3 ms·

It looks like this doesn't offer any way for video creators to get paid? Right now a lot of major video creators are looking to leave YouTube because YouTube i

by adrusi 9y ago

It looks like this doesn't offer any way for video creators to get paid? Right now a lot of major video creators are looking to leave YouTube because YouTube is marking their videos as ineligible for monetization. That's the market you want to capture if you want to succeed as a YouTube alternative. Sites like d.tube and steemit.com and bitchute.com are offering this. Getting major video producers with a following on YouTube to use your alternative platform is how you get enough viewers to achieve critical mass. They won't come if they can't get paid. Now there's a problem here, because the average YouTube channel suffering from demonetization is a right-wing political channel, and attracting too many of them is a great way to make no one else want to come to your platform. These aren't the only video producers who are suffering from demonetization; the most egregious case I know of is science education channel CodysLab[1], which has been barred from uploading new videos a couple times on account of violating youtube's content guidelines for microwaving crickets to show that crickets are too small to be hurt by microwave radiation, and using black powder explosives. A federated network might be better able to handle this problem, giving the right-wing creators a platform on some instances, but not on others. But if peertube offers no monetization options, then it will never compete with YouTube. [1] https://youtube.com/user/thecodyreeder https://youtube.com/user/thecodyreeder

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Houshalter 9y ago
Is advertising really necessary? Most youtubers are making more money from donations than they are from ad revenue. Many of them also do paid promotions that pay better than youtube ads. The ad rate is really bad. And you can get demonetized for all sorts of random things that have nothing to do with politics The bigger problem is network effects. If you don't post your videos on youtube, no one will ever see them.
- exolymph 9y ago
  > Most youtubers are making more money from donations than they are from ad revenue. Citation needed.
peoplewindow 9y ago
attracting too many of them is a great way to make no one else want to come to your platform Perhaps that's a feature and not a bug. After all, judging by the last US election such people are in a slight minority anyway. And why is YouTube whacking those channels specifically - because left wing social justice types systematically try to wipe out conservative thought wherever they find it. It's a private sector form of the behavior communist countries always see. Do you want those people following you to the next place you host your videos? Or would you rather leave them to sit and stew in their nicely whitewashed PC groupthink? I think the real issue with your idea is that revenue streams from ads aren't that large, and anyway, advertisers are extremely sensitive to being targeted by witch hunts, which is why you see left wingers engage in so many of them against advertisers. I'd leave video authors to arrange for their own sponsorships; they can surely do it if the right messaging framework is in place.
- adrusi 9y ago
  There’s an unfortunate corollary to this, which is that if you try to create a libertarian paradise, you will attract three deeply virtuous people with a strong committment to the principle of universal freedom, plus millions of scoundrels. Declare that you’re going to stop holding witch hunts, and your coalition is certain to include more than its share of witches. So while some small percent of Reddit’s average users moved over, a very large percent of its witches did. Sometimes the witchcraft was nothing worse than questioning Reddit’s political consensus. Other times, it was harassment, hate groups, and creepy porn. http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centralized-web/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centrali... When one platform (youtube) starts banning/demonetizing certain people, and you create a new platform that guarantees free expression, that new platform is going to get swarmed by the people who were banned by the incumbent platform. If YouTube's methid of selecting people be banned/demonetized is reasonably in line with what the average viewer dislikes (no necessarily what they would want banned), then when the new platform gets flooded with content from those banned from YouTube, the average viewer will find little to like on the platform. Many people made their living off of YouTube ad revenue. Still do. You might be right that it's not the best source of income for the typical producer. However, right now, a lot of producers are angry at YouTube for their changes to their ad policy. Now's the time to drive a large number of big content producers off of YouTube and onto your new platform, because they are actively searching for a new one. But they're motivated by the loss of their ad revenue, so they're not going to be interested in a platform that doesn't pay out ad revenue at all, that doesn't address their concerns.

by adrusi 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Houshalter 9y ago

Is advertising really necessary? Most youtubers are making more money from donations than they are from ad revenue. Many of them also do paid promotions that pay better than youtube ads. The ad rate is really bad. And you can get demonetized for all sorts of random things that have nothing to do with politics The bigger problem is network effects. If you don't post your videos on youtube, no one will ever see them.

exolymph 9y ago
> Most youtubers are making more money from donations than they are from ad revenue. Citation needed.

peoplewindow 9y ago

attracting too many of them is a great way to make no one else want to come to your platform Perhaps that's a feature and not a bug. After all, judging by the last US election such people are in a slight minority anyway. And why is YouTube whacking those channels specifically - because left wing social justice types systematically try to wipe out conservative thought wherever they find it. It's a private sector form of the behavior communist countries always see. Do you want those people following you to the next place you host your videos? Or would you rather leave them to sit and stew in their nicely whitewashed PC groupthink? I think the real issue with your idea is that revenue streams from ads aren't that large, and anyway, advertisers are extremely sensitive to being targeted by witch hunts, which is why you see left wingers engage in so many of them against advertisers. I'd leave video authors to arrange for their own sponsorships; they can surely do it if the right messaging framework is in place.

adrusi 9y ago
There’s an unfortunate corollary to this, which is that if you try to create a libertarian paradise, you will attract three deeply virtuous people with a strong committment to the principle of universal freedom, plus millions of scoundrels. Declare that you’re going to stop holding witch hunts, and your coalition is certain to include more than its share of witches. So while some small percent of Reddit’s average users moved over, a very large percent of its witches did. Sometimes the witchcraft was nothing worse than questioning Reddit’s political consensus. Other times, it was harassment, hate groups, and creepy porn. http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centralized-web/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/07/22/freedom-on-the-centrali... When one platform (youtube) starts banning/demonetizing certain people, and you create a new platform that guarantees free expression, that new platform is going to get swarmed by the people who were banned by the incumbent platform. If YouTube's methid of selecting people be banned/demonetized is reasonably in line with what the average viewer dislikes (no necessarily what they would want banned), then when the new platform gets flooded with content from those banned from YouTube, the average viewer will find little to like on the platform. Many people made their living off of YouTube ad revenue. Still do. You might be right that it's not the best source of income for the typical producer. However, right now, a lot of producers are angry at YouTube for their changes to their ad policy. Now's the time to drive a large number of big content producers off of YouTube and onto your new platform, because they are actively searching for a new one. But they're motivated by the loss of their ad revenue, so they're not going to be interested in a platform that doesn't pay out ad revenue at all, that doesn't address their concerns.