don't care about the subject he's still entertaining.
Not really,if you are a programmer unless you refuse to learn new standards or programming languages, you an move from company to company or even dare to create something yourself.
If YouTube decides to kill revenue tomorrow, most of them will end without any way to earn money or even the experience to get a different job.
Anyways, back to topic, I do think that the lack of competition hurts the video system, it is basically a monopoly held by YouTube. Now, I understand that no normal company would want to dive into this shitfest lightly
Majima Everywhere System
Member
Why the sudden concern around things turning into demons?
They sure did slap Call of Duty: WWII on this article to enhance the clicks. In practice, this will affect a great deal of video game depicting war.
They sure did slap Call of Duty: WWII on this article to enhance the clicks. In practice, this will affect a great deal of video game depicting war.
According to your logic they are, since neither got employed by anyone else.
Chozo_Lord
Member
I see this biting youtube in the ass big time in the future if this keeps going. Imagine content creators going above youtube ad revenue and get sponsored directly by a company that doesn't mind their content (some already do this like with patreon). The creator plays the ad inside the video and not an external ad by youtube. Youtube gets zero money, but they have to pay for the servers that host the video. It could get bad enough where youtube would ban in-video advertisement just to try to get a cut.
Also this can potentially hurt free opinions about games. Imagine if Activision started paying content creators directly for COD videos, but then the creator could not say anything bad about the games.
Also this can potentially hurt free opinions about games. Imagine if Activision started paying content creators directly for COD videos, but then the creator could not say anything bad about the games.
Fox Mulder
Member
People under estimate the work people do all the time, like complaining about lazy devs.
I think this ad shift sucks and will hurt quality content that really built the platform, but Google doesn't owe anyone shit in the end.
I know full-time YouTubers have to be incredibly dedicated to amass a large enough audience to sustain themselves, but I've never been able to help myself from seeing it as "You're able to make money doing what?? More power to you, but strike while the iron's hot, cuz that shit won't last forever."
Adertisers have the right to determine what content fits their brand's image. If you want a mass market audience, your content will have mass market advertising. If your content is 18+, you'll have advertisers interested only in that demographic and that inherently cuts your possible advertisers.
Why do you think HBO and Cinemax were subscription only? If you want to make a living on advertising on adult entertainment, you're either going to have back to back liquor ads or you're going subscription.
Why do you think HBO and Cinemax were subscription only? If you want to make a living on advertising on adult entertainment, you're either going to have back to back liquor ads or you're going subscription.
Spot on. Completely agree.
While I hope that anyone who wants something bad enough will be able to achieve their dreams, I hope that this leads to less kids thinking that Youtube personality is a viable career choice. I'm not saying that no-one should aspire to that, but to be more realistic about the hurdles associated with it. I always think of the kid who dropped out of school to become a professional Guitar Hero player. Like, don't put all of your eggs into such a fragile basket. People like the Pewdiepie's of the world are the exception, not the rule.
The biggest German cooking channel uploaded a video talking about this some time ago. She said that parents often come to her and ask for advice because their kids want to become a YouTube star. Her answer: Go to school and get a real job.
She's also a teacher and was worried about how many of her fans believe that YouTube could be a reliable job for all of them. Nice to see.
Why not have a rating system for YouTube and then have advertisers bucketed into these rating scales. If Pepsi is ok with a Mature Rated video .. YT should be OK with paying the content creator. Have the content creator rate their own video. If the content doesn't match the rating then I can see justification for demonetization.
Alebrije
Member
That's the problem , a lot of kids 10-12 years old want to be you tubers and the worse there are parents that support this and school just becomes a place to talk about their channel.
In the Media Industry just few people make millions , thousands of people just earn to live in the edge and they are the ones that should be looking for a second job or leave You Tube for a better place.
ClosingADoor
Member
This happens. The videos are grouped and the advertisers can say if they want to advertise around it. But most would not check the 'sensitive content' or things like that.
Content creators rating their own videos will be a total mess. They'll just label it whatever has the best advertising rates and complain afterwards.
So someone who has a hard time in their profession is classified as a amateur by your definition? What about a translator freelancer. That is also just a hobby if he is doing poorly?
Alebrije
Member
Beta testers are on extinction, lazy developers just patch the game after consumer complains.
just curios how much a Betatester can earn. Can you make a living as one ?
Because that would equate to a massive over generalization of content. A Call of Duty trailer would receive the same M rating as an expletive-laden rant by a skinhead. Obviously, Pepsi might be okay with one of those but not the other.
tearsintherain
Member
Feel sorta bad for YTers who make their living off videos but this was just a quickening of the problem thats coming: advertising online doesn't seem very smart, and i think big advertisers are starting to realize their brand, products, etc have probably a negative impact with random advertising on random google adsense, Youtube, twitch, etc rather than a positive one.
It just means the market has to adapt and shift, thats all. You need to depend more on product placement, partnerships, working directly with sponsors, and of course patreons / paid subs / donations / etc rather than passively hoping you make money just putting out content and random advertising paying for your content. Specifically for Call of Duty content, the market is pretty specific and thinks like energy drinks, gaming peripherals, fast food, etc are all good candidates for partnered advertising but just random stuff isn't.
Its interesting that all of this has had virtually no impact on twitch streamers, since they don't really depend on ad revenue at all but instead on subs, donations, and partnerships.
It just means the market has to adapt and shift, thats all. You need to depend more on product placement, partnerships, working directly with sponsors, and of course patreons / paid subs / donations / etc rather than passively hoping you make money just putting out content and random advertising paying for your content. Specifically for Call of Duty content, the market is pretty specific and thinks like energy drinks, gaming peripherals, fast food, etc are all good candidates for partnered advertising but just random stuff isn't.
Its interesting that all of this has had virtually no impact on twitch streamers, since they don't really depend on ad revenue at all but instead on subs, donations, and partnerships.
Got it. Ya, not that familiar with how YT works. Regarding self governance .. yes, it would be difficult but YT has the governor is more of a mess. If you don't check of 'sensitive content' or label it something that it is not .. maybe you don't deserve the advertising dollars.
Is there an option to label something as "video game" or "video game content" or "video game gameplay"?
EDIT: "sensitive content" is a pretty general toggle
You would think that Youtube would realize that there are audiences of all ages and how much like channels on a TV, there are some that aren't exactly aimed at children. It would be like saying that History channel can't air any content from WW2 because it can be too graphic for kids. A ridiculous example of course, but that is how some are viewing this whole mess right now.
funkystudent
Member
Youtube was always a shaky platform as far as making a living goes.
I have some sympathy for these guys but you would have to be playing dumb to not see the day the youtube money train stopped coming.
I have some sympathy for these guys but you would have to be playing dumb to not see the day the youtube money train stopped coming.
No idea how much they are paid, but I've heard they have pretty salaries. I'm not surprised companies want to get rid of them because it's cheaper by far to make consumers do their jobs.