3 ms·

I would argue that the ethical thing to do in this case is used Vanced/blockers and then support the content creators directly. (I happen to pay for YT Premium

by Mezzie 5y ago

I would argue that the ethical thing to do in this case is used Vanced/blockers and then support the content creators directly. (I happen to pay for YT Premium now, but I understand and sympathize with objections to it and used Vanced before I switched to an iOS device). In fact, in that case, the creators see more of the money, and they get data indicating what stuff people will and won't pay for. That $15/mo. YT Premium budget could easily go to supporting content creators. Content creators are screwed, long term, if they continue to rely on ad revenue, because both the ad companies and the platforms have incentives to keep the content creators' cuts as low as possible. Creators need revenue sources not under external control.

DetroitThrow 5y ago
This doesn't touch on how easy it is for the YouTube monopoly to never pass ad revenue to users and how it's in their favor to keep revenue information as opaque as possible. If it were a competitive market, perhaps blocking ads would be the bigger problem at play for creators trying to recover revenue through it, but that's just not the case even though OP is content dismissing the much more interesting discussion as "bad faith" or "unproductive".
wbobeirne 5y ago
I agree and throw ~$25 a month to various folks on Patreon / Substack. Content creators will always have to pay the piper to some degree though if they want a platform for distributing their content, and discoverability. Patreon gets by right now by relying on external hosts for videos (See https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017431292-Share-my-videos-with-patrons https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017431292-S...) and by largely having creators direct their audience from existing platforms. Without YouTube or Twitch or Twitter, Patreon doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. I definitely look forward to YouTube getting stiff competition from a direct monetization focused video platform though.

by Mezzie 5y ago

DetroitThrow 5y ago

This doesn't touch on how easy it is for the YouTube monopoly to never pass ad revenue to users and how it's in their favor to keep revenue information as opaque as possible. If it were a competitive market, perhaps blocking ads would be the bigger problem at play for creators trying to recover revenue through it, but that's just not the case even though OP is content dismissing the much more interesting discussion as "bad faith" or "unproductive".

wbobeirne 5y ago

I agree and throw ~$25 a month to various folks on Patreon / Substack. Content creators will always have to pay the piper to some degree though if they want a platform for distributing their content, and discoverability. Patreon gets by right now by relying on external hosts for videos (See https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017431292-Share-my-videos-with-patrons https://support.patreon.com/hc/en-us/articles/360017431292-S...) and by largely having creators direct their audience from existing platforms. Without YouTube or Twitch or Twitter, Patreon doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. I definitely look forward to YouTube getting stiff competition from a direct monetization focused video platform though.