8 ms·

> Every day, people come to YouTube to learn something new. True. > shows content on commonly used education apps without distractions like ads, external link

> Every day, people come to YouTube to learn something new. True. > shows content on commonly used education apps without distractions like ads, external links or recommendations External links seem important on educational files, and I kind of like recommendations when I'm browsing educational stuff, but whoo, no ads on educational stuff? That's great! > Next year, qualified creators can begin offering free or paid There it is.

mertd 4y ago
How should the creators be rewarded for their effort?
- eimrine 4y ago
  More subscribers for increasing their revenue from other videos, maybe yt-premium or even some protection against infamous random ban because of needness to support learning materials.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - jahewson 4y ago
    > More subscribers for increasing their revenue from other videos That’s not an answer as much as it’s moving the question.
- Bloating 4y ago
  with Thumbs Up, of course. Do you kno whow much effort it takes to login and click?
yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
Just to play Devil's Advocate (and I can't believe that I'm arguing for YouTube here): Why shouldn't they charge for a useful service? And it does sound like they're removing other major problems with using their platform for this purpose.
- tmpz22 4y ago
  Problem: Creators want to be paid more for their content (great content, good content, bad content, etc) Solution proposed by Google: Lets charge customers who view this content so that we can pay creators more without losing revenue. Solution proposed by Consumers: Lets give creators a larger share of youtube's profits. We're already paying for the service by offering our data, our youtube premium subscriptions, and other forms of MTX monetization. TLDR; Youtube is double dipping in the guacamole bowl, despite having billions of pounds of guacamole.
  - lern_too_spel 4y ago
    Both options are available. I don't see the issue here.
  - colinmhayes 4y ago
    Then go to a different video hosting service I guess.
  - Bloating 4y ago
    Its almost like we're forced to watch their ads, as if Youtube is the only way to occupy our minds
  - green_on_black 4y ago
    Solution proposed by shareholders: Why do you think you're entitled to our profits?
    - EarlKing 4y ago
      Solution proposed by viewers: Why do you think you're entitled to my attention? [installs adblock]
      - Miraste 4y ago
        Solution proposed by Google: Force through Manifest v3, coincidentally make blocking YouTube ads impossible
towaway15463 4y ago
As long as they offer both and not one or the other this should be ok. I’m hoping this allows creators to build more in depth courses consisting of a large number of videos. Right now I mostly have to go to Udemy et al for that sort of thing. Being able to preview some of a course on YouTube with ads and then buy the whole thing if I like it sounds like a win. I’ll reserve judgment until it launches though, it is an Alphabet product after all.
- 7speter 4y ago
  >Right now I mostly have to go to Udemy et al for that sort of thing. So pretty much, with launching a model where viewers might pay, Youtube is launching a Udemy competitor, no?
scifibestfi 4y ago
The "qualified" part is sus. But otherwise isn't being able to charge directly a good thing assuming creators remove ads and any product placement?
- Bilal_io 4y ago
  Probably what they meant by that is a beta by invitation only. That may lead to an open beta based on metrics and not hand picked creators, and eventually open to anyone who wants to participate. But I am just speculating.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Because if they just dumped it on everyone we would have pirated content and scam courses being sold on day one. So instead of the team getting to refine the service, they spend their time playing whack a mole with scammers.
derefr 4y ago
The alternative isn’t these creators giving their content away; the alternative is these creators using one of the dozens of paid-video-course hosting platforms that have sprung up. This isn’t going to put a paywall in front of any content that didn’t already have a paywall in front of it.
- moffkalast 4y ago
  Well maybe, but on the other hand this makes pay walling far more trivial and accessible, so it'll likely be even more common. Google just wants that Nebula money.
  - derefr 4y ago
    (FYI, Nebula is a bad analogy, because it exists not to do anything like courseware, but rather because a bunch of creators don't believe in YouTube as a long-lasting + stable revenue engine that won't betray them one day. There's nothing YouTube could offer to make the channels with Nebula extras switch back to posting only on YouTube. Other than, maybe, offering them a contract that basically makes YouTube into a B2B video-hosting platform where the content-creator is treated as a paying customer that deserves things like SLAs, and a human customer-success agent being in the signal chain between copyright strikes and account suspension. Which will seemingly never happen.)
    - squeaky-clean 4y ago
      I think the GP commenter was referring to Nebula's recent new strategy "Nebula Classes" https://blog.nebula.app/nebula-classes/ https://blog.nebula.app/nebula-classes/
    - nickzana 4y ago
      Nebula has also recently started selling skillshare/masterclass-esque classes in addition to the main video platform product. Many (maybe all???) are taught by existing Nebula creators. The classes are advertised on the Nebula homepage to subscribers, but require additional payment.
- 4y ago
nabakin 4y ago
By no external links or recommendations, I think they're talking about the links to other videos they show after the video being currently watched has finished because they are talking about the embedded YouTube player
lb4r 4y ago
Many creators of educational content on Youtube already have paid content alongside their free. Except, the paid is currently hosted on other platforms like Udemy and Patreon. As long it's not an exclusive deal which forces them to only use YouTube, I don't really see that many problems with it. In the end, it will likely draw in more creators, which translates to more educational content, both free and paid, and hopefully better, as competition grows.
- bertil 4y ago
  I’m curious whether Patreon’s security team leaving will play in that dynamic.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
concinds 4y ago
You can expect YouTube to take a fat percentage (30%?) far beyond what alternative monetization methods like Patreon. Good revenue stream, especially if they can get partnership deals with schools or other educational institutions. Imagine YouTube getting this sort of "guaranteed" revenue, like publishers do from textbooks, but getting schools to foot the bill instead of students; great business model.
- gingerlime 4y ago
  Yes, from what I heard, YouTube is looking at a 70/30 split with creators.

mertd 4y ago

How should the creators be rewarded for their effort?

eimrine 4y ago
More subscribers for increasing their revenue from other videos, maybe yt-premium or even some protection against infamous random ban because of needness to support learning materials.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- jahewson 4y ago
  > More subscribers for increasing their revenue from other videos That’s not an answer as much as it’s moving the question.
Bloating 4y ago
with Thumbs Up, of course. Do you kno whow much effort it takes to login and click?

yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago

Just to play Devil's Advocate (and I can't believe that I'm arguing for YouTube here): Why shouldn't they charge for a useful service? And it does sound like they're removing other major problems with using their platform for this purpose.

tmpz22 4y ago
Problem: Creators want to be paid more for their content (great content, good content, bad content, etc) Solution proposed by Google: Lets charge customers who view this content so that we can pay creators more without losing revenue. Solution proposed by Consumers: Lets give creators a larger share of youtube's profits. We're already paying for the service by offering our data, our youtube premium subscriptions, and other forms of MTX monetization. TLDR; Youtube is double dipping in the guacamole bowl, despite having billions of pounds of guacamole.
- lern_too_spel 4y ago
  Both options are available. I don't see the issue here.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  Then go to a different video hosting service I guess.
- Bloating 4y ago
  Its almost like we're forced to watch their ads, as if Youtube is the only way to occupy our minds
- green_on_black 4y ago
  Solution proposed by shareholders: Why do you think you're entitled to our profits?
  - EarlKing 4y ago
    Solution proposed by viewers: Why do you think you're entitled to my attention? [installs adblock]
    - Miraste 4y ago
      Solution proposed by Google: Force through Manifest v3, coincidentally make blocking YouTube ads impossible

towaway15463 4y ago

As long as they offer both and not one or the other this should be ok. I’m hoping this allows creators to build more in depth courses consisting of a large number of videos. Right now I mostly have to go to Udemy et al for that sort of thing. Being able to preview some of a course on YouTube with ads and then buy the whole thing if I like it sounds like a win. I’ll reserve judgment until it launches though, it is an Alphabet product after all.

7speter 4y ago
>Right now I mostly have to go to Udemy et al for that sort of thing. So pretty much, with launching a model where viewers might pay, Youtube is launching a Udemy competitor, no?

scifibestfi 4y ago

The "qualified" part is sus. But otherwise isn't being able to charge directly a good thing assuming creators remove ads and any product placement?

Bilal_io 4y ago
Probably what they meant by that is a beta by invitation only. That may lead to an open beta based on metrics and not hand picked creators, and eventually open to anyone who wants to participate. But I am just speculating.
Gigachad 4y ago
Because if they just dumped it on everyone we would have pirated content and scam courses being sold on day one. So instead of the team getting to refine the service, they spend their time playing whack a mole with scammers.

derefr 4y ago

The alternative isn’t these creators giving their content away; the alternative is these creators using one of the dozens of paid-video-course hosting platforms that have sprung up. This isn’t going to put a paywall in front of any content that didn’t already have a paywall in front of it.

moffkalast 4y ago
Well maybe, but on the other hand this makes pay walling far more trivial and accessible, so it'll likely be even more common. Google just wants that Nebula money.
- derefr 4y ago
  (FYI, Nebula is a bad analogy, because it exists not to do anything like courseware, but rather because a bunch of creators don't believe in YouTube as a long-lasting + stable revenue engine that won't betray them one day. There's nothing YouTube could offer to make the channels with Nebula extras switch back to posting only on YouTube. Other than, maybe, offering them a contract that basically makes YouTube into a B2B video-hosting platform where the content-creator is treated as a paying customer that deserves things like SLAs, and a human customer-success agent being in the signal chain between copyright strikes and account suspension. Which will seemingly never happen.)
  - squeaky-clean 4y ago
    I think the GP commenter was referring to Nebula's recent new strategy "Nebula Classes" https://blog.nebula.app/nebula-classes/ https://blog.nebula.app/nebula-classes/
  - nickzana 4y ago
    Nebula has also recently started selling skillshare/masterclass-esque classes in addition to the main video platform product. Many (maybe all???) are taught by existing Nebula creators. The classes are advertised on the Nebula homepage to subscribers, but require additional payment.
4y ago

nabakin 4y ago

By no external links or recommendations, I think they're talking about the links to other videos they show after the video being currently watched has finished because they are talking about the embedded YouTube player

lb4r 4y ago

Many creators of educational content on Youtube already have paid content alongside their free. Except, the paid is currently hosted on other platforms like Udemy and Patreon. As long it's not an exclusive deal which forces them to only use YouTube, I don't really see that many problems with it. In the end, it will likely draw in more creators, which translates to more educational content, both free and paid, and hopefully better, as competition grows.

bertil 4y ago
I’m curious whether Patreon’s security team leaving will play in that dynamic.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

concinds 4y ago

You can expect YouTube to take a fat percentage (30%?) far beyond what alternative monetization methods like Patreon. Good revenue stream, especially if they can get partnership deals with schools or other educational institutions. Imagine YouTube getting this sort of "guaranteed" revenue, like publishers do from textbooks, but getting schools to foot the bill instead of students; great business model.

gingerlime 4y ago
Yes, from what I heard, YouTube is looking at a 70/30 split with creators.