6 ms·

Why does YouTube or Instagram tolerate sponsored content? They don't get a cut from a sponsored video or product placement, and their dominance in the advertis

Why does YouTube or Instagram tolerate sponsored content? They don't get a cut from a sponsored video or product placement, and their dominance in the advertising space means this is also cutting into their ad revenue.

corobo 5y ago
Sponsored content isn't locked in to YouTube The second they ban it all the creators that can afford to will jump ship. YouTube knows the creators that can afford to jump ship are also the ones keeping their lights on I have no idea the legal situation but I'd also imagine there'd be a safe harbour challenge in there somewhere too
- Jerry2 5y ago
  >The second they ban it all the creators that can afford to will jump ship. Jump to where though? No other video platform is even close to the number of visitors. We really need a credible YT alternative :(
  - corobo 5y ago
    Probably Vimeo plus their remaining socials at first to satisfy outstanding contracts and then I'm not sure unfortunately Depends on their access to tech knowledge whether they go distributed (peertube) or find another YouTube. Wherever they go would become the new YouTube over time Oddly enough it seems all content creators quickly attract a tech person that they later rely on and make their first hire when successful. I doubt it'd be the issue, depends what exists at the time
ajhurliman 5y ago
Sponsored content is the main income for creators, so if a platform banned it there would be a mass exodus and they'd lose their dominance.
- xqcgrek2 5y ago
  But they would earn more money from regular ad revenue, presumably. You're painting a rather bleak picture -- that the majority of creators/influencers' content is advertising. If that's the case, I'm not sure why Youtube/Instagram should also tolerate that -- it's basically spam on their platform they haven't curated through their ad network.
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    Spam is something nobody wants. The influencers videos quite some people want to see despite their sneaky ads. So youtube gets views, too.
    - katbyte 5y ago
      Not all sponsored ads are sneaky, a number of YouTube channels I watch do hilarious skits for each one at the end of their videos which I think is a win for everyone involved.
      - djur 5y ago
        At this point I don't think there's a single channel I watch that produces original content for YouTube (as opposed to, say, speedruns of video games or stream recordings) that is not sponsored. The last few holdouts gave in just a year or two ago. Just like podcasts, they'll do an ad read before, in the middle of, or after the video. I've gotten very used to skipping them.
    - slapfrog 5y ago
      > Spam is something nobody wants. Spam is something the recipient doesn't want. What is or isn't spam is subjectively determined by each individual recipient. If spam were strictly determined by what nobody wants, requiring complete consensus, then nothing would be spam because in a world of 7 billion people there will always be one nut who welcomes the unrequested solicitation.
  - cwkoss 5y ago
kentosi 5y ago
True, but banning it would mean a drop in engagement with the platform, which would in turn hurt YouTube/Instagram's profits. That's my guess.
lampe3 5y ago
because if you would only get money from youtube ads then you could not survive on it. Maybe if you are on of the 0.1% creaters but then you would miss out on a lot of smaller channels. Sure you have things like Patreon but its not that easy to get people to pay for your stuff. So in the end you will take sponsorship deals because you either do that or do something else.
jdavis703 5y ago
Digital ad campaigns are all about advanced targeting that influencers can’t really do. Influencers are more like traditional media that can describe their general demographics, but can’t precisely deliver ad dollars. For example say I follow a lot of architecture / interior design / construction accounts. A company that pays a construction influencer is going to waste their money on my impression — I’m never going to buy professional-grade construction equipment. On the other side Instagram or whomever already knows I’m a white collar worker and just sends me ads for ring lights and laptop stands. So influencers and platforms are essentially going after different sets of ad dollars.
paxys 5y ago
Because then they would have to pay content creators themselves.
Bayart 5y ago
Their dominance in the ad space means content creators aren't able to make a living without sponsorships and other sources of revenue (merch, patreon). Sponsorships on Youtube exploded when ad revenue cratered. Cut sponsorships away and you're basically killing the ecosystem.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
joshl325369 5y ago
Why wouldn't they? It doesn't really hurt them. When viewers see Youtube ads, they'll be annoyed with Youtube. But when viewers see sponsored content, they'd be annoyed with the content creator. So Youtube won't get the extra flak.
that_guy_iain 5y ago
Instagram actually force themselves into the value chain. Also, if all your content creators leave then you have no content. If you see the "sponsored" field on Instagram then it's part of Facebook forcing itself into the value chain. I also suspect it's againist anti-trust to force yourself into that value chain and to prevent others from marketing.
heavyset_go 5y ago
Because without sponsored content, they'd have to give content creators a bigger cut of their own revenue.
manigandham 5y ago
It's not really the same ad revenue. Sponsorships are completely different campaigns and budgets from typical programmatic video or companion ads run on Youtube. As far as YT is concerned, their ads pay for the hosting and delivery of the content, but it's the creators who actually create the content and they can include whatever they want (as long as its legal, etc) with their audience deciding if they want to deal with it or not.
asdff 5y ago
Youtube and instagram still place their own ads on sponsored content. I see it as youtube and instagram saving on labor costs since the sponsored posts are paying the influencer who ultimately drives engagement to the actual first party advertisements that make these platforms their real money. Just look at what gets posted as a sponsored post vs a first party advertisement and you can see its an entirely different ballgame being played and orders of magnitude different levels of ad spend. Sponsored posts might have some weird energy drink you've never heard of with vague promises of virility or other typical snakeoil features. The first party ad on the other hand will be from coca cola.
- lostlogin 5y ago
  > Youtube and instagram still place their own ads on sponsored content The ‘skip advert’ button… should it skip the YouTube inserted sponsored content, or move to the end of the video entirely?
mhh__ 5y ago
Better the devil you know?

corobo 5y ago

Sponsored content isn't locked in to YouTube The second they ban it all the creators that can afford to will jump ship. YouTube knows the creators that can afford to jump ship are also the ones keeping their lights on I have no idea the legal situation but I'd also imagine there'd be a safe harbour challenge in there somewhere too

Jerry2 5y ago
>The second they ban it all the creators that can afford to will jump ship. Jump to where though? No other video platform is even close to the number of visitors. We really need a credible YT alternative :(
- corobo 5y ago
  Probably Vimeo plus their remaining socials at first to satisfy outstanding contracts and then I'm not sure unfortunately Depends on their access to tech knowledge whether they go distributed (peertube) or find another YouTube. Wherever they go would become the new YouTube over time Oddly enough it seems all content creators quickly attract a tech person that they later rely on and make their first hire when successful. I doubt it'd be the issue, depends what exists at the time

ajhurliman 5y ago

Sponsored content is the main income for creators, so if a platform banned it there would be a mass exodus and they'd lose their dominance.

xqcgrek2 5y ago
But they would earn more money from regular ad revenue, presumably. You're painting a rather bleak picture -- that the majority of creators/influencers' content is advertising. If that's the case, I'm not sure why Youtube/Instagram should also tolerate that -- it's basically spam on their platform they haven't curated through their ad network.
- hutzlibu 5y ago
  Spam is something nobody wants. The influencers videos quite some people want to see despite their sneaky ads. So youtube gets views, too.
  - katbyte 5y ago
    Not all sponsored ads are sneaky, a number of YouTube channels I watch do hilarious skits for each one at the end of their videos which I think is a win for everyone involved.
    - djur 5y ago
      At this point I don't think there's a single channel I watch that produces original content for YouTube (as opposed to, say, speedruns of video games or stream recordings) that is not sponsored. The last few holdouts gave in just a year or two ago. Just like podcasts, they'll do an ad read before, in the middle of, or after the video. I've gotten very used to skipping them.
  - slapfrog 5y ago
    > Spam is something nobody wants. Spam is something the recipient doesn't want. What is or isn't spam is subjectively determined by each individual recipient. If spam were strictly determined by what nobody wants, requiring complete consensus, then nothing would be spam because in a world of 7 billion people there will always be one nut who welcomes the unrequested solicitation.
- cwkoss 5y ago

kentosi 5y ago

True, but banning it would mean a drop in engagement with the platform, which would in turn hurt YouTube/Instagram's profits. That's my guess.

lampe3 5y ago

because if you would only get money from youtube ads then you could not survive on it. Maybe if you are on of the 0.1% creaters but then you would miss out on a lot of smaller channels. Sure you have things like Patreon but its not that easy to get people to pay for your stuff. So in the end you will take sponsorship deals because you either do that or do something else.

jdavis703 5y ago

Digital ad campaigns are all about advanced targeting that influencers can’t really do. Influencers are more like traditional media that can describe their general demographics, but can’t precisely deliver ad dollars. For example say I follow a lot of architecture / interior design / construction accounts. A company that pays a construction influencer is going to waste their money on my impression — I’m never going to buy professional-grade construction equipment. On the other side Instagram or whomever already knows I’m a white collar worker and just sends me ads for ring lights and laptop stands. So influencers and platforms are essentially going after different sets of ad dollars.

paxys 5y ago

Because then they would have to pay content creators themselves.

Bayart 5y ago

Their dominance in the ad space means content creators aren't able to make a living without sponsorships and other sources of revenue (merch, patreon). Sponsorships on Youtube exploded when ad revenue cratered. Cut sponsorships away and you're basically killing the ecosystem.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

joshl325369 5y ago

Why wouldn't they? It doesn't really hurt them. When viewers see Youtube ads, they'll be annoyed with Youtube. But when viewers see sponsored content, they'd be annoyed with the content creator. So Youtube won't get the extra flak.

that_guy_iain 5y ago

Instagram actually force themselves into the value chain. Also, if all your content creators leave then you have no content. If you see the "sponsored" field on Instagram then it's part of Facebook forcing itself into the value chain. I also suspect it's againist anti-trust to force yourself into that value chain and to prevent others from marketing.

heavyset_go 5y ago

Because without sponsored content, they'd have to give content creators a bigger cut of their own revenue.

manigandham 5y ago

It's not really the same ad revenue. Sponsorships are completely different campaigns and budgets from typical programmatic video or companion ads run on Youtube. As far as YT is concerned, their ads pay for the hosting and delivery of the content, but it's the creators who actually create the content and they can include whatever they want (as long as its legal, etc) with their audience deciding if they want to deal with it or not.

asdff 5y ago

Youtube and instagram still place their own ads on sponsored content. I see it as youtube and instagram saving on labor costs since the sponsored posts are paying the influencer who ultimately drives engagement to the actual first party advertisements that make these platforms their real money. Just look at what gets posted as a sponsored post vs a first party advertisement and you can see its an entirely different ballgame being played and orders of magnitude different levels of ad spend. Sponsored posts might have some weird energy drink you've never heard of with vague promises of virility or other typical snakeoil features. The first party ad on the other hand will be from coca cola.

lostlogin 5y ago
> Youtube and instagram still place their own ads on sponsored content The ‘skip advert’ button… should it skip the YouTube inserted sponsored content, or move to the end of the video entirely?

mhh__ 5y ago

Better the devil you know?