One of the truisms of this emerging market is that diversity of revenue makes the difference. But it's also a bidirectional thing where diversity of the marketi

One of the truisms of this emerging market is that diversity of revenue makes the difference. But it's also a bidirectional thing where diversity of the marketing funnel also matters. If a creator is all-in on YouTube, they're at the mercy of the algorithm. But if they see YouTube as a cheap dumping ground to advertise content made elsewhere, they are the ones who benefit. For Twitch streamers this typically comes in the form of highlight videos; for e-commerce, the current products for sale are spammed. Slideshows and audio-only video get podcast, audiobook and music content out there. It's a numbers game where most of these videos disappear with sub-1000 view counts, but occasionally one slips through and gets blessed by the algorithm. And if you look at other platforms it's the same thing - a "weaving" of venues into a web. Lots of Twitter accounts exist to spread memes and sell their merch. Discords exist as a gathering point for Twitch and Patreon subscribers. At various points monetization can be offered but the business doesn't have to rest on any particular one paying for itself because the marginal cost to the creator is too cheap to meter; it's more important simply to keep building the network because it is the network that supports, not the specific trade relations flowing through it. So as we keep adding more platforms I think the ability to monetize is generally going to improve, because you have less reason to pay attention to any one platform owner's revenue model. And that also means that there's a "flight to quality" that will necessarily take place over the long run: When you straddle multiple platforms, you can afford to take a hit and possibly lose your identity on one of them, as long as you retain hooks elsewhere.