3 ms·

A generalist (a half decent you-tuber) would be able to set up something better than 'default microphone' at home - I seem to recall late night US talk show hos

A generalist (a half decent you-tuber) would be able to set up something better than 'default microphone' at home - I seem to recall late night US talk show hosts doing monologues from their hallway. But these guys relied upon a team that was 'just there'. The corporation had done the work - the knowledge on how to make a TV programme was implicit in the whole organisation, not in one persons head. I think this is the real 'reveal' - it is possible to have much smaller corporations, you just need much higher skilled (perhaps broader-skilled) employees. In HN terms, very very few companies need vast Spark-enabled data centres replicated across multiple time zones. You can go a very long way with the data centre equivalent of pro-sumer.

wayoutthere 7y ago
I don't think you're entirely wrong, but most corporations spend the majority of their specialization on the revenue generation side of things. In media, this means sales and ad tech. "Making a TV program" is something that has been outsourced to studios for a long time. It's also a nightmare trying to hire for broad skillsets. Increased specialization is the only way to scale on the business side of the house. Even YouTubers have agents and managers who handle the money side of things. The influencer management companies largely act as a studio from a distribution standpoint, and most are owned by major studios at this point. There is no free lunch; those YouTubers have a huge centralized infrastructure with an army of specialized people, it's just funded by management fees paid by the talent instead of a corporate budget. Don't discount the level of professionalism behind most YouTube content; this shit has been heavily controlled by established media interests (Comcast/NBC, Disney, etc.) for at least 5 years. It just looks different than the old media model, but it's all owned by the same players.
- lifeisstillgood 7y ago
  So, those kids doing a billion views, aren't just managed by two pushy parents, but have been bought by Disney? I beleive you - but would love to read more about it - any references?
  - wayoutthere 7y ago
    I don't have references because of the intentionally opaque way this stuff is negotiated; but the level of consolidation was one of the most eye-opening things I found when building a video product in the space back in 2016. Rooster Teeth (owned by Otter Media, which is WarnerMedia/AT&T) is a good example here; they have their fingers in a lot more YouTube pies than is obvious at a glance. But yeah -- the real money in video is still in negotiated campaigns that target a specific channel or set of channels. There are only so many ad buyers, so there are benefits to centralizing ad slot sales as well as SSP activity. Those kids doing a billion views have a magic combination of personal charisma, work ethic and well-connected, pushy parents in the media industry. Things were different pre-2015 but the level of sophistication required to get big in online video is much higher than people think. There are a lot of talented, charismatic people out there making videos; the ones who find financial success are the ones who can amplify their voice above the crowd (which really just takes money).

wayoutthere 7y ago

I don't think you're entirely wrong, but most corporations spend the majority of their specialization on the revenue generation side of things. In media, this means sales and ad tech. "Making a TV program" is something that has been outsourced to studios for a long time. It's also a nightmare trying to hire for broad skillsets. Increased specialization is the only way to scale on the business side of the house. Even YouTubers have agents and managers who handle the money side of things. The influencer management companies largely act as a studio from a distribution standpoint, and most are owned by major studios at this point. There is no free lunch; those YouTubers have a huge centralized infrastructure with an army of specialized people, it's just funded by management fees paid by the talent instead of a corporate budget. Don't discount the level of professionalism behind most YouTube content; this shit has been heavily controlled by established media interests (Comcast/NBC, Disney, etc.) for at least 5 years. It just looks different than the old media model, but it's all owned by the same players.

lifeisstillgood 7y ago
So, those kids doing a billion views, aren't just managed by two pushy parents, but have been bought by Disney? I beleive you - but would love to read more about it - any references?
- wayoutthere 7y ago
  I don't have references because of the intentionally opaque way this stuff is negotiated; but the level of consolidation was one of the most eye-opening things I found when building a video product in the space back in 2016. Rooster Teeth (owned by Otter Media, which is WarnerMedia/AT&T) is a good example here; they have their fingers in a lot more YouTube pies than is obvious at a glance. But yeah -- the real money in video is still in negotiated campaigns that target a specific channel or set of channels. There are only so many ad buyers, so there are benefits to centralizing ad slot sales as well as SSP activity. Those kids doing a billion views have a magic combination of personal charisma, work ethic and well-connected, pushy parents in the media industry. Things were different pre-2015 but the level of sophistication required to get big in online video is much higher than people think. There are a lot of talented, charismatic people out there making videos; the ones who find financial success are the ones who can amplify their voice above the crowd (which really just takes money).