20 ms·

In the belly of the MrBeast

511 points by stafford_beer 2y ago

eitally 2y ago
At the top of the heap (Mr Beast, Nastya, Ryan, etc), this is true: > The ideal creator has no distance between themselves and their persona. They have been interpellated by audience metrics; their subjective experience already takes audience reactions into account. > Or more simply, YouTubers are not “Creators” but Creations. Audiences, rationalized by the platform, and the vloggers who upload the videos those audiences consume are not separable either theoretically or empirically. It's pretty obvious, too, because these YouTubers have a distinct theme where their popularity is dependent on 1) the whims and algos of the platform on one side, and 2) the ability for their audience to care and relate to something pretty dang detached and irrelevant from their everyday lives (unboxing, aggressive acts of charity, etc). While you hear plenty (Most? All?) YouTubers complain about the ranking algorithms & capriciousness of their overlord, I don't believe most channels are quite as vapid as those at the top of the heap. Lots of deep subjective content, and lots of freaking annoying CapCut edits, but also a primary focus on meaningful content relevent to viewers. These people may not be getting rich from their vlogging, but it's also not fair to call what most of them are doing "vlogging", either. It's video-based short form content curation for a clearly identified audience. Not remotely the same as how the big guns like Mr Beast have to view their work [where they're much more similar to a cable TV network or a commercial production company than an independent producer].
- hylaride 2y ago
  Youtube is also killing a lot of history channels because if there's any violence (eg war) they get demonetized, the algorithm avoids them, or they can even have their channels disabled. Most now blur out pictures of the holocaust, which negates a lot of the otherwise serious impact on a serious subject. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24QgMpvX3mw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24QgMpvX3mw
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Obligatory plug for Nebula, where a lot of educational YouTube has gone for refuge from demonetization. Many creators will have different versions that they upload to Nebula containing the content that YouTube wouldn't let them add in.
  - ihumanable 2y ago
    I enjoy the occasional true crime documentary. It's been amazing to watch YouTube demonetization just drive censorship to an absurd degree. No blood, no violence, no bad words. And the words YouTube deems bad are somehow much stricter than what I grew up with. Many words related to violence (abuse, assault, etc) words related to death (killed, executed, etc) words related to drugs (took me a while to figure out what a suspect was even saying when their speech was censored to "they drank and used s**d" I finally figured out it was speed aka meth) It's amazing to see how sanitized things have become, almost to the point of absurdity. Does making it so that people can't say the word "abuse" somehow eliminate abuse from the world?
    - kalleboo 2y ago
      I watch a YouTuber called bigclive who does hardware teardowns. Occasionally he'll tear down a single-use vape to show how you can harvest re-usable li-ion batteries from them. He can't use the word "vape", or the video gets de-monetized...
- antasvara 2y ago
  >but also a primary focus on meaningful content relevent to viewers. These people may not be getting rich from their vlogging, but it's also not fair to call what most of them are doing "vlogging", either. It's video-based short form content curation for a clearly identified audience. There's a fine line between "content created for X people interested in Y topic in Z form" and "content that's relevant to my viewers." The former is a channel that is avoiding the "creator" described by the author. The latter is on a path towards the author's "creator." For a long time, the two can be very similar. The group you are tailoring your content for and your viewers won't necessarily diverge quickly, especially in niche areas or highly technical fields. But they will inevitably diverge. Worth noting that the form this takes will depend on the topic. It's rare to find a creator that can avoid this trap long-term. I see it even with small channels I follow.
- okdood64 2y ago
  > YouTubers are not “Creators” but Creations This is such a broad and general statement for a platform that is unfathomably big. I don't any of the mass market Mr Beast, Nastya, Ryan videos on my feed. At all. I get smaller (but still large) creators with videos that actually engage the mind. Example: https://www.youtube.com/@blancolirio https://www.youtube.com/@blancolirio But I guess that's the distinction between a Youtuber and Creator.
- dmonitor 2y ago
  Well put. As long as channels like Technology Connections can remain financially viable on the platform and not beaten down by the algorithm, I really don't care how many Mr Beasts are making "slop content".
  - dom96 2y ago
    I do. Slop content is melting the brains of the people watching that content to the detriment of society as a whole.
    - mperham 2y ago
      Soap operas, reality TV and evangelists have existed forever in various guises. "Bread and circuses" is thousands of years old. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
      - cogman10 2y ago
        I don't care so much about the dumb brain melting. However, what MrBeast and other youtubers do is exploitative to their audiences (which in the case of MrBeast skews young). It's not great to see young kids addicted to content designed primarily to rob them of their money with false claims of success. "Oh, if you send me money, buy my shit, or subscribe to my channel, you could win millions of dollars!" That sort of exploitative media should be illegal (and in the case of MrBeast appears to be illegal in some cases).
    - timewizard 2y ago
      If you remove this they'll simply substitute it with something else. Some people don't mind "melting" their brains as they didn't have a primary use for it anyways.
      - disqard 2y ago
        Kentaro Toyama wrote that "Technology acts as an amplifier of human intentions". We really are very susceptible to living in "default mode".
nemesis1637 2y ago
"They have been interpellated by audience metrics; their subjective experience already takes audience reactions into account." This is great. I think there's a body of research to be done regarding the creation of self in the age of social media. (Not just creators but everyone)
- adamc 2y ago
  Except that it's "interpolated".
  - rahimnathwani 2y ago
    No, it's "interpellated", i.e. 'brought into being'.
  - add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
    That was my first instinct, too, but instead of reflexively posting about it I double checked and found I was wrong and learned something new.
    - adamc 2y ago
      I sit enlightened, although I don't like the word much.
  - thfuran 2y ago
    No, that's a different word that doesn't work in that context.
  - gertrunde 2y ago
    Perhaps not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpellation (Specifically the top item, "the process by which we encounter a culture's or ideology's values and internalize them"). Edit: Doh! On checking the article, that's even the same link the author embedded!
  - ionwake 2y ago
    ooof
iambateman 2y ago
First of all – the essay is phenomenal and his book is available online for free – https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/youtube-apparatus/36600D69788530F805C650B70976A585 https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/youtube-apparatus/36... > “Communication within the YouTube Apparatus has no meaning.” The rapid feedback loop between creators and audiences (as constructed by platform metrics) means that the system more and more responds to itself. Rather than trying to go somewhere (as is the case with political ideology), the creator seeks simply intensification, to draw more and more of the world into his whirlpool of content. This idea – that meaning is replaced by intensification – helps me understand a lot about the world today.
- irrational 2y ago
  Now I understand why numberphile has videos about infinity. I jest, but it seems like only certain content creators can get on the intensification train.
  - EA-3167 2y ago
    Seriously though, this is true. My YouTube feed has none of this "intensification" stuff. Perun, Blancolirio, everything Brady Haran has made (he's the guy behind Numberphile, Sixty Symbols, etc), Applied Science, etc. I think the idea that media aimed at education or sharing a passionate hobby is different from media that exists in the first place to just make money. If you start out with a goal that involves communication, I think it's more likely to stick than if your goal was just to become the Death Star from the start!
    - maeil 2y ago
      It's hard to realize just how unrepresentative that is and how much of a minority that makes you. Just like it's easy for people into video games to think the latest Steam-chart topping indie hit is really popular. And then you look up the numbers and it turns out something like FIFA (EAFC) makes more money than every single indie game on Steam combined.
- throwway120385 2y ago
mhartz 2y ago
> The ideal creator has no distance between themselves and their persona. They have been interpellated by audience metrics; their subjective experience already takes audience reactions into account. Isn't this sort of one of the themes from The Prestige(2006)? That certain magicians were so dedicated to their craft that they became inseparable from it. The performance never actually stopped
- suyash 2y ago
  Great analogy! As a performing magician and a big fan of the movie, I get how obsession with a craft can blur the line between reality and performance. But that line still exists. The best actors, creators, and magicians make us feel they’re being real, even when they’re not.
  - HanClinto 2y ago
    This is why I struggle with enjoying Andy Kaufman's content -- I'm never entirely sure where that line is. I respect his dedication to the craft, but I have a difficult time enjoying it -- on a meta level, it's unsettling.
    - jprd 2y ago
      Also, exactly his aim
    - kevinsync 2y ago
      Kaufman was Daniel Day Lewis-level dedicated to the character, but there are others, Tom Green for instance, who ostensibly was just as dedicated for the first arc of his fame and career, then loosened his grip on the persona with age. I often think about his trajectory compared to the average social media influencer -- he pioneered so many things and has worked in a bunch of mediums while they're basically imprisoned in their chosen persona, doomed to repeat the formula / gimmick / character day in and day out until the novelty wears off for everybody and they burn out entirely 12-24 months later. The ones with the most longevity seem to have been able to retain autonomy as a creator rather than a creation, as mentioned in the article, allowing them to grow and evolve rather than forever being a one-note wonder whose entire raison d'etre is eating shoe polish on camera.
infecto 2y ago
Not entirely related to MrBeast but related to YouTube. I genuinely miss the older algorithm where after watching a video you would go progressively further down a hole of videos somehow related to the one you just watched. It was quite entertaining and really uncovered fascinating videos.
- ravenstine 2y ago
  I don't. My experience with their algorithm between 2014 and ~2020 was that autoplay would quickly turn into a form of video diarrhea composed largely of Jordan Peterson and Lex Fridman. Was pretty bizarre because I only watched a few Peterson videos in the beginning, mostly his "Maps Of Meaning" videos which I think are mostly poppycock, and ever since then YouTube would quickly bring me back to his content even though I was never navigating to it organically. I had to resort to clicking "Not interested" and "Don't recommend channel" on several videos, which sort of worked, but it wasn't fool proof. These days it happens way less often, though usually that loop contains a lot of "gurus" in general and less of Peterson. I hope I never have to hear the voices of Jordan Peterson or Lex Fridman again. I'm not a fan of either one, but YouTube insisted I was for many years.
  - Applejinx 2y ago
    I think they can be paid to do that, but I'm not sure quite how it was arranged. That, or the Peterson pipeline is a good representation of a local maximum: a fairly obvious way a set of videos can direct people to related videos and increase the appetite for them. That'd produce algorithmic reinforcement without anybody getting paid. Apart from Youtube, content-agnostically hungering for being paid in views on their platform. It could have sent a very strong signal that 'this content maximally sends a statistically significant number of viewers down MASSIVE youtube rabbitholes never to emerge, therefore take the gamble and try to show everyone the content, ???, profit!'
  - thinkingtoilet 2y ago
    Funny, I have the opposite experience. I used to get relevant videos to what I was watching. If I'm watching a Phish video, it would recommend other Phish videos. These days, if I'm watching a Phish video I will literally, as in literally literally, get a Candace Owens video recommendation. I have literally never clicked on one of her videos ever. I don't watch political content on youtube at all, and if I did I am very left leaning. I can't fathom what has made the algorithm so terrible that if you're watching 90s Phish videos it recommends right-wing talking heads.
satisfice 2y ago
Interesting experience to read an essay of such insight regarding a subject that is the opposite of insight. Best thing I’ve read this week. I am happy to say I have never seen a Mr. Beast video, and now I will be sure never to see one in the future.
- xyzzy4747 2y ago
  There's not much you're missing. His videos try to appeal to the lowest common denominator and are relatively vapid. Sort of like the junk food of YouTube.
  - drawkward 2y ago
    In analogy with the article: what is the junk food experience, but the craving for more junk food? It is literally engineered to make us want more.
- WolfeReader 2y ago
  "YouTubers" are one of those things that a lot of people are interested in, yet everything I learn about them makes me not want to start. The world has so much good film, music, novels, even video games and TV - in a choice between any of those and watching a YouTuber, why would anyone choose the latter?
  - jazzyjackson 2y ago
    I mean, there certainly is a genre of "YouTuber", but there's lots of quality content. I just enjoyed a little 20 minute history of the Panasonic 3DO console that I managed to never hear about before.
  - OJFord 2y ago
    The 'Youtubers' I watch are those that do things that are also my hobbies or interests, for education/demonstration/inspiration. Woodworking, machining, 3D printing, electronics, that sort of thing. A modern alternative to magazines basically, or to regional/cable/'public access' (I don't really know how it works, not sure if we ever had that sort of thing here) TV shows like the fictional 'Tool Time' show within the sitcom Home Improvement if you ever saw that. I got started via 'how to do x' for a couple of DIY things, realised there's so much stuff like that, started watching for fun/interest (vs. actually having the job to do myself) and from there the more 'maker' (hate the term) side of doing it for a hobby to create a thing rather than household DIY/repair.
mrkramer 2y ago
So formula for success on YouTube is to be constantly making crazy and then even more crazier videos and hope they become viral so more people discover you? I knew that even 15 years ago when I was watching crazy pranks pulled by French YouTuber Rémi Gaillard[0]....he was so popular back in the day on YouTube. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9mi_Gaillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9mi_Gaillard
- Applejinx 2y ago
  The formula for success is more basic than that. Make people watch more YouTube. Crazy videos might become passe or burn people out, at which point the 'formula' will change, but the underlying reality is the same. It's a paperclip maximizer. To succeed at YouTube make people watch more YouTube.
  - mrkramer 2y ago
    >To succeed at YouTube make people watch more YouTube. Yea but how do you do that? By making more compelling content than competitors. That's the basic formula.
    - ArnoVW 2y ago
      What he's trying to say, is that compelling content is not necessarily what you think it is. There's whole subcultures of people doing unboxing videos. People framing existing videos as "unintentional ASMR" (https://www.youtube.com/c/PureUnintentionalASMR https://www.youtube.com/c/PureUnintentionalASMR) The point is : it doesn't matter what you upload. As long as it allows Google to show ads to people.
- BlueTemplar 2y ago
  You might (or might not) be interested to know that, among other things, he went on to make a movie, and even (semi-successfully !) run for mayor ! Also, I think his videos might be predating YouTube, or at least predating YouTube dominating the format ? IIRC he used to self-host as well as publish on other platforms ?
JohnMakin 2y ago
It is indeed a fascinating topic, and it’s completely changed content (for the worse, in my opinion) in the last ten years. I always wonder though, does the dead-eyed creepy smile factor into his metrics analysis? it must, or he wouldn’t do it. something has always felt a little “off” about that guy, but if your entire adult waking life is devoted to the whims of the massive YT content space, I guess you’d probably seem a little kooky.
- yifanl 2y ago
  It does at the moment. At some point in the future, it might not rank, at which point he and anyone else devoted to the rat race will get their teams to replace their thumbnails with whatever new thing gets more clicks.
  - grahamj 2y ago
    Please god let it be something other than faux surprise and arrows
- grahamj 2y ago
  If there’s no border between him and the Apparatus then his is literally the face of the Apparatus.
alecco 2y ago
Watching YouTube anonymously with different browsers and cycling VPNs frequently, I see it quickly ends up suggesting the same videos during the same week. Not similar videos but the same ones. Many of those videos are below 1M and not particularly notable. This is after only watching a couple of videos and those videos are different every session. Either it has some magic fingerprinting I am not aware of (and I go to lengths to avoid this) or it quickly puts me in a bin of generic results. It feels like the YouTube algorithm is either way more manual than we think or it has rules that end up showing the same things. Or both. Or something more sinister. I've never, ever clicked on short videos with girls in skimpy clothing doing something "based" and yet it keeps trying to hook me up on those. Even after clicking around very different videos (infosec, low level code, workshop). It's like it refuses to learn what I want to watch. When watching with my account on YouTube mobile app it keeps trying to push dumber content. I wasted years giving it feedback with "not interested" and "Don't recommend channel". It only keeps pushing videos of channels I liked 1 video 1 time long ago. If I like a DefCon video the algo will pester me with garbage shock content for infosec. Recently, I liked a cppcon wait free programming presentation and then YouTube started pestering me (again) with the Indian programming 101 videos with terrible sound and rushed video. I had to give it like 10 "not interested" / "Don't recommend channel" for it to stop. Ironicaly, about a year ago, I started watching a really good ML channel by an Indian guy with great animations an in-depth explanations. Top level. And YouTube rarely suggested his content. I had to go to his channel to look for things or search the channel name and some keywords. It feels like YouTube punishes sophisticated content. I think there is no true algorithm. Or that it has rules to never suggest me the content I actually want to watch. And don't get me started with YouTube search. Sadly most of the content I want to watch is hidden deeply in the garbage pile of YouTube.
- derektank 2y ago
  I find that going into your history and removing offending videos that seem to be driving the algorithm is more effective than using the "not interested" option on newly recommended videos
  - alecco 2y ago
roland35 2y ago
It's interesting how this is happening in software engineering YouTube content as well. It seems like things like "go sucks rust is great! Now rust sucks and zig is great!!" get way more views since it is basically clickbait for nerds. It's too bad that nuanced discussion doesn't do too well on social media.
- xyzzy4747 2y ago
  It also reminds me how the most upvoted comments on Reddit often reflect the consensus opinion but not necessarily the truth.
  - okdood64 2y ago
    This is a great line, thanks.
  - OJFord 2y ago
    How could a voting system anywhere be expected to represent truth rather than consensus?
    - xyzzy4747 2y ago
      It probably depends if the audience is intelligent and open-minded, but I agree, it will always be biased towards their preconceptions.
      - OJFord 2y ago
        Even then that's consensus on what the participants believe to be true (whether it's what they believed beforehand or not) - not a method of determining what is actually true.
  - 65 2y ago
    Also, almost always highly emotional if you're on a popular subreddit's post. I picked a random post on the home page, this one for example: https://old.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/1i1b4tn/i_definitely_do_not_want_this/ https://old.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/1i1b4tn/i_... The comments are all "The oligarchs would never go for it." or "It’s a cult." and on and on. I think this is particularly true in rage bait posts on Reddit, which is most of the home page these days.
anal_reactor 2y ago
The more I learn about successful people, the more I realize that being an office drone with a satisfactory salary is where I want to stay.
- criddell 2y ago
  You don't think of yourself as being successful? Do you think of success mostly in terms of what your job is?
- queuebert 2y ago
  You should watch Severance.
wodenokoto 2y ago
> in cybernetic terms, a long lag time in production is deadly. Does "long lag time" or "deadly" mean something else in cybernetic terms than in regular terms? I found the "in cybernetics terms" insert quite puzzling.
- Tryk 2y ago
  An interpretation that made sense is "cybernetics" as the ancient Greek word for the one who steers the ship.
- drawkward 2y ago
  Cybernetics has a lot (everything?) to do with feedback loops; the word itself comes from the Greek for "steersman". If you have a long feedback loop in a process that is supposed to self govern, it would be potentially deadly to the equilibrium.
  - bobbylarrybobby 2y ago
    Also the etymology of kubernetes
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - cyost 2y ago
    Similarly, in a positive feedback loop (as in the article), a long lag time would decrease its growth rate.
- criddell 2y ago
  I googled for a cybernetics definition and this came back: > Cybernetics is the scientific study and mathematical modeling of regulation and control in systems, focusing on the flow of information and how it is used by the system to control itself. So maybe a long lag time is deadly because they lose control of the system? That doesn't really make sense to me either though because what control do they have in the first place? The author says as much when they call it an ever-shifting target.
nmeofthestate 2y ago
I'm interested in how many people here on HN watch Mr Beast - I've never watched any of his videos ever, and I spend far too much time on YT.
- cvoss 2y ago
  I don't, on principle. A few years ago, if you opened up YouTube without being logged in, the algorithm would show you its default recommendations in the purest state, uninfluenced by your proclivities. MrBeast and similar dumpster clickbait videos were prominently featured. These days, I think you have to at least search for and watch some things before you are told what to watch. If MrBeast has ever shown up on my YT front page in the past, I slapped YT's hand until it stopped. Haven't had a problem since.
- OJFord 2y ago
  I'd never even heard of him/it until a previous submission here (and I also watch a lot). Still hadn't heard of any of the other apparently big ones mentioned in another thread. I assume most of us aren't using YouTube for that kind of doom-scrolling click bait scream face 'content' about nothing in particular, but I could be wrong.
- ajkjk 2y ago
  It's a younger-people thing primarily.
- tim333 2y ago
  I've watched like three. They are quite entertaining but tend to follow a similar formula.
- thedman9052 2y ago
  I watched one of his videos and quit pretty early because it was boring. Thinking back on what I remember, it seems very weird. It was the one where he "gave away" a chocolate factory, after he did the Willy Wonka thing with his chocolate bars where you could win a chance to be on the show. I clicked because I was curious what he was actually "giving away", if it was actual chocolate factory property, shares in his snack brand, or some disused industrial building. They had a "candy room" with plants supposedly made of real sweets but it looked like a cheap imitation of the Willy Wonka movie, the walls were mostly white and it seemed like it could have used more set dressing. The actual content was a game show (seems to be a lot of his videos) but it didn't make good use of the space they built, I think it was a basic scavenger hunt. Then the contestants had to throw a giant Mento into a giant Coke bottle, it was impressively large but the game wasn't exciting at all, they just threw the disc at the bottle over and over without any drama. MrBeast even said something like "we're going to be here a while" so he started their ad read, that's when I turned it off. Unlike a TV game show or reality show the contestants had no characterization, they didn't play up any rivalries or reactions or drama. It seemed like they were there doing the most basic challenges so MrBeast could talk about what they made and give away something expensive at the end. I found it all very odd and it reinforced that I am very far from the median viewer since I found none of it interesting.
hartator 2y ago
> and I confess that I feel vindicated by the analytic approach in the book I feel the opposite, everything seems reasonable, business-centric, and marketing-aware strategies.
- n4r9 2y ago
  Isn't that the point? By purely focussing on business-centric strategies, the videos no longer have meaning.
  - senko 2y ago
    This presumes that MrBeast intended to create "videos with meaning" in the first place. In his defense (!?), most of what's churned out by the streaming platforms, hollywood, and the music industry, is also not very bothered by lack of meaning.
    - n4r9 2y ago
      There's no such assumption being made. If anything, the linked article is about how MrBeast is intentionally making vapid slop.
    - lanternfish 2y ago
      This seems an insufficient analysis. The meaning expressed by contemporary music, film media, or streaming television isn't very profound, but they at least still make a passing effort to "signify" something. The highest grossing movie of 2024 - Inside Out 2 - is not a deep text, but it does have a thesis. The "Pixar apparatus" is definitely increasingly consumed by audience demand, but they're at a minimum in a transitional phase: something like Seeing Red would never get workshopped out of committees. Youtube and other social media (emphasis on media) is ground zero for the decay of meaning into intensity; the ultimate incestuous product of auto-simulacra.
      - senko 2y ago
        I heard a term for a specific version of this that I'm (mis)applying in all such cases: brainrot.
hartator 2y ago
> This beauty is an ever-shifting target. The platform architecture and viewer preferences can change overnight; in cybernetic terms, a long lag time in production is deadly. MrBeast needs to be able to adapt to trends, vindicating my audience-driven framework for understanding YouTube. That's actually not true. MrBest is saying the opposite in the leaked PDF, that fundamentals don't change much since he started.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  The "fundamentals" don't change (ie, lighting, pacing) but trending topics are constantly shifting. The stuff he's doing today may not be popular in a month so being able to quickly put out a new video for the current trend is what he's optimized for.
jasonmarks_ 2y ago
His view counts seem cooked to me. I would be interested to see what countries his viewers are claiming to be from. This article even reads as a guerilla upsell that his numbers are legitimate. Surely the urge to cheat is unbearable with millions of dollars on the hook. (Alot of apps on the app stores also claim to have quarter million 5 star reviews. Uhhuh)
- kube-system 2y ago
  His viewers skew younger. Kids have a lot of time on their hands. Given how ubiquitously well-known he is among younger people, I doubt there's much fraud necessary.
  - jasonmarks_ 2y ago
    I agree the kids will take it at face value all the more reason to not tolerate massive deception. What if his teaching them fraudulent representation pays. All pro athletes cheat a little bit at the highest levels but exceptional cheating is never tolerated.
    - kube-system 2y ago
      I don't understand what you're saying. Kids don't watch the channel because it has a high number of views. And what "massive deception" are you referring to?
      - jasonmarks_ 2y ago
        You are using deflection here (deceitful). Without a list of all viewer ip's it's hard to identify where his click contractor is. Just knowing what countries his viewers are from would be sufficient.
    - spiderice 2y ago
      What evidence do you have of him cheating other than your feelings?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Invictus0 2y ago
Breathless navel gazing. It's not that he's wrong, it's just that this article adds nothing new to the conversation other than excessively technical mumbo jumbo. Just read MrBeast's original document.
- lanternfish 2y ago
  The actual work underlying the essay - the one published in Cambridge Core - is pretty strong and has a lot of pretty compelling analysis. It's just long.
  - Invictus0 2y ago
    I disagree that it's strong, I got up to section five and it's written in the same "I am very smart and this is very important" style while saying very little of substance and bouncing around like a rabbit on speed. The central thesis that demand creates supply is also just very obviously false, no one was searching for "100 identical twins fight for $250k" before Mr beast made that video. People watch Mr beast because they want 20 minutes of whimsical predictably mind numbing colorful emotional fast paced distraction and Mr beast fills that need perfectly with videos of all kinds. He transports viewers to a fantasy land far beyond their real world, where boredom doesn't exist and crazy things are possible. No one knew they wanted an iPod until Steve jobs showed it to them; they just wanted a better CD player. Same thing with YouTube; people just show up and click on something the algorithm puts in their way, there isn't a demand for anything really. No one knew they wanted a Mr beast. The consumer demand is some combination of distraction, entertainment, or education, it's not much deeper than that.
- queuebert 2y ago
  Ironically I think one huge contribution that YouTube has made for the good is elevating the quality of STEM didactics. Channels like 3blue1brown and Veritasium have shown what STEM instruction could look like when not relegated to tenured professors who DGAF about teaching.
coopykins 2y ago
Really liked this sentence: "YouTubers are not “Creators” but Creations. Audiences, rationalized by the platform, and the vloggers who upload the videos those audiences consume are not separable either theoretically or empirically."
hahamrfunnyguy 2y ago
I ran a YouTube channel seriously for a couple of years. Chasing the whims of the algorithm contributed to burnout and now I only release one or two videos a year. My reason for starting a channel was to have a discussion around some of the projects I was working on that I found interesting. This never materialized. I never had a ton of engagement, but if I did most questions asked by viewers that are answered in the video. I monetized my videos and started making beer-money amounts of revenue. I put more and more time into them but never gained traction. I had a few "evergreen" videos that would make maybe a thousand bucks a year, the rest of the videos hardly got any views at all. Eventually, I found myself making videos to feed the algorithm not because it was a project that I wanted to do. This is where I had to stop. I realized that I just don't like editing videos. My channel makes no revenue now because YouTube requires an upload schedule and shorts. Mr Beast's job sounds awful to me. The videos I make now only get dozens to hundreds of views when they're published. I mostly share them with friends and in online communities where the info contained might be helpful.
- AndrewStephens 2y ago
  Thank you for your story. I have been running a low traffic blog for decades now and there was a time when I craved engagement. I never put too much effort in but I did change the things I wrote about to try to get noticed, a strategy that was unmarred by success. The creators that find success need to pump out content at a ridiculous rate. It is a faustian bargain that sucks in a lot of people.
  - coliveira 2y ago
    These people are essentially competing against an algorithm, not against other humans. I consider this to be an extremely distasteful endeavor.
- lobsterthief 2y ago
  I had a hobby electronics channel that was getting quite popular (~30k subs after ~15 videos). I burned out for a different reason: it’s hard to do this as a side gig. If I could’ve done it full time I would’ve continued doing so, but YouTube just doesn’t pay you enough despite each video getting >100K views. I paid zero attention to the algorithm and just focused on creating unique, creative, high-quality content that showed a level of effort was put forth. This “side gig” burned me out. So it’s possible you would’ve burned out anyways, despite any algorithmic considerations.
geerlingguy 2y ago
There's a lot of drama around the MrBeast YouTube channel lately—some of it justified, a lot of it manufactured... I think the main thing is Jimmy Donaldson (MrBeast) has stated numerous times his goal in life (at least publicly) is to make the best YouTube videos possible. Realistically, a lot of the things that feed into drama are related to that goal: overwork, inadequate planning. They take 'move fast and break things' to the extreme to make the videos they make, and unfortunately the 'things' they break are often people. The tough thing is, at least until recently, it seemed like MrBeast and the 'Beastification' of YouTube (where all content is loud, shouty, super-quick cuts) was inevitable. And in many corners (especially kids-centric content) it kind-of is. But luckily I think some people have pulled back. I feel like we're currently in kind of the anti-thesis of the '2001 Space Odyssey' era of entertainment. Instead of long, thoughtful content for consumption, it's fast-paced, zero-thought content with splashy colors.
cedws 2y ago
I think MrBeast and other high end influencers like the Paul brothers are harmful to children. Kids see them flaunting their huge wealth and abandon all their other ambitions in favour of wanting to become a YouTuber. Which, now, is a very competitive platform few succeed on. Kids should be nudged towards working fruitful careers beneficial to society. Although MrBeast has done some good things with it, I find the way he flaunts his wealth perverse.
- munchler 2y ago
  > Kids should be nudged towards working fruitful careers beneficial to society. It’s all about incentives. I think we should nudge society towards rewarding kids who choose fruitful careers.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    Yes, that too, but it might not help kids whose main perception/exposure of "society" is MrBeast et al. Kids can be quite oblivious to how "society" works in practice and what will be rewarded.
- ndileas 2y ago
  Franz Liszt is a Menace to Society and all those whose consider themselves Decent, Hardworking, Folk should warn their Children aginst[sic] him. Composition is of course a Good, but the competition is too steep, and if the Young seek to imitate the likes of him it will end in Tears. The Young should be guided, steered into more reliable, beneficial aspirations.
- andrewla 2y ago
  In general I'm in agreement that they present a life where being an "influencer" is a goal in and of itself, but I think it's mostly harmless, like kids wanting to be a rock star or a professional athlete. These are unobtainable for most people but learning some music or sports or video production isn't a bad idea for anyone because you don't know where it will lead. The specific criticism of "flaunting their huge wealth" does not apply at least to MrBeast -- he specifically is not very wealthy (I mean, he may be, but he says that he is not and he does not flaunt any such wealth; on the few occasions where his personal life is highlighted it seems he lives rather humbly). He claims to put all of the money he earns back into his videos; so when he makes enough to buy a "lambo" or whatever he will buy one and give it away to whoever can swallow the most toothpicks or whatever. MrBeast does not push a life of luxury as his lifestyle, he presents a life of being a celebrity influencer whose life is making more spectacles.
campbel 2y ago
The reciprocal relationship between speakers and audiences is well documented in rhetorical studies. The example of Hitler's development as a speaker is discussed in Ian Kershaw's biography "Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris." According to historical accounts, Hitler's early speeches in 1919-1920 for the German Workers' Party were rather technical, focusing on economic topics like inflation and the Versailles Treaty's economic impact. Through audience reactions, he learned which themes resonated most strongly and adapted his rhetoric accordingly. His latter speeches focused on topics like nationalism, anti-semitism, anti-marxism, etc... topics far more popular with his audience.
- stafford_beer 2y ago
  totally agree--and I think this is key to Trump's success as well, that he used audience feedback on Twitter to figure out that there was unmet demand for harsh anti-immigration policy and then win the 2016 primary
tdb7893 2y ago
So firstly I think for understanding YouTube it's much longer but it's better to just read Mr Beasts onboarding guide (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YaG9xpu-WQKBPUi8yQ4HaDYQLUSa7Y3J/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YaG9xpu-WQKBPUi8yQ4HaDYQLUS...). It gives a more complete picture straight from the horses mouth (and I always prefer primary documents if I can). That being said I think the author here is taking some things for granted. An example of this to me is "As I wrote in the book, “If creators are speaking their authentic truths, how can they also be accountable to audience feedback? I am personally bemused to see 'authenticity' invoked as a criterion for what is ultimately and obviously a performance". So firstly I don't view authenticity as some binary thing that is mutually exclusive with taking feedback and context. Just because I act differently with my boss, my parents, and my friends based on feedback from them I'm not being inherently inauthentic. To me authenticity and external pressures are at odds but from the few videos and interviews I've seen of Jimmy he seems to genuinely enjoy creating the spectacles he does so beneath all the artifice in the videos I think you're still seeing the core of Jimmy making content that he wants to make. Anyway, I think if you stop looking at stuff like authenticity as less rigid rules for how to act and more as a spectrum or very broad category what the creators say makes more sense (because it's not just Mr Beast saying similar things).
- lanternfish 2y ago
  Your conclusion is the exact same one the above essay comes to in the next paragraphs. It concludes that the "alignment" between MrBeast and his work is a result of the larger thesis: creators are ultimately created by the audience conditions of the platform. Or, authenticity doesn't mean much when the root of the creator isn't a ground truth, but a synthesis of demand.
  - tdb7893 2y ago
    We do not come to the same conclusions. The last paragraph is this: “Luckily, I’d say I’m a pretty predictable guy.” Luck has nothing to do with it, Mr. MrBeast. Your predictability is the result of years of an information diet consisting of audience feedback metrics. You are the proudest creation of the YouTube Apparatus." Audience feedback metrics are only part of what a creator does. They are people with complex motivations and being sensitive to audience feedback metrics doesn't eliminate that. I could see saying the ecosystem being a synthesis of demand (I mean that's just trivially true, we don't need an essay on Mr Beast to say that) but from interviews Mr Beast is very much a product of the pressure of YouTube mixed with the very specific nature of who Jimmy is as a person (from interviews he seems like a pretty weird guy and his videos definitely reflect his particular quirks). Edit: I'm trying to see how the author and I agree but unless the author is saying that people who succeed on a platform are the people that do things that are successful on the platform (i.e. align with audience metrics) then I don't think we agree. And I don't think that's all they are saying because that's just trivially true everywhere and it would make all the talk about philosophy and authenticity useless cruft. I think that Mr Beast is the sorta platonic ideal of a "content creator" driven by metrics and even he cannot escape his own Jimmy Donaldson-ness in his videos.
01308106991 2y ago
[flagged]
andrewflnr 2y ago
> I am personally bemused to see “authenticity” invoked as a criterion for what is ultimately and obviously a performance Imagine someone is actually an actor. They might play two different roles, one in a character and show they find boring, and one in relatable character in a show whose message they think is important. Don't you think their performance in the second one might be more authentic, despite being a "performance" in both cases? This essay starts interesting, but I think it overreaches at the end.
lern_too_spel 2y ago
I was thrown off by the use of the word, "wordcel," which the author defines as almost the opposite of what I would expect it to mean. Just like "incel" is a portmanteau, I expect "wordcel" to mean "word celibate." It didn't fit the context. The word is linked to a longer article that has the author's definition buried in it, which just distracted more from this article.
- andrewla 2y ago
  I'm perhaps too online, but this is not the author's coining. There was discourse ages ago about how some people are "shape rotators" -- that is, they could reason about complex stuff in their heads, and their counterparts, the "wordcels", that could express ideas through writing. The latter admittedly does not make sense as a portmanteau, likely because a shape rotator came up with it.
_blk 2y ago
Thanks op. This sums it up pretty well for me: In what sense is any of this authentic?
coliveira 2y ago
Consider the following: my personal youtube feed has never shown a video of MrBeast. I never asked to remove it from my feed. I only know the he exists because I see it being debated in the media. So, this tells me more about what people in general are interested in and click to watch, than about the nature of youtube itself.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
artur_makly 2y ago
Dhar Mann’s channel is another interesting cultural signal of what kind of content tweens are being groomed with: https://youtube.com/@dharmann?si=vsNv2M2S7LfbVvVt https://youtube.com/@dharmann?si=vsNv2M2S7LfbVvVt What is abhorrently revolting is the total amount of “Gold Digger” videos +100 and counting.. https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=76583c995a4c1c88&rlz=1CDGOYI_enAR1098AR1098&hl=en-US&sxsrf=ADLYWIKbRUoA1xeQAK7jK48WOz79FmTwiw:1736876766800&q=youtube+dhar+mann+gold+digger&udm=7&fbs=AEQNm0Aa4sjWe7Rqy32pFwRj0UkWd8nbOJfsBGGB5IQQO6L3JyJJclJuzBPl12qJyPx7ESKd_0oka9aLy7VkmZpoP843borY-CYvh01p-kxy-aQoVzgguT7S6tPcab4Ybn4EdxAeV3D95PqErRBP6zbkyIGbKxYX0kcfiZwJH27_29Goroz1VCeJKxzcvUNGi2z-c4iTHRriKhO1dXbYYbUmW0eufpnljQ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjGotCV4vWKAxWoqpUCHfb0JbIQtKgLegQIGBAB&biw=393&bih=657&dpr=3#ip=1 https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=76583c995a4c1c88&rlz=1...
- snakeyjake 2y ago
  Dang. I wanted to see what "the youths" were watching so I scrubbed through a couple of those videos. The people in them make me feel like the world's most accomplished actor.
- axxto 2y ago
  Wow. I expected this to be just bad clickbaity content, but I didn't expect this level of algorithmic-driven slop. Disturbing. 25 million subscribers, too; millions of views on every single video, one new hour-long video of this insane crap every few days. All clearly directed at children.
  - artur_makly 2y ago
    yeah it's totally f'd up. This is the NEW children "fables" that are teaching the next-gen modern "morality". My 11yr old made me aware of it, and I've seen like 20 of them now.. about 22% are OK in terms of messaging/values. But the danger lies in that the 9-13yr old kids watching this stuff will take most of it literally as 'this is how the real-world works'. Sadly no one else if filling this niche better and he seems to have found the algo.
nickdothutton 2y ago
I feel like I need to see an Adam Curtis documentary* on this. [*] Spanning 5 hours.
- nikcub 2y ago
  Curtis heavily applies quick cuts, emotive footage, authoritative English narration and emotional music to lull the viewer into his views. His message wouldn't work as written essays or books because they're just not very deep - it's early YouTube MrBeast-like audience optimisation for those who don't want to discover or read on topics.
citizenpaul 2y ago
>like is there a correlation between better lighting at the start of the video and less viewer drop off (there is, have good lighting at the start of the video haha) This gives me the smell and sight of red flags in their methodology. It reeks of unsuspected hidden variables. Such as what is really going on is that focusing on lighting in the beginning of the video simply makes people put more thought into the into thereby having a hook that keeps people interested, rather than lighting having anything to do with it. That means this is just a pseudoscience blog of throwing darts to me. Sure call me a curmudgeon or whatever.
plaidfuji 2y ago
> As I wrote in the book, “If creators are speaking their authentic truths, how can they also be accountable to audience feedback? I am personally bemused to see “authenticity” invoked as a criterion for what is ultimately and obviously a performance; Who are you to deny their authenticity, though? If authenticity is being true to one’s own character, and one’s entire character is driven by YouTube video metric optimization (and perhaps ultimately by the profit thereby obtained), then isn’t their behavior on screen authentic? Put another way, if MrBeast says “your goal is to make me excited to be on screen”, he’s explicitly saying he doesn’t want to have to act or otherwise be inauthentic on screen. Whether his excitement about a certain topic is tied to the views he expects it to garner is immaterial, if that’s his authentic motivation. Or put yet another way, what drives anybody’s “authentic” behavior? What audience are they playing to? It may not be the entire internet, but it’s certainly influenced by “performance” in front of friends and family. We’re all Creations of our environment. MrBeast has just kind of found himself in an environment where feedback from YouTube videos motivates him and creates a ton of positive feedback loops.
donatj 2y ago
> the MrBeast with two backs > haha just kidding. MrBeast does not have sex. YouTube doesn’t allow pornography, so what would be the point? Why was this included in the post? What does it add? It seems … just sort of mean spirited and out of place in an otherwise good article.
- stafford_beer 2y ago
  haha I'm not saying that MrBeast couldn't have sex if he wanted to -- I'm saying that, because he's constructed himself to only care about maximizing audience metrics, having sex would be a waste of his time
propter_hoc 2y ago
This is just a terrific read. The following excerpt from the final chapter of his e-book is just as good: There are indeed “echo chambers” on YouTube, but they are filled with an active and demanding audience. When the YouTuber uploads their video, whatever originality, creativity or meaning they intended to communicate is reduced to the public audience measures that the platform appends to the video. This quantification puts the video into immediate comparison with the YouTuber’s previous videos, and indeed with every video on the platform. It requires incredible willpower to ignore the reverberations of the ever-present audience on social media, to maintain an independent artistic vision or coherent ideological position. And for YouTubers attempting to make a living, the vast and intense competition makes it impossible to do so. The audience can simply click away if the YouTuber displeases them. The pressure of having millions of bosses issuing conflicting demands can produce “Creator burnout” or worse. My poetic aspiration is that whenever you read the words “YouTube Creator” you think instead of “Audience Creation.” Social media does not create powerful Influencers but rather powerless marionettes, dancing jerkily to quantified audience tugs.
- stafford_beer 2y ago
  thank you!

511 points by stafford_beer 2y ago

At the top of the heap (Mr Beast, Nastya, Ryan, etc), this is true: > The ideal creator has no distance between themselves and their persona. They have been interpellated by audience metrics; their subjective experience already takes audience reactions into account. > Or more simply, YouTubers are not “Creators” but Creations. Audiences, rationalized by the platform, and the vloggers who upload the videos those audiences consume are not separable either theoretically or empirically. It's pretty obvious, too, because these YouTubers have a distinct theme where their popularity is dependent on 1) the whims and algos of the platform on one side, and 2) the ability for their audience to care and relate to something pretty dang detached and irrelevant from their everyday lives (unboxing, aggressive acts of charity, etc). While you hear plenty (Most? All?) YouTubers complain about the ranking algorithms & capriciousness of their overlord, I don't believe most channels are quite as vapid as those at the top of the heap. Lots of deep subjective content, and lots of freaking annoying CapCut edits, but also a primary focus on meaningful content relevent to viewers. These people may not be getting rich from their vlogging, but it's also not fair to call what most of them are doing "vlogging", either. It's video-based short form content curation for a clearly identified audience. Not remotely the same as how the big guns like Mr Beast have to view their work [where they're much more similar to a cable TV network or a commercial production company than an independent producer].

hylaride 2y ago
Youtube is also killing a lot of history channels because if there's any violence (eg war) they get demonetized, the algorithm avoids them, or they can even have their channels disabled. Most now blur out pictures of the holocaust, which negates a lot of the otherwise serious impact on a serious subject. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24QgMpvX3mw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24QgMpvX3mw
- lolinder 2y ago
  Obligatory plug for Nebula, where a lot of educational YouTube has gone for refuge from demonetization. Many creators will have different versions that they upload to Nebula containing the content that YouTube wouldn't let them add in.
- ihumanable 2y ago
  I enjoy the occasional true crime documentary. It's been amazing to watch YouTube demonetization just drive censorship to an absurd degree. No blood, no violence, no bad words. And the words YouTube deems bad are somehow much stricter than what I grew up with. Many words related to violence (abuse, assault, etc) words related to death (killed, executed, etc) words related to drugs (took me a while to figure out what a suspect was even saying when their speech was censored to "they drank and used s**d" I finally figured out it was speed aka meth) It's amazing to see how sanitized things have become, almost to the point of absurdity. Does making it so that people can't say the word "abuse" somehow eliminate abuse from the world?
  - kalleboo 2y ago
    I watch a YouTuber called bigclive who does hardware teardowns. Occasionally he'll tear down a single-use vape to show how you can harvest re-usable li-ion batteries from them. He can't use the word "vape", or the video gets de-monetized...
antasvara 2y ago
>but also a primary focus on meaningful content relevent to viewers. These people may not be getting rich from their vlogging, but it's also not fair to call what most of them are doing "vlogging", either. It's video-based short form content curation for a clearly identified audience. There's a fine line between "content created for X people interested in Y topic in Z form" and "content that's relevant to my viewers." The former is a channel that is avoiding the "creator" described by the author. The latter is on a path towards the author's "creator." For a long time, the two can be very similar. The group you are tailoring your content for and your viewers won't necessarily diverge quickly, especially in niche areas or highly technical fields. But they will inevitably diverge. Worth noting that the form this takes will depend on the topic. It's rare to find a creator that can avoid this trap long-term. I see it even with small channels I follow.
okdood64 2y ago
> YouTubers are not “Creators” but Creations This is such a broad and general statement for a platform that is unfathomably big. I don't any of the mass market Mr Beast, Nastya, Ryan videos on my feed. At all. I get smaller (but still large) creators with videos that actually engage the mind. Example: https://www.youtube.com/@blancolirio https://www.youtube.com/@blancolirio But I guess that's the distinction between a Youtuber and Creator.
dmonitor 2y ago
Well put. As long as channels like Technology Connections can remain financially viable on the platform and not beaten down by the algorithm, I really don't care how many Mr Beasts are making "slop content".
- dom96 2y ago
  I do. Slop content is melting the brains of the people watching that content to the detriment of society as a whole.
  - mperham 2y ago
    Soap operas, reality TV and evangelists have existed forever in various guises. "Bread and circuses" is thousands of years old. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
    - cogman10 2y ago
      I don't care so much about the dumb brain melting. However, what MrBeast and other youtubers do is exploitative to their audiences (which in the case of MrBeast skews young). It's not great to see young kids addicted to content designed primarily to rob them of their money with false claims of success. "Oh, if you send me money, buy my shit, or subscribe to my channel, you could win millions of dollars!" That sort of exploitative media should be illegal (and in the case of MrBeast appears to be illegal in some cases).
  - timewizard 2y ago
    If you remove this they'll simply substitute it with something else. Some people don't mind "melting" their brains as they didn't have a primary use for it anyways.
    - disqard 2y ago
      Kentaro Toyama wrote that "Technology acts as an amplifier of human intentions". We really are very susceptible to living in "default mode".

nemesis1637 2y ago

"They have been interpellated by audience metrics; their subjective experience already takes audience reactions into account." This is great. I think there's a body of research to be done regarding the creation of self in the age of social media. (Not just creators but everyone)

adamc 2y ago
Except that it's "interpolated".
- rahimnathwani 2y ago
  No, it's "interpellated", i.e. 'brought into being'.
- add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
  That was my first instinct, too, but instead of reflexively posting about it I double checked and found I was wrong and learned something new.
  - adamc 2y ago
    I sit enlightened, although I don't like the word much.
- thfuran 2y ago
  No, that's a different word that doesn't work in that context.
- gertrunde 2y ago
  Perhaps not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpellation (Specifically the top item, "the process by which we encounter a culture's or ideology's values and internalize them"). Edit: Doh! On checking the article, that's even the same link the author embedded!
- ionwake 2y ago
  ooof

iambateman 2y ago

First of all – the essay is phenomenal and his book is available online for free – https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/youtube-apparatus/36600D69788530F805C650B70976A585 https://www.cambridge.org/core/elements/youtube-apparatus/36... > “Communication within the YouTube Apparatus has no meaning.” The rapid feedback loop between creators and audiences (as constructed by platform metrics) means that the system more and more responds to itself. Rather than trying to go somewhere (as is the case with political ideology), the creator seeks simply intensification, to draw more and more of the world into his whirlpool of content. This idea – that meaning is replaced by intensification – helps me understand a lot about the world today.

irrational 2y ago
Now I understand why numberphile has videos about infinity. I jest, but it seems like only certain content creators can get on the intensification train.
- EA-3167 2y ago
  Seriously though, this is true. My YouTube feed has none of this "intensification" stuff. Perun, Blancolirio, everything Brady Haran has made (he's the guy behind Numberphile, Sixty Symbols, etc), Applied Science, etc. I think the idea that media aimed at education or sharing a passionate hobby is different from media that exists in the first place to just make money. If you start out with a goal that involves communication, I think it's more likely to stick than if your goal was just to become the Death Star from the start!
  - maeil 2y ago
    It's hard to realize just how unrepresentative that is and how much of a minority that makes you. Just like it's easy for people into video games to think the latest Steam-chart topping indie hit is really popular. And then you look up the numbers and it turns out something like FIFA (EAFC) makes more money than every single indie game on Steam combined.
throwway120385 2y ago

mhartz 2y ago

> The ideal creator has no distance between themselves and their persona. They have been interpellated by audience metrics; their subjective experience already takes audience reactions into account. Isn't this sort of one of the themes from The Prestige(2006)? That certain magicians were so dedicated to their craft that they became inseparable from it. The performance never actually stopped

suyash 2y ago
Great analogy! As a performing magician and a big fan of the movie, I get how obsession with a craft can blur the line between reality and performance. But that line still exists. The best actors, creators, and magicians make us feel they’re being real, even when they’re not.
- HanClinto 2y ago
  This is why I struggle with enjoying Andy Kaufman's content -- I'm never entirely sure where that line is. I respect his dedication to the craft, but I have a difficult time enjoying it -- on a meta level, it's unsettling.
  - jprd 2y ago
    Also, exactly his aim
  - kevinsync 2y ago
    Kaufman was Daniel Day Lewis-level dedicated to the character, but there are others, Tom Green for instance, who ostensibly was just as dedicated for the first arc of his fame and career, then loosened his grip on the persona with age. I often think about his trajectory compared to the average social media influencer -- he pioneered so many things and has worked in a bunch of mediums while they're basically imprisoned in their chosen persona, doomed to repeat the formula / gimmick / character day in and day out until the novelty wears off for everybody and they burn out entirely 12-24 months later. The ones with the most longevity seem to have been able to retain autonomy as a creator rather than a creation, as mentioned in the article, allowing them to grow and evolve rather than forever being a one-note wonder whose entire raison d'etre is eating shoe polish on camera.

infecto 2y ago

Not entirely related to MrBeast but related to YouTube. I genuinely miss the older algorithm where after watching a video you would go progressively further down a hole of videos somehow related to the one you just watched. It was quite entertaining and really uncovered fascinating videos.

ravenstine 2y ago
I don't. My experience with their algorithm between 2014 and ~2020 was that autoplay would quickly turn into a form of video diarrhea composed largely of Jordan Peterson and Lex Fridman. Was pretty bizarre because I only watched a few Peterson videos in the beginning, mostly his "Maps Of Meaning" videos which I think are mostly poppycock, and ever since then YouTube would quickly bring me back to his content even though I was never navigating to it organically. I had to resort to clicking "Not interested" and "Don't recommend channel" on several videos, which sort of worked, but it wasn't fool proof. These days it happens way less often, though usually that loop contains a lot of "gurus" in general and less of Peterson. I hope I never have to hear the voices of Jordan Peterson or Lex Fridman again. I'm not a fan of either one, but YouTube insisted I was for many years.
- Applejinx 2y ago
  I think they can be paid to do that, but I'm not sure quite how it was arranged. That, or the Peterson pipeline is a good representation of a local maximum: a fairly obvious way a set of videos can direct people to related videos and increase the appetite for them. That'd produce algorithmic reinforcement without anybody getting paid. Apart from Youtube, content-agnostically hungering for being paid in views on their platform. It could have sent a very strong signal that 'this content maximally sends a statistically significant number of viewers down MASSIVE youtube rabbitholes never to emerge, therefore take the gamble and try to show everyone the content, ???, profit!'
- thinkingtoilet 2y ago
  Funny, I have the opposite experience. I used to get relevant videos to what I was watching. If I'm watching a Phish video, it would recommend other Phish videos. These days, if I'm watching a Phish video I will literally, as in literally literally, get a Candace Owens video recommendation. I have literally never clicked on one of her videos ever. I don't watch political content on youtube at all, and if I did I am very left leaning. I can't fathom what has made the algorithm so terrible that if you're watching 90s Phish videos it recommends right-wing talking heads.

satisfice 2y ago

Interesting experience to read an essay of such insight regarding a subject that is the opposite of insight. Best thing I’ve read this week. I am happy to say I have never seen a Mr. Beast video, and now I will be sure never to see one in the future.

xyzzy4747 2y ago
There's not much you're missing. His videos try to appeal to the lowest common denominator and are relatively vapid. Sort of like the junk food of YouTube.
- drawkward 2y ago
  In analogy with the article: what is the junk food experience, but the craving for more junk food? It is literally engineered to make us want more.
WolfeReader 2y ago
"YouTubers" are one of those things that a lot of people are interested in, yet everything I learn about them makes me not want to start. The world has so much good film, music, novels, even video games and TV - in a choice between any of those and watching a YouTuber, why would anyone choose the latter?
- jazzyjackson 2y ago
  I mean, there certainly is a genre of "YouTuber", but there's lots of quality content. I just enjoyed a little 20 minute history of the Panasonic 3DO console that I managed to never hear about before.
- OJFord 2y ago
  The 'Youtubers' I watch are those that do things that are also my hobbies or interests, for education/demonstration/inspiration. Woodworking, machining, 3D printing, electronics, that sort of thing. A modern alternative to magazines basically, or to regional/cable/'public access' (I don't really know how it works, not sure if we ever had that sort of thing here) TV shows like the fictional 'Tool Time' show within the sitcom Home Improvement if you ever saw that. I got started via 'how to do x' for a couple of DIY things, realised there's so much stuff like that, started watching for fun/interest (vs. actually having the job to do myself) and from there the more 'maker' (hate the term) side of doing it for a hobby to create a thing rather than household DIY/repair.

mrkramer 2y ago

So formula for success on YouTube is to be constantly making crazy and then even more crazier videos and hope they become viral so more people discover you? I knew that even 15 years ago when I was watching crazy pranks pulled by French YouTuber Rémi Gaillard[0]....he was so popular back in the day on YouTube. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9mi_Gaillard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9mi_Gaillard

Applejinx 2y ago
The formula for success is more basic than that. Make people watch more YouTube. Crazy videos might become passe or burn people out, at which point the 'formula' will change, but the underlying reality is the same. It's a paperclip maximizer. To succeed at YouTube make people watch more YouTube.
- mrkramer 2y ago
  >To succeed at YouTube make people watch more YouTube. Yea but how do you do that? By making more compelling content than competitors. That's the basic formula.
  - ArnoVW 2y ago
    What he's trying to say, is that compelling content is not necessarily what you think it is. There's whole subcultures of people doing unboxing videos. People framing existing videos as "unintentional ASMR" (https://www.youtube.com/c/PureUnintentionalASMR https://www.youtube.com/c/PureUnintentionalASMR) The point is : it doesn't matter what you upload. As long as it allows Google to show ads to people.
BlueTemplar 2y ago
You might (or might not) be interested to know that, among other things, he went on to make a movie, and even (semi-successfully !) run for mayor ! Also, I think his videos might be predating YouTube, or at least predating YouTube dominating the format ? IIRC he used to self-host as well as publish on other platforms ?

JohnMakin 2y ago

It is indeed a fascinating topic, and it’s completely changed content (for the worse, in my opinion) in the last ten years. I always wonder though, does the dead-eyed creepy smile factor into his metrics analysis? it must, or he wouldn’t do it. something has always felt a little “off” about that guy, but if your entire adult waking life is devoted to the whims of the massive YT content space, I guess you’d probably seem a little kooky.

yifanl 2y ago
It does at the moment. At some point in the future, it might not rank, at which point he and anyone else devoted to the rat race will get their teams to replace their thumbnails with whatever new thing gets more clicks.
- grahamj 2y ago
  Please god let it be something other than faux surprise and arrows
grahamj 2y ago
If there’s no border between him and the Apparatus then his is literally the face of the Apparatus.

alecco 2y ago

Watching YouTube anonymously with different browsers and cycling VPNs frequently, I see it quickly ends up suggesting the same videos during the same week. Not similar videos but the same ones. Many of those videos are below 1M and not particularly notable. This is after only watching a couple of videos and those videos are different every session. Either it has some magic fingerprinting I am not aware of (and I go to lengths to avoid this) or it quickly puts me in a bin of generic results. It feels like the YouTube algorithm is either way more manual than we think or it has rules that end up showing the same things. Or both. Or something more sinister. I've never, ever clicked on short videos with girls in skimpy clothing doing something "based" and yet it keeps trying to hook me up on those. Even after clicking around very different videos (infosec, low level code, workshop). It's like it refuses to learn what I want to watch. When watching with my account on YouTube mobile app it keeps trying to push dumber content. I wasted years giving it feedback with "not interested" and "Don't recommend channel". It only keeps pushing videos of channels I liked 1 video 1 time long ago. If I like a DefCon video the algo will pester me with garbage shock content for infosec. Recently, I liked a cppcon wait free programming presentation and then YouTube started pestering me (again) with the Indian programming 101 videos with terrible sound and rushed video. I had to give it like 10 "not interested" / "Don't recommend channel" for it to stop. Ironicaly, about a year ago, I started watching a really good ML channel by an Indian guy with great animations an in-depth explanations. Top level. And YouTube rarely suggested his content. I had to go to his channel to look for things or search the channel name and some keywords. It feels like YouTube punishes sophisticated content. I think there is no true algorithm. Or that it has rules to never suggest me the content I actually want to watch. And don't get me started with YouTube search. Sadly most of the content I want to watch is hidden deeply in the garbage pile of YouTube.

derektank 2y ago
I find that going into your history and removing offending videos that seem to be driving the algorithm is more effective than using the "not interested" option on newly recommended videos
- alecco 2y ago

roland35 2y ago

It's interesting how this is happening in software engineering YouTube content as well. It seems like things like "go sucks rust is great! Now rust sucks and zig is great!!" get way more views since it is basically clickbait for nerds. It's too bad that nuanced discussion doesn't do too well on social media.

xyzzy4747 2y ago
It also reminds me how the most upvoted comments on Reddit often reflect the consensus opinion but not necessarily the truth.
- okdood64 2y ago
  This is a great line, thanks.
- OJFord 2y ago
  How could a voting system anywhere be expected to represent truth rather than consensus?
  - xyzzy4747 2y ago
    It probably depends if the audience is intelligent and open-minded, but I agree, it will always be biased towards their preconceptions.
    - OJFord 2y ago
      Even then that's consensus on what the participants believe to be true (whether it's what they believed beforehand or not) - not a method of determining what is actually true.
- 65 2y ago
  Also, almost always highly emotional if you're on a popular subreddit's post. I picked a random post on the home page, this one for example: https://old.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/1i1b4tn/i_definitely_do_not_want_this/ https://old.reddit.com/r/clevercomebacks/comments/1i1b4tn/i_... The comments are all "The oligarchs would never go for it." or "It’s a cult." and on and on. I think this is particularly true in rage bait posts on Reddit, which is most of the home page these days.

anal_reactor 2y ago

The more I learn about successful people, the more I realize that being an office drone with a satisfactory salary is where I want to stay.

criddell 2y ago
You don't think of yourself as being successful? Do you think of success mostly in terms of what your job is?
queuebert 2y ago
You should watch Severance.

wodenokoto 2y ago

> in cybernetic terms, a long lag time in production is deadly. Does "long lag time" or "deadly" mean something else in cybernetic terms than in regular terms? I found the "in cybernetics terms" insert quite puzzling.

Tryk 2y ago
An interpretation that made sense is "cybernetics" as the ancient Greek word for the one who steers the ship.
drawkward 2y ago
Cybernetics has a lot (everything?) to do with feedback loops; the word itself comes from the Greek for "steersman". If you have a long feedback loop in a process that is supposed to self govern, it would be potentially deadly to the equilibrium.
- bobbylarrybobby 2y ago
  Also the etymology of kubernetes
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- cyost 2y ago
  Similarly, in a positive feedback loop (as in the article), a long lag time would decrease its growth rate.
criddell 2y ago
I googled for a cybernetics definition and this came back: > Cybernetics is the scientific study and mathematical modeling of regulation and control in systems, focusing on the flow of information and how it is used by the system to control itself. So maybe a long lag time is deadly because they lose control of the system? That doesn't really make sense to me either though because what control do they have in the first place? The author says as much when they call it an ever-shifting target.

nmeofthestate 2y ago

I'm interested in how many people here on HN watch Mr Beast - I've never watched any of his videos ever, and I spend far too much time on YT.

cvoss 2y ago
I don't, on principle. A few years ago, if you opened up YouTube without being logged in, the algorithm would show you its default recommendations in the purest state, uninfluenced by your proclivities. MrBeast and similar dumpster clickbait videos were prominently featured. These days, I think you have to at least search for and watch some things before you are told what to watch. If MrBeast has ever shown up on my YT front page in the past, I slapped YT's hand until it stopped. Haven't had a problem since.
OJFord 2y ago
I'd never even heard of him/it until a previous submission here (and I also watch a lot). Still hadn't heard of any of the other apparently big ones mentioned in another thread. I assume most of us aren't using YouTube for that kind of doom-scrolling click bait scream face 'content' about nothing in particular, but I could be wrong.
ajkjk 2y ago
It's a younger-people thing primarily.
tim333 2y ago
I've watched like three. They are quite entertaining but tend to follow a similar formula.
thedman9052 2y ago
I watched one of his videos and quit pretty early because it was boring. Thinking back on what I remember, it seems very weird. It was the one where he "gave away" a chocolate factory, after he did the Willy Wonka thing with his chocolate bars where you could win a chance to be on the show. I clicked because I was curious what he was actually "giving away", if it was actual chocolate factory property, shares in his snack brand, or some disused industrial building. They had a "candy room" with plants supposedly made of real sweets but it looked like a cheap imitation of the Willy Wonka movie, the walls were mostly white and it seemed like it could have used more set dressing. The actual content was a game show (seems to be a lot of his videos) but it didn't make good use of the space they built, I think it was a basic scavenger hunt. Then the contestants had to throw a giant Mento into a giant Coke bottle, it was impressively large but the game wasn't exciting at all, they just threw the disc at the bottle over and over without any drama. MrBeast even said something like "we're going to be here a while" so he started their ad read, that's when I turned it off. Unlike a TV game show or reality show the contestants had no characterization, they didn't play up any rivalries or reactions or drama. It seemed like they were there doing the most basic challenges so MrBeast could talk about what they made and give away something expensive at the end. I found it all very odd and it reinforced that I am very far from the median viewer since I found none of it interesting.

hartator 2y ago

> and I confess that I feel vindicated by the analytic approach in the book I feel the opposite, everything seems reasonable, business-centric, and marketing-aware strategies.

n4r9 2y ago
Isn't that the point? By purely focussing on business-centric strategies, the videos no longer have meaning.
- senko 2y ago
  This presumes that MrBeast intended to create "videos with meaning" in the first place. In his defense (!?), most of what's churned out by the streaming platforms, hollywood, and the music industry, is also not very bothered by lack of meaning.
  - n4r9 2y ago
    There's no such assumption being made. If anything, the linked article is about how MrBeast is intentionally making vapid slop.
  - lanternfish 2y ago
    This seems an insufficient analysis. The meaning expressed by contemporary music, film media, or streaming television isn't very profound, but they at least still make a passing effort to "signify" something. The highest grossing movie of 2024 - Inside Out 2 - is not a deep text, but it does have a thesis. The "Pixar apparatus" is definitely increasingly consumed by audience demand, but they're at a minimum in a transitional phase: something like Seeing Red would never get workshopped out of committees. Youtube and other social media (emphasis on media) is ground zero for the decay of meaning into intensity; the ultimate incestuous product of auto-simulacra.
    - senko 2y ago
      I heard a term for a specific version of this that I'm (mis)applying in all such cases: brainrot.

hartator 2y ago

> This beauty is an ever-shifting target. The platform architecture and viewer preferences can change overnight; in cybernetic terms, a long lag time in production is deadly. MrBeast needs to be able to adapt to trends, vindicating my audience-driven framework for understanding YouTube. That's actually not true. MrBest is saying the opposite in the leaked PDF, that fundamentals don't change much since he started.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
The "fundamentals" don't change (ie, lighting, pacing) but trending topics are constantly shifting. The stuff he's doing today may not be popular in a month so being able to quickly put out a new video for the current trend is what he's optimized for.

jasonmarks_ 2y ago

His view counts seem cooked to me. I would be interested to see what countries his viewers are claiming to be from. This article even reads as a guerilla upsell that his numbers are legitimate. Surely the urge to cheat is unbearable with millions of dollars on the hook. (Alot of apps on the app stores also claim to have quarter million 5 star reviews. Uhhuh)

kube-system 2y ago
His viewers skew younger. Kids have a lot of time on their hands. Given how ubiquitously well-known he is among younger people, I doubt there's much fraud necessary.
- jasonmarks_ 2y ago
  I agree the kids will take it at face value all the more reason to not tolerate massive deception. What if his teaching them fraudulent representation pays. All pro athletes cheat a little bit at the highest levels but exceptional cheating is never tolerated.
  - kube-system 2y ago
    I don't understand what you're saying. Kids don't watch the channel because it has a high number of views. And what "massive deception" are you referring to?
    - jasonmarks_ 2y ago
      You are using deflection here (deceitful). Without a list of all viewer ip's it's hard to identify where his click contractor is. Just knowing what countries his viewers are from would be sufficient.
  - spiderice 2y ago
    What evidence do you have of him cheating other than your feelings?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Invictus0 2y ago

Breathless navel gazing. It's not that he's wrong, it's just that this article adds nothing new to the conversation other than excessively technical mumbo jumbo. Just read MrBeast's original document.

lanternfish 2y ago
The actual work underlying the essay - the one published in Cambridge Core - is pretty strong and has a lot of pretty compelling analysis. It's just long.
- Invictus0 2y ago
  I disagree that it's strong, I got up to section five and it's written in the same "I am very smart and this is very important" style while saying very little of substance and bouncing around like a rabbit on speed. The central thesis that demand creates supply is also just very obviously false, no one was searching for "100 identical twins fight for $250k" before Mr beast made that video. People watch Mr beast because they want 20 minutes of whimsical predictably mind numbing colorful emotional fast paced distraction and Mr beast fills that need perfectly with videos of all kinds. He transports viewers to a fantasy land far beyond their real world, where boredom doesn't exist and crazy things are possible. No one knew they wanted an iPod until Steve jobs showed it to them; they just wanted a better CD player. Same thing with YouTube; people just show up and click on something the algorithm puts in their way, there isn't a demand for anything really. No one knew they wanted a Mr beast. The consumer demand is some combination of distraction, entertainment, or education, it's not much deeper than that.
queuebert 2y ago
Ironically I think one huge contribution that YouTube has made for the good is elevating the quality of STEM didactics. Channels like 3blue1brown and Veritasium have shown what STEM instruction could look like when not relegated to tenured professors who DGAF about teaching.

coopykins 2y ago

Really liked this sentence: "YouTubers are not “Creators” but Creations. Audiences, rationalized by the platform, and the vloggers who upload the videos those audiences consume are not separable either theoretically or empirically."

hahamrfunnyguy 2y ago

I ran a YouTube channel seriously for a couple of years. Chasing the whims of the algorithm contributed to burnout and now I only release one or two videos a year. My reason for starting a channel was to have a discussion around some of the projects I was working on that I found interesting. This never materialized. I never had a ton of engagement, but if I did most questions asked by viewers that are answered in the video. I monetized my videos and started making beer-money amounts of revenue. I put more and more time into them but never gained traction. I had a few "evergreen" videos that would make maybe a thousand bucks a year, the rest of the videos hardly got any views at all. Eventually, I found myself making videos to feed the algorithm not because it was a project that I wanted to do. This is where I had to stop. I realized that I just don't like editing videos. My channel makes no revenue now because YouTube requires an upload schedule and shorts. Mr Beast's job sounds awful to me. The videos I make now only get dozens to hundreds of views when they're published. I mostly share them with friends and in online communities where the info contained might be helpful.

AndrewStephens 2y ago
Thank you for your story. I have been running a low traffic blog for decades now and there was a time when I craved engagement. I never put too much effort in but I did change the things I wrote about to try to get noticed, a strategy that was unmarred by success. The creators that find success need to pump out content at a ridiculous rate. It is a faustian bargain that sucks in a lot of people.
- coliveira 2y ago
  These people are essentially competing against an algorithm, not against other humans. I consider this to be an extremely distasteful endeavor.
lobsterthief 2y ago
I had a hobby electronics channel that was getting quite popular (~30k subs after ~15 videos). I burned out for a different reason: it’s hard to do this as a side gig. If I could’ve done it full time I would’ve continued doing so, but YouTube just doesn’t pay you enough despite each video getting >100K views. I paid zero attention to the algorithm and just focused on creating unique, creative, high-quality content that showed a level of effort was put forth. This “side gig” burned me out. So it’s possible you would’ve burned out anyways, despite any algorithmic considerations.

geerlingguy 2y ago

There's a lot of drama around the MrBeast YouTube channel lately—some of it justified, a lot of it manufactured... I think the main thing is Jimmy Donaldson (MrBeast) has stated numerous times his goal in life (at least publicly) is to make the best YouTube videos possible. Realistically, a lot of the things that feed into drama are related to that goal: overwork, inadequate planning. They take 'move fast and break things' to the extreme to make the videos they make, and unfortunately the 'things' they break are often people. The tough thing is, at least until recently, it seemed like MrBeast and the 'Beastification' of YouTube (where all content is loud, shouty, super-quick cuts) was inevitable. And in many corners (especially kids-centric content) it kind-of is. But luckily I think some people have pulled back. I feel like we're currently in kind of the anti-thesis of the '2001 Space Odyssey' era of entertainment. Instead of long, thoughtful content for consumption, it's fast-paced, zero-thought content with splashy colors.

cedws 2y ago

I think MrBeast and other high end influencers like the Paul brothers are harmful to children. Kids see them flaunting their huge wealth and abandon all their other ambitions in favour of wanting to become a YouTuber. Which, now, is a very competitive platform few succeed on. Kids should be nudged towards working fruitful careers beneficial to society. Although MrBeast has done some good things with it, I find the way he flaunts his wealth perverse.

munchler 2y ago
> Kids should be nudged towards working fruitful careers beneficial to society. It’s all about incentives. I think we should nudge society towards rewarding kids who choose fruitful careers.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  Yes, that too, but it might not help kids whose main perception/exposure of "society" is MrBeast et al. Kids can be quite oblivious to how "society" works in practice and what will be rewarded.
ndileas 2y ago
Franz Liszt is a Menace to Society and all those whose consider themselves Decent, Hardworking, Folk should warn their Children aginst[sic] him. Composition is of course a Good, but the competition is too steep, and if the Young seek to imitate the likes of him it will end in Tears. The Young should be guided, steered into more reliable, beneficial aspirations.
andrewla 2y ago
In general I'm in agreement that they present a life where being an "influencer" is a goal in and of itself, but I think it's mostly harmless, like kids wanting to be a rock star or a professional athlete. These are unobtainable for most people but learning some music or sports or video production isn't a bad idea for anyone because you don't know where it will lead. The specific criticism of "flaunting their huge wealth" does not apply at least to MrBeast -- he specifically is not very wealthy (I mean, he may be, but he says that he is not and he does not flaunt any such wealth; on the few occasions where his personal life is highlighted it seems he lives rather humbly). He claims to put all of the money he earns back into his videos; so when he makes enough to buy a "lambo" or whatever he will buy one and give it away to whoever can swallow the most toothpicks or whatever. MrBeast does not push a life of luxury as his lifestyle, he presents a life of being a celebrity influencer whose life is making more spectacles.

campbel 2y ago

The reciprocal relationship between speakers and audiences is well documented in rhetorical studies. The example of Hitler's development as a speaker is discussed in Ian Kershaw's biography "Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris." According to historical accounts, Hitler's early speeches in 1919-1920 for the German Workers' Party were rather technical, focusing on economic topics like inflation and the Versailles Treaty's economic impact. Through audience reactions, he learned which themes resonated most strongly and adapted his rhetoric accordingly. His latter speeches focused on topics like nationalism, anti-semitism, anti-marxism, etc... topics far more popular with his audience.

stafford_beer 2y ago
totally agree--and I think this is key to Trump's success as well, that he used audience feedback on Twitter to figure out that there was unmet demand for harsh anti-immigration policy and then win the 2016 primary

tdb7893 2y ago

So firstly I think for understanding YouTube it's much longer but it's better to just read Mr Beasts onboarding guide (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YaG9xpu-WQKBPUi8yQ4HaDYQLUSa7Y3J/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YaG9xpu-WQKBPUi8yQ4HaDYQLUS...). It gives a more complete picture straight from the horses mouth (and I always prefer primary documents if I can). That being said I think the author here is taking some things for granted. An example of this to me is "As I wrote in the book, “If creators are speaking their authentic truths, how can they also be accountable to audience feedback? I am personally bemused to see 'authenticity' invoked as a criterion for what is ultimately and obviously a performance". So firstly I don't view authenticity as some binary thing that is mutually exclusive with taking feedback and context. Just because I act differently with my boss, my parents, and my friends based on feedback from them I'm not being inherently inauthentic. To me authenticity and external pressures are at odds but from the few videos and interviews I've seen of Jimmy he seems to genuinely enjoy creating the spectacles he does so beneath all the artifice in the videos I think you're still seeing the core of Jimmy making content that he wants to make. Anyway, I think if you stop looking at stuff like authenticity as less rigid rules for how to act and more as a spectrum or very broad category what the creators say makes more sense (because it's not just Mr Beast saying similar things).

lanternfish 2y ago
Your conclusion is the exact same one the above essay comes to in the next paragraphs. It concludes that the "alignment" between MrBeast and his work is a result of the larger thesis: creators are ultimately created by the audience conditions of the platform. Or, authenticity doesn't mean much when the root of the creator isn't a ground truth, but a synthesis of demand.
- tdb7893 2y ago
  We do not come to the same conclusions. The last paragraph is this: “Luckily, I’d say I’m a pretty predictable guy.” Luck has nothing to do with it, Mr. MrBeast. Your predictability is the result of years of an information diet consisting of audience feedback metrics. You are the proudest creation of the YouTube Apparatus." Audience feedback metrics are only part of what a creator does. They are people with complex motivations and being sensitive to audience feedback metrics doesn't eliminate that. I could see saying the ecosystem being a synthesis of demand (I mean that's just trivially true, we don't need an essay on Mr Beast to say that) but from interviews Mr Beast is very much a product of the pressure of YouTube mixed with the very specific nature of who Jimmy is as a person (from interviews he seems like a pretty weird guy and his videos definitely reflect his particular quirks). Edit: I'm trying to see how the author and I agree but unless the author is saying that people who succeed on a platform are the people that do things that are successful on the platform (i.e. align with audience metrics) then I don't think we agree. And I don't think that's all they are saying because that's just trivially true everywhere and it would make all the talk about philosophy and authenticity useless cruft. I think that Mr Beast is the sorta platonic ideal of a "content creator" driven by metrics and even he cannot escape his own Jimmy Donaldson-ness in his videos.

01308106991 2y ago

[flagged]

andrewflnr 2y ago

> I am personally bemused to see “authenticity” invoked as a criterion for what is ultimately and obviously a performance Imagine someone is actually an actor. They might play two different roles, one in a character and show they find boring, and one in relatable character in a show whose message they think is important. Don't you think their performance in the second one might be more authentic, despite being a "performance" in both cases? This essay starts interesting, but I think it overreaches at the end.

lern_too_spel 2y ago

I was thrown off by the use of the word, "wordcel," which the author defines as almost the opposite of what I would expect it to mean. Just like "incel" is a portmanteau, I expect "wordcel" to mean "word celibate." It didn't fit the context. The word is linked to a longer article that has the author's definition buried in it, which just distracted more from this article.

andrewla 2y ago
I'm perhaps too online, but this is not the author's coining. There was discourse ages ago about how some people are "shape rotators" -- that is, they could reason about complex stuff in their heads, and their counterparts, the "wordcels", that could express ideas through writing. The latter admittedly does not make sense as a portmanteau, likely because a shape rotator came up with it.

_blk 2y ago

Thanks op. This sums it up pretty well for me: In what sense is any of this authentic?

coliveira 2y ago

Consider the following: my personal youtube feed has never shown a video of MrBeast. I never asked to remove it from my feed. I only know the he exists because I see it being debated in the media. So, this tells me more about what people in general are interested in and click to watch, than about the nature of youtube itself.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

artur_makly 2y ago

Dhar Mann’s channel is another interesting cultural signal of what kind of content tweens are being groomed with: https://youtube.com/@dharmann?si=vsNv2M2S7LfbVvVt https://youtube.com/@dharmann?si=vsNv2M2S7LfbVvVt What is abhorrently revolting is the total amount of “Gold Digger” videos +100 and counting.. https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=76583c995a4c1c88&rlz=1CDGOYI_enAR1098AR1098&hl=en-US&sxsrf=ADLYWIKbRUoA1xeQAK7jK48WOz79FmTwiw:1736876766800&q=youtube+dhar+mann+gold+digger&udm=7&fbs=AEQNm0Aa4sjWe7Rqy32pFwRj0UkWd8nbOJfsBGGB5IQQO6L3JyJJclJuzBPl12qJyPx7ESKd_0oka9aLy7VkmZpoP843borY-CYvh01p-kxy-aQoVzgguT7S6tPcab4Ybn4EdxAeV3D95PqErRBP6zbkyIGbKxYX0kcfiZwJH27_29Goroz1VCeJKxzcvUNGi2z-c4iTHRriKhO1dXbYYbUmW0eufpnljQ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjGotCV4vWKAxWoqpUCHfb0JbIQtKgLegQIGBAB&biw=393&bih=657&dpr=3#ip=1 https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=76583c995a4c1c88&rlz=1...

snakeyjake 2y ago
Dang. I wanted to see what "the youths" were watching so I scrubbed through a couple of those videos. The people in them make me feel like the world's most accomplished actor.
axxto 2y ago
Wow. I expected this to be just bad clickbaity content, but I didn't expect this level of algorithmic-driven slop. Disturbing. 25 million subscribers, too; millions of views on every single video, one new hour-long video of this insane crap every few days. All clearly directed at children.
- artur_makly 2y ago
  yeah it's totally f'd up. This is the NEW children "fables" that are teaching the next-gen modern "morality". My 11yr old made me aware of it, and I've seen like 20 of them now.. about 22% are OK in terms of messaging/values. But the danger lies in that the 9-13yr old kids watching this stuff will take most of it literally as 'this is how the real-world works'. Sadly no one else if filling this niche better and he seems to have found the algo.

nickdothutton 2y ago

I feel like I need to see an Adam Curtis documentary* on this. [*] Spanning 5 hours.

nikcub 2y ago
Curtis heavily applies quick cuts, emotive footage, authoritative English narration and emotional music to lull the viewer into his views. His message wouldn't work as written essays or books because they're just not very deep - it's early YouTube MrBeast-like audience optimisation for those who don't want to discover or read on topics.

citizenpaul 2y ago

>like is there a correlation between better lighting at the start of the video and less viewer drop off (there is, have good lighting at the start of the video haha) This gives me the smell and sight of red flags in their methodology. It reeks of unsuspected hidden variables. Such as what is really going on is that focusing on lighting in the beginning of the video simply makes people put more thought into the into thereby having a hook that keeps people interested, rather than lighting having anything to do with it. That means this is just a pseudoscience blog of throwing darts to me. Sure call me a curmudgeon or whatever.

plaidfuji 2y ago

> As I wrote in the book, “If creators are speaking their authentic truths, how can they also be accountable to audience feedback? I am personally bemused to see “authenticity” invoked as a criterion for what is ultimately and obviously a performance; Who are you to deny their authenticity, though? If authenticity is being true to one’s own character, and one’s entire character is driven by YouTube video metric optimization (and perhaps ultimately by the profit thereby obtained), then isn’t their behavior on screen authentic? Put another way, if MrBeast says “your goal is to make me excited to be on screen”, he’s explicitly saying he doesn’t want to have to act or otherwise be inauthentic on screen. Whether his excitement about a certain topic is tied to the views he expects it to garner is immaterial, if that’s his authentic motivation. Or put yet another way, what drives anybody’s “authentic” behavior? What audience are they playing to? It may not be the entire internet, but it’s certainly influenced by “performance” in front of friends and family. We’re all Creations of our environment. MrBeast has just kind of found himself in an environment where feedback from YouTube videos motivates him and creates a ton of positive feedback loops.

donatj 2y ago

> the MrBeast with two backs > haha just kidding. MrBeast does not have sex. YouTube doesn’t allow pornography, so what would be the point? Why was this included in the post? What does it add? It seems … just sort of mean spirited and out of place in an otherwise good article.

stafford_beer 2y ago
haha I'm not saying that MrBeast couldn't have sex if he wanted to -- I'm saying that, because he's constructed himself to only care about maximizing audience metrics, having sex would be a waste of his time

propter_hoc 2y ago

This is just a terrific read. The following excerpt from the final chapter of his e-book is just as good: There are indeed “echo chambers” on YouTube, but they are filled with an active and demanding audience. When the YouTuber uploads their video, whatever originality, creativity or meaning they intended to communicate is reduced to the public audience measures that the platform appends to the video. This quantification puts the video into immediate comparison with the YouTuber’s previous videos, and indeed with every video on the platform. It requires incredible willpower to ignore the reverberations of the ever-present audience on social media, to maintain an independent artistic vision or coherent ideological position. And for YouTubers attempting to make a living, the vast and intense competition makes it impossible to do so. The audience can simply click away if the YouTuber displeases them. The pressure of having millions of bosses issuing conflicting demands can produce “Creator burnout” or worse. My poetic aspiration is that whenever you read the words “YouTube Creator” you think instead of “Audience Creation.” Social media does not create powerful Influencers but rather powerless marionettes, dancing jerkily to quantified audience tugs.

stafford_beer 2y ago
thank you!