3 ms·

This is the same failed strategy that caused Google Video to lose to YouTube. GV bet hard that people would only want to watch video from big legacy content hou

by nvm0n2 3y ago

This is the same failed strategy that caused Google Video to lose to YouTube. GV bet hard that people would only want to watch video from big legacy content houses like Disney and barely cared about "UGC" as they called it back then (user generated content, now just known as content). They thought it was a joke. YouTube smoked them by embracing the UGC but somehow Susan Wojcicki never learns. It's incredible that Google put her in charge after the GV fiasco and left her there so long, given she seems psychologically incapable of embracing the bazaar-like nature of what made YouTube successful in the first place. If it were up to her, internet video would be a recreation of the 1970s TV environment. A handful of channels broadcasting worthy and civilized (but incorrect) things.

whywhywhywhy 3y ago
Google's search product and YouTube's algorithm have both been completely gutted for this need to control the sources and what people see down to being shadows of their former usefulness. Now we could say this is a good thing because there's less radicalization and what many consider misinformation. But I think the clear difference in usefulness wont result in those people not seeing that information but more an eventual move away from the Google services rendering the control useless because the next most viable services will likely be under Chinese control anyway. Yandex already offers a far superior image search to Google, Tiktok video search is preferred by young people over Google text search.
js8 3y ago
I agree with most of what you wrote, except: > handful of channels broadcasting worthy and civilized Maybe that's different for public TV (like BBC), but I found lot more interesting and civilized content on YT than in commercial TV. Commercial TV execs have this elitist notion that common people are stupid and are not interested in any sort of intellectual content.

by nvm0n2 3y ago

whywhywhywhy 3y ago

Google's search product and YouTube's algorithm have both been completely gutted for this need to control the sources and what people see down to being shadows of their former usefulness. Now we could say this is a good thing because there's less radicalization and what many consider misinformation. But I think the clear difference in usefulness wont result in those people not seeing that information but more an eventual move away from the Google services rendering the control useless because the next most viable services will likely be under Chinese control anyway. Yandex already offers a far superior image search to Google, Tiktok video search is preferred by young people over Google text search.

js8 3y ago

I agree with most of what you wrote, except: > handful of channels broadcasting worthy and civilized Maybe that's different for public TV (like BBC), but I found lot more interesting and civilized content on YT than in commercial TV. Commercial TV execs have this elitist notion that common people are stupid and are not interested in any sort of intellectual content.