4 ms·

A big problem with automatic demonetization is that what frequently happens is that (let's assume that you are a popular Youtuber): You spend a lot of time and

by yoz-y 9y ago

A big problem with automatic demonetization is that what frequently happens is that (let's assume that you are a popular Youtuber): You spend a lot of time and money to make a video. You upload it to youtube. It trips some random check and is flagged and de-monetized, you appeal. People come and watch your video, with this type of content the vast majority of views is in the few first days since publishing. Your appeal finally gets through, you can now monetize the video. However it is too late because 80% of the views the video will ever have have been without ads. You are not entitled to revenue, however if you make your living off Youtube, you may expect that it will not randomly shoot you in the foot for no reason.

jacquesm 9y ago
Business disputes are not normally resolved with weapons. If you treat your Youtube presence as a business you are doing it wrong to begin with, and your conflict resolution venue will be the courts, not shooting at random employees.
- simias 9y ago
  I don't think he was defending the shooting but rather the fact that many so-called "pro" Youtubers feel like they're getting shafted. I think you built a strawman that makes it harder to discuss because you seem to equate "being unhappy with Youtube's monetization scheme" with supporting that shooter which is obviously inane. I doubt anybody here is saying that you should go shoot Google HQ if you're unhappy with their ToS. For the record I don't think people complaining about Youtube's monetization are right anyway, begging a tech giant for lunch money is not a viable business model. If you think you ought to be paid for your content then you should try to work together with other content producers to create your own platform where you get the share of the profit you deem fair. You need Youtube more than they need you.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    There is no such thing as a 'pro Youtuber'. That's about as silly as being a 'pro Mediumer'. There is such a thing as a professional blogger but they treat the thing as an actual business: with as much control over hosting and content delivery as they can get. The moment you use a third party service as the key component of your business you lose your 'pro' status.
    - djrogers 9y ago
      >The moment you use a third party service as the key component of your business you lose your 'pro' status. That's ridiculous on any number of levels. Are Pro hockey players not pro because they don't own their teams? Are salespeople not professional because they use SFDC as SaaS instead of their own handcrafted CRM? Hell, are devs not pros if they use GitHub, AWS, or GCP?
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        > That's ridiculous on any number of levels. Yes, if you draw it wider than I intended to it is. After all I clearly meant within the context of creating and delivering content to an audience. If that is your business you operate at the whims of the owners of the network. > Are Pro hockey players not pro because they don't own their teams? I never really got 'professional sports' so I'm not going to be the right person to comment on that. To me a sport is something to be enjoyed, not something to be made into a profession though it is clear that lots of people do just that. Even so, they are not - to me - as much of a professional as say a car mechanic, a musician or a computer programmer would be. If professional sports would disappear tomorrow I wouldn't miss it, but I totally realize I'm in the minority here. > Are salespeople not professional because they use SFDC as SaaS instead of their own handcrafted CRM? They would be unprofessional if they did not plan for outages, being kicked off the service and potential bankruptcies of the SaaS providers. Or at least, the organization they are part of would not be professional. > Hell, are devs not pros if they use GitHub, AWS, or GCP? If they make themselves totally dependent on any of those, then yes, they are not pros. A real business should do the best it can to be an independent entity and should only enter into dependencies after well reasoned out weighing of pros and cons and backup services and options where possible. Otherwise you will find that that business will sooner or later crash due to some outside influence. Now obviously there are some risks that you can not protect against: wars, 'acts of god' (a cop-out to mean anything we can imagine that's out of scope), wholesale market downturn and so on. But a simple account termination should not be able to kill a healthy business.
- frankc 9y ago
  Literally no one has said she was justified in shooting anyone.
- baud147258 9y ago
  > If you treat your Youtube presence as a business you are doing it wrong to begin with Why? If you are aware of the risks, have alternate monetization scheme, back-ups and mirrors of your videos, what's the problem of relying on a company who can distribute videos way better than what one person can do?
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    That's a responsible attitude. Sadly, that attitude does not seem to be the prevailing one.
    - baud147258 9y ago
      > Sadly, that attitude does not seem to be the prevailing one. You are right. I was just trying to point out how treating one's YT presence as a business could be done right, but I agree that's not the majority of Youtubers.
MaupitiBlue 9y ago
If you thought investing your future in internet videos was a good idea, I'd stay away from cryptocurrency.
- yoz-y 9y ago
  Why not? It is not much different that wanting a career in video elsewhere. There are many people who are successfully doing so. Also, most do not earn money only from Youtube, but also from sponsorships and patrons. (Also, I am neither making videos on Youtube nor invest in crypto, I just happen to follow a bunch of people that do.)
chii 9y ago
> It trips some random check and is flagged and de-monetized this is the problem i think a lot of youtubers have. If only youtube can clearly say what they are checking or set guidelines for monetizations to follow. Of course, the issue they must have is that guidelines are often skirted around - youtubers (and internet in general) is known for attempting to edge towards the limits...
- yoz-y 9y ago
  At least one possibility would be to add a possibility to pass the checks before releasing the video.
  - chii 9y ago
    > pass the checks before releasing the video. unless you're restricted in how many times you're allowed to check the video, this will just become the same game-able system. There isn't a good way tbh - i think a free-for-all (ala, streamable!) is the best democratic option.
    - yoz-y 9y ago
      That is true. The push to de-monetise controversial videos comes from the advertisers rather than google though.

by yoz-y 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

Business disputes are not normally resolved with weapons. If you treat your Youtube presence as a business you are doing it wrong to begin with, and your conflict resolution venue will be the courts, not shooting at random employees.

simias 9y ago
I don't think he was defending the shooting but rather the fact that many so-called "pro" Youtubers feel like they're getting shafted. I think you built a strawman that makes it harder to discuss because you seem to equate "being unhappy with Youtube's monetization scheme" with supporting that shooter which is obviously inane. I doubt anybody here is saying that you should go shoot Google HQ if you're unhappy with their ToS. For the record I don't think people complaining about Youtube's monetization are right anyway, begging a tech giant for lunch money is not a viable business model. If you think you ought to be paid for your content then you should try to work together with other content producers to create your own platform where you get the share of the profit you deem fair. You need Youtube more than they need you.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  There is no such thing as a 'pro Youtuber'. That's about as silly as being a 'pro Mediumer'. There is such a thing as a professional blogger but they treat the thing as an actual business: with as much control over hosting and content delivery as they can get. The moment you use a third party service as the key component of your business you lose your 'pro' status.
  - djrogers 9y ago
    >The moment you use a third party service as the key component of your business you lose your 'pro' status. That's ridiculous on any number of levels. Are Pro hockey players not pro because they don't own their teams? Are salespeople not professional because they use SFDC as SaaS instead of their own handcrafted CRM? Hell, are devs not pros if they use GitHub, AWS, or GCP?
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      > That's ridiculous on any number of levels. Yes, if you draw it wider than I intended to it is. After all I clearly meant within the context of creating and delivering content to an audience. If that is your business you operate at the whims of the owners of the network. > Are Pro hockey players not pro because they don't own their teams? I never really got 'professional sports' so I'm not going to be the right person to comment on that. To me a sport is something to be enjoyed, not something to be made into a profession though it is clear that lots of people do just that. Even so, they are not - to me - as much of a professional as say a car mechanic, a musician or a computer programmer would be. If professional sports would disappear tomorrow I wouldn't miss it, but I totally realize I'm in the minority here. > Are salespeople not professional because they use SFDC as SaaS instead of their own handcrafted CRM? They would be unprofessional if they did not plan for outages, being kicked off the service and potential bankruptcies of the SaaS providers. Or at least, the organization they are part of would not be professional. > Hell, are devs not pros if they use GitHub, AWS, or GCP? If they make themselves totally dependent on any of those, then yes, they are not pros. A real business should do the best it can to be an independent entity and should only enter into dependencies after well reasoned out weighing of pros and cons and backup services and options where possible. Otherwise you will find that that business will sooner or later crash due to some outside influence. Now obviously there are some risks that you can not protect against: wars, 'acts of god' (a cop-out to mean anything we can imagine that's out of scope), wholesale market downturn and so on. But a simple account termination should not be able to kill a healthy business.
frankc 9y ago
Literally no one has said she was justified in shooting anyone.
baud147258 9y ago
> If you treat your Youtube presence as a business you are doing it wrong to begin with Why? If you are aware of the risks, have alternate monetization scheme, back-ups and mirrors of your videos, what's the problem of relying on a company who can distribute videos way better than what one person can do?
- jacquesm 9y ago
  That's a responsible attitude. Sadly, that attitude does not seem to be the prevailing one.
  - baud147258 9y ago
    > Sadly, that attitude does not seem to be the prevailing one. You are right. I was just trying to point out how treating one's YT presence as a business could be done right, but I agree that's not the majority of Youtubers.

MaupitiBlue 9y ago

If you thought investing your future in internet videos was a good idea, I'd stay away from cryptocurrency.

yoz-y 9y ago
Why not? It is not much different that wanting a career in video elsewhere. There are many people who are successfully doing so. Also, most do not earn money only from Youtube, but also from sponsorships and patrons. (Also, I am neither making videos on Youtube nor invest in crypto, I just happen to follow a bunch of people that do.)

chii 9y ago

> It trips some random check and is flagged and de-monetized this is the problem i think a lot of youtubers have. If only youtube can clearly say what they are checking or set guidelines for monetizations to follow. Of course, the issue they must have is that guidelines are often skirted around - youtubers (and internet in general) is known for attempting to edge towards the limits...

yoz-y 9y ago
At least one possibility would be to add a possibility to pass the checks before releasing the video.
- chii 9y ago
  > pass the checks before releasing the video. unless you're restricted in how many times you're allowed to check the video, this will just become the same game-able system. There isn't a good way tbh - i think a free-for-all (ala, streamable!) is the best democratic option.
  - yoz-y 9y ago
    That is true. The push to de-monetise controversial videos comes from the advertisers rather than google though.