3 ms·

Facebook wants creators, but YouTube is paying creators much, much more

• easytiger 5y ago
  If YouTube didn't exist most of these non live creators would have no business. There is no alternative platform. People earn incomes from regular 200k view videos from non paying customers. YouTube is completely unnafordable from my understanding without Alphabet cross subsidising it. So if anti trust attacks YouTube it's fairly likely that entire industry dies
• arkitaip 5y ago
  > The second reason is philosophical, and perhaps more important: I’m told that Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t think Facebook content-makers should get a cut of all of Facebook’s revenue. And that while he’s happy Facebook content-makers are giving him content, he thinks he can replace them with others if they don’t like the terms. Yay for Zuckerberg being so fucking greedy that he undermines his own platform. That's functional stupidity right there.
  • easytiger 5y ago
    As far as I can tell Facebook watch/gaming has no advertising whatsoever and creators on it get 100% of user subscription s (30% YT and 50% twitch) I don't think it's controversial to say they shouldn't get revenue from something not related to their content. Lots and lots of very small streamers are also contract salaried by Facebook in 1 year deals. So it's also not quite true
• readflaggedcomm 5y ago
  They say people stay with Youtube because it pays more, but it also allows casual viewing, which gives a chance to grow an audience. Most Facebook links lead me to signup pages, but Youtube is completely navigable without an account, whether or not I block ads. Maybe that makes no difference to artists, but if they're going ad-supported anyway, they might as well stick to a platform that hides them less.