Agreed. I’m fine with anyone making money by any means that is and should be legal; “Youtuber” qualifies, I guess. But it would seem to me obvious that it’s not a reliable career path. If someone honestly thought they could earn a middle-class living doing that for the rest of their life, I would question their intelligence.
Yes, I do.
I watch a number of smaller channels, all with interesting content, and some of them were making a decent living by putting out a few videos per week. Not much, but $300 in income for a teenager in Alabama is pretty decent.
Youtube then changed its ways it calculates ad revenue. Folks that were making money suddenly were only making 10 to 20% of what they used to make - not because their audience changed or because their content change, but because the company that they helped build decided to change how they paid folks.
I have a great deal of sympathy for them, as they counted on Youtube being one thing, and then Youtube shifted directions, putting them out of a job through no fault of their own.
Agreed (although I would call that an art form too, but I get your point.
You’re right. The risk is the step out into the void - if it goes wrong, it could end in long term unemployment; because getting a job is not as easy as keeping a job, so giving up a job is a risk - but again, agreed - doing all of that and also taking on debt to start a bricks and mortar business is a bigger investment and risk.
Is that why I’m seeing more Patreon links on YouTube channels?
I don’t have any more sympathy for a youtuber who ran out of creative juices than I have for an author or songwriter that only had a few works in them to produce.
They got paid for the contribution that they did make to our collective creative inventory, and there is no reason that they should continue to get more money if they are not still creating original content that interests people.
OTOH, there are a number of people that constantly put out high quality, informative and/or educational videos, they put quite a bit of time and effort into them, and if people are still just as or more interested in watching them as they were when the channel started, then the youtuber should be getting similar or more compensation for their work.
Youtube changing the way that the monetize videos doesn’t just hurt the youtube video creators who were looking to get paid for their work, it also hurt youtube video watchers, as there will be fewer people willing to put in the time and effort of creating something if there is less or even no financial compensation for it.
A number seem to have gone to either a patreon model, or a product placement and endorsement model. If this works for them, that’s great, but it isn’t going to do much for newer content creators with new and unexplored ideas. No one is funding a brand new channel through patreon, and sponsors are not going to have much interest in paying for product placement on a channel that hasn’t gotten many views yet.
IMO. it’s sort of the modern-day equivalent of getting into TV or acting, but with a lower bar to entry and lower standards in general. There’s no automatic need to sneer at people trying to make a living talking to others through a camera on YouTube any more than there’s a reason to sneer at David Attenborough for talking to us through a camera on TV. I’m not equating the quality and intent in every case, of course.
That and YouTube Red.
Patreon seems OK as a way for very devoted fans to support the work of a channel they love, and get some upgraded benefits too (access to additional content, competitions and giveaways, etc). All’s fair, I reckon - these are all consenting adults interacting in ways they choose to.
but they’re not even really creative! they’re things like “watch me play a video game and narrate it,” shrieking twats like Ricky Dillon, and totally useless garbage like Jake Paul who think “social experiment” means “watch me be an incredible pain in the ass to make people lose their minds.”
I have yet to see a “YouTube personality” whom I didn’t want to strangle within the first 60 seconds of their blabber, but if I ever do, and they end up failing, I may feel some sympathy. No promises.
There’s a reason most artists are starving.
The channels I watch have mostly followed a pattern of releasing a video on both Patreon and youtube. They’ll put it out on Patreon first and youtube a week or two later. The super dedicated people get their content right away and the content creator gets paid and the rest of us get to see the videos a few days later. For the great majority of videos (ie things that aren’t related to current events) this probably works pretty well. Until Patreon hits some critical mass, I doubt it’s going to make a huge dent in youtube’s numbers.
Try other channels maybe? I don’t know what you’re into, but I watch a bunch of car repair channels, welding channels, AVE, waterjet channel, Tommy Edison, Smarter Every Day etc.
I think you’ll get more signal and less noise than watching random viral videos.
i could be completely wrong, but when he said he “didn’t know it was a thing”, i took that “it” to be about the you tubers situation (running out of ideas, getting jacked around by you tube, having it as a career in the first place) being a thing, not he didn’t know sympathy was a thing.
I think it might take over as the monetization channel for YouTubers at some point, but still only as a way of getting subscribers to support what is primarily happening on YT. I guess I should get on board, but it still feels sort of dirty to me to be asking for subs.
Absolutely agree with this. The most popular vloggers are not especially creative, just effective at being in front of a camera (that’s a skill, but for many, not as admirable as working with your hands). AVE, This Old Tony, John Heisz, Matthias Wandel, Clickspring (seriously, anyone who asserts ‘youtubers are not creative’ needs to go watch Clickspring, then shut the hell up), Pocket83, William Osman, Joerg Sprave…
The ones that seem to fade fast that have a “sthick” like fgtv that’s mostly the guy trying dad jokes with his kids
I didn’t follow anyone until my nephew started watching gaming videos … the second one I ever seen was dantdm playing job simulator on the vive… he was so funny that I wanted to go and get one …
Of course ive used him to avoid several crappy games (although I wish he never played the 5 night at freddys series …)
But as long as someone makes a game he’ll have a job funny thing is he doesn’t play games any better than I do …
It’s hard for me not to have sympathy for anyone trying to scrape by in this capricious hell world.
Depending on the scope of the channel, equipment alone can run into the thousands of dollars, plus shelling out for editing software (though I’m guessing most of the small fries just pirate Premiere).
spending thousands of dollars in hopes of making money on YouTube is like taking out a loan to buy Bitcoin.
not the wisest move.
I dunno, I don’t watch those channels. I watch channels where people are creative, interesting, and/or educational.
If nothing else, I replaced the radiator in my car, repaired my home AC, fixed my oven, and performed several other home repairs after watching other people do those activities on youtube.
There are also some game channels I watch a bit. I really liked kerbal space program, but got tired of messing around with building and orbits for hours on end, and discovered I could get the same enjoyment as playing, without the frustration, by watching Scott Manley play. Then there are many other videos on his chanel that are interesting and educational.
Smarter every day, backyard scientist, even cody’s lab may teach you something useful, and probably make you enjoy learning it
That’s not counting the zillion channels that are made by Brady Haran like numberphile, computerphile, sixty symbols, periodic videos and so on.
It is very true that most youtubers aren’t all that creative or interesting, but it is certainly not true that there are no creative or interesting content to be had.
My cousin and her kids are YouTube-famous. It surprised her as much as anyone. You probably don’t watch her channel, but your kids might.
She was somehow able to turn 20-minute videos into a success, and now does it full-time. Last I checked they had 5 million subscribers, and one of her kids was recently on the cover of a well-known teen magazine.
It’s taken a lot of work, but I guess it can be done! The few times she’s mentioned me I got like 10,000 hits a day; it was a little weird, actually (but kind of cool, I must admit). It’s a strange world we live in!
No, it isn’t.
Employees are always piggybacking on private infrastructure, it’s what they do.
Now, your use of the word “piggybacking” may imply that you are intending it to be a one way street, the piggybacker gets benefit, but the piggybackee does not, so your implication is that the youtube content creator is a parasite on youtube’s infrastructure.
That would be true, if it were not for the fact that if youtube did not have people creating videos for it to display, it wouldn’t exist at all.
You may as well say that youtube is piggybacking off the content that is created by the youtubers.
They are not parasites, it is a symbiotic relationship, one where youtbue actually gets the better end of the deal, IMHO.