3 ms·

It's harder for me to get upset at instances of alleged corporate bullying when the result is clearly pro-user. If YouTube allowed video authors to opt out of

by comex 11y ago

It's harder for me to get upset at instances of alleged corporate bullying when the result is clearly pro-user. If YouTube allowed video authors to opt out of Red, their only reasonable option (short of turning into a charity for said authors) would be to show Red subscribers those videos with ads. For a user, a service that's only "mostly" ad-free is only a pale imitation of the real thing - especially if labels decide to opt out en masse as a bargaining chip, and "mostly" starts to look a lot more like "largely" or "partly". Not a good way for Google to keep subscribers (who might turn to ad blockers instead), obnoxious for subscribers, and probably ultimately detrimental to the creators.

silverbax88 11y ago
It's "pro user" unless it starts to limit new content, which is possible. Many videos are actually on YouTube without ads because they are stored as tutorials, etc. I get why Google wouldn't want to keep hosting them but it could mean a reduction in content.
- nemothekid 11y ago
  I'm not sure the new deal affects those uploaders. The deal only affects people who are monetizing today via Ads and don't want to monetize from the Red subscription. If you are just uploading tutorials, you can just opt out of being a "YouTube Partner" altogether.
  - Blaaguuu 11y ago
    This is the part that I don't understand - because I don't know what the language like 'YouTube Partner' means... I know of a lot of YouTube creators who monetize many of their videos with ads, but when they have small 'announcement' videos, and other videos which don't really contribute to the primary drive of their channel, they don't monetize them - does this mean those 'partners' have to go all-or-nothing, and either monetize all of their videos or none? Because that is what it sounds like, and what makes me upset.
    - micaeked 11y ago
      > does this mean those 'partners' have to go all-or-nothing, and either monetize all of their videos or none? Nope. Means nothing of the sort.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

by comex 11y ago

silverbax88 11y ago

It's "pro user" unless it starts to limit new content, which is possible. Many videos are actually on YouTube without ads because they are stored as tutorials, etc. I get why Google wouldn't want to keep hosting them but it could mean a reduction in content.

nemothekid 11y ago
I'm not sure the new deal affects those uploaders. The deal only affects people who are monetizing today via Ads and don't want to monetize from the Red subscription. If you are just uploading tutorials, you can just opt out of being a "YouTube Partner" altogether.
- Blaaguuu 11y ago
  This is the part that I don't understand - because I don't know what the language like 'YouTube Partner' means... I know of a lot of YouTube creators who monetize many of their videos with ads, but when they have small 'announcement' videos, and other videos which don't really contribute to the primary drive of their channel, they don't monetize them - does this mean those 'partners' have to go all-or-nothing, and either monetize all of their videos or none? Because that is what it sounds like, and what makes me upset.
  - micaeked 11y ago
    > does this mean those 'partners' have to go all-or-nothing, and either monetize all of their videos or none? Nope. Means nothing of the sort.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]