# The recent YouTube demonitization kefuffle and why its business model is doomed **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [September 22, 2016, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570 "2016-09-22T11:10:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/21 "2016-09-22T21:34:07Z")
> [@troub](#): > > And with regard to ad-blockers…sure, lots of people use them. Lots don’t. But that ignores the reality that more and more people aren’t watching videos on their desktops in their browsers. They’re watching (or even just listening) via tablets and phones and other devices. Most of my YouTube viewing (see above) is via a Roku. There’s Chromecast and AppleTV, all kinds of ways to get this content other than through a desktop browser that supports adblock plugins. The number of people who go to the trouble of maintaining a block list at the router level is vanishingly small. Make no mistake, there are still lots of people seeing ads on YouTube, and probably always will be. No way the YouTube app, or Roku or AppleTV or your “Smart” web-connected TV or DVD player and so on and so forth will ever allow for ad blockers. Good point. I furiously block ads, but not all do. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/22 "2016-09-22T21:37:42Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Can someone explain a bit how the process works? > > I have a video to post, and think it could make money. Do I ask YT to find a sponsor for it? Do I go liking for a sponsor on my own? Does Youtube just arbitrarily assign an ad to a new video? Basically, how is the video paired with one or more ads? It’s based on algorithms which are sort of super-secret within YouTube (I had a meeting with an account manager at YouTube Space London earlier this week and he said a lot about ‘the algorithm’, including that nobody really knows how it works). It’s going to be a bit like Google Page Rank though, I expect (which is also sort of super-secret in the precise detail of its operation), but known to be based on metadata plus inbound links plus where people actually arrived from etc - which will give YouTube a rough classification of the content and channel - they’ll then probably pair it with experimentally-relevant ads, and refine based on the performance of those ads. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/23 "2016-09-22T22:54:21Z")
I thought there’s be more pushback on my belief that YT as we know it is doomed. No one disagree with that? ---
**Author:** ![troub](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troub/32/14802_2.png) [@troub](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/troub)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/24 "2016-09-23T02:48:35Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I thought there’s be more pushback on my belief that YT as we know it is doomed. No one disagree with that? Probably not. I’ve been on the internet for 20+ years, and the only thing that stays the same is the fact that nothing ever stays the same. Things come, everything eventually goes\*. So far, anyway. It’s hard to see something with apparent critical mass like Facebook or Google withering away, but they very well might. YouTube, as a small piece of the whole Google empire, is certainly not safe from the same chopping block that has claimed other beloved Google services and products, though I suspect they get enough valuable advertising info from monitoring people’s habits that even losing money on YouTube itself is fine as they can use the data to enhance their other ad products and make it up somewhere else. \*Except this board. It’s been the one (mostly) constant thing since the dawn of time. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/25 "2016-09-23T03:19:04Z")
And now comes the YouTube Heroes program, where you can earn points, and thereby some sort of YouTube fame, by reporting other posters for your personal bugaboos. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/26 "2016-09-23T04:18:21Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > And now comes the YouTube Heroes program, where you can earn points, and thereby some sort of YouTube fame, by reporting other posters for your personal bugaboos. LOL! More panic paddling. Très incompetent! ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/27 "2016-09-23T04:48:27Z")
> [@troub](#): > > Probably not. I’ve been on the internet for 20+ years, and the only thing that stays the same is the fact that nothing ever stays the same. Things come, everything eventually goes\*. So far, anyway. It’s hard to see something with apparent critical mass like Facebook or Google withering away, but they very well might. I highly doubt they will be gone 5 years from now. I highly doubt they will be here in anything close to the same form 20 years from now. Well, I could see Google’s search engine biz lasting that long. > [@](#): > > YouTube, as a small piece of the whole Google empire, is certainly not safe from the same chopping block that has claimed other beloved Google services and products, though I suspect they get enough valuable advertising info from monitoring people’s habits that even losing money on YouTube itself is fine as they can use the data to enhance their other ad products and make it up somewhere else. Right. And shutting it down would be a big loss of prestige. It’s not something they are going to trash like Wave (remember that?). They will keep it alive in some form or another for, oh, the next 10 years or so at least. It might be a very faint shadow of its former self, but it will be there. > [@](#): > > \*Except this board. It’s been the one (mostly) constant thing since the dawn of time. I predicted this board’s demise at one point (2003? 2004?) when there was a struggle over making it subscription, this or that. Then I basically left for a couple years. I never really learned how it _did_ survive and continues to do so. Would anyone care to catch me up? ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/28 "2016-09-23T16:35:20Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > It’s simply corporate censorship by stealth. Eh. There are dozens of competing video hosting sites, and buying your own server to throw some video files on is cheap and easy. It’s not like the old days where there were actual media gatekeepers who could keep you from getting your message out. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/29 "2016-09-23T17:32:52Z")
My point is \*not \*that YouTube is trying to prevent some message getting out. It’s that YouTube is trying to avoid being itself associated with, and blamed for, and punished for, some messages it thinks will arouse public ire. While also not triggering a firestorm of protest from the cyber-libertarians as they act to limit their exposure. Personally I side more with the cyber-libertarians. But I also understand how suits see their corporate imperatives. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2016, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/30 "2016-09-23T19:21:12Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I thought there’s be more pushback on my belief that YT as we know it is doomed. No one disagree with that? Dunno. I was a producer on MetaCafe when their Producer Rewards program went to shit (at around about the same time as the YouTube Partner program was opening up to more than just the select few). This doesn’t feel like that. Of course there’s no reason that this should feel like that, even if this is the beginning of the end for YouTube. My impression though, is that YouTube does not perceive itself as floundering or having problems - they seem to be pouring a lot of effort into new creative ventures - I think if they were really in trouble, they would be withdrawing on all fronts into a profitable core. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/31 "2016-09-24T02:14:48Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > Dunno. I was a producer on MetaCafe when their Producer Rewards program went to shit (at around about the same time as the YouTube Partner program was opening up to more than just the select few). This doesn’t feel like that. > > Of course there’s no reason that this should feel like that, even if this is the beginning of the end for YouTube. My impression though, is that YouTube does not perceive itself as floundering or having problems - they seem to be pouring a lot of effort into new creative ventures - I think if they were really in trouble, they would be withdrawing on all fronts into a profitable core. Yeah, they are not bleeding cash either and I am not predicting their shutdown any time soon. In fact, I think Google will keep YouTube alive in some form for the foreseeable future, as it’s such a prestige business for them. They don’t want to admit failure. But YT is as much “in trouble” at any given time as Google feels they are, since the biz model isn’t making money. When you’re breaking even on $4 billion, there’s a LOT of slush in the system. You can try this, try that, still break even or maybe even go into the red a bit, and relative success can be hard to judge. ---
**Author:** ![Cyberhwk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7993a0/32.png) [@Cyberhwk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyberhwk)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/32 "2016-09-24T07:54:23Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I predicted this board’s demise at one point (2003? 2004?) when there was a struggle over making it subscription, this or that. Then I basically left for a couple years. I never really learned how it _did_ survive and continues to do so. Would anyone care to catch me up? Yeah, we’re getting a bit off-topic, but I’m wondering this as well. I’ve also posted on-and-off really since the AOL days but distinctly remember lots of worry in the past as The Straight Dope was passed from company to company whether the **SDMB** was part of their future. I remember the future looking quite dim more than once. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/33 "2016-09-24T09:48:32Z")
IMO, one of the threats to YouTube is the rise of clickbait type videos - essentially, videos titled ‘Ten photos you won’t believe exist’ that contain no creative content at all - little more than a slideshow of someone else’s pictures, spun out into a 7 minute video with shifty voiceover. They’re a threat because they are easy to churn out, and although they generate views in the short term, I don’t believe they contribute to the health of YouTube as a broadcasting medium. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 11:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/34 "2016-09-24T11:43:23Z")
YT is also serving a blocking role. As long as Google has it out there, Brand X has a hard time replacing it as the go-to source for amateur video. So Google retains control of the flow of eyeballs. Even if Google hasn’t quite figured out how to make it a money-spinner, the fact it’s breaking even means their true “cost” is their invested capital volume times their capital cost rate. Given that they’re drowning in unused capital (read as “cash”), the cost of YT is more or less zero. When you’re that capital heavy you can afford to play a long game. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/35 "2016-09-24T11:50:06Z")
Late add: Take a look at the history of the _chaebol_, [[Chaebol - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol)] the post-war Korean conglomerates. Or their Japanese counterparts. They just kept buying up more and more businesses and expanding into new areas apparently willy-nilly until they developed a monopoly across large swaths of the economy. Then they started to squeeze. A little like playing the Monopoly board game, there’s a period where you’re just trying to occupy more and more board space even though you’re losing money doing it. The difference in the real world is that nobody knows how the game board will change and grow over time. But for sure, the more you own and the more what you own is positioned near the frontier, the better positioned you’ll be to eventually make a killing with your properties. While preventing Brand X from doing so instead. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/36 "2016-09-24T12:52:42Z")
Google (not used to “Alphabet” yet) is acting strangely here. Lots of advertisers don’t care if there are dirty words and/or violence in videos. Look at TV. Conan can get away with saying stuff that you can’t say on _SpongeBob SquarePants_. Google could rate videos in a sort of TV-MA VSL way and map advertisers accordingly. Note that Google _already_ uses this system for its Play Store. They don’t just ban stuff wily-nilly. Note that they already a sign-in to access mature videos. So, what is going on? It appears that this is hurting their income stream. It smacks more of censorship than anything. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/37 "2016-09-24T17:17:43Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I highly doubt they will be gone 5 years from now. I highly doubt they will be here in anything close to the same form 20 years from now. Well, I could see Google’s search engine biz lasting that long. > > Right. And shutting it down would be a big loss of prestige. It’s not something they are going to trash like Wave (remember that?). They will keep it alive in some form or another for, oh, the next 10 years or so at least. It might be a very faint shadow of its former self, but it will be there. > I predicted this board’s demise at one point (2003? 2004?) when there was a struggle over making it subscription, this or that. Then I basically left for a couple years. I never really learned how it _did_ survive and continues to do so. Would anyone care to catch me up? I’m not clear either but hardware and storage is cheaper than ever and a text based board is (I’m guessing) not going to be chewing up a lot of bandwidth. I get that the cost of the board hardware and BBS software updates is probably a few thousand a year to maintain and the moderation labor is effectively free. What is unclear is the cost of the net connection to service this. Against this is the income from the header ads (probably meager) and those who still maintain subscriptions, but I doubt that’s a huge cash cow. I think in the end it’s basically an act of good faith by Cecil and the moderators that keep it going. The value of the free labor by (generally) well educated people that goes into keeping this thing going is incalculable. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/38 "2016-09-24T19:20:17Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > YT is also serving a blocking role. As long as Google has it out there, Brand X has a hard time replacing it as the go-to source for amateur video. So Google retains control of the flow of eyeballs. And there is a political component to this so it isn’t going to change unless it’s bleeding money in an unsustainable manner. ---
**Author:** ![DonLogan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@DonLogan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DonLogan)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/39 "2016-09-24T19:20:20Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > 1. **It only gets more and more expensive to run as is.** What was the stat I read? People upload 400 hours of content to YT every minute, I think it was. In any case, it’s an absurdly high figure. Do you think YT is going to want to host blurry cat videos from 2006 forever? Endless copies of pop songs (especially now that streaming is a reality)? All the useless content that people throw up that no one watches? Hell no. It’s not physically possible or fiscally prudent. Something has to give. Seems to me like this would be one of the worst problems. If they are using algos to keep advertising off, then it’s going to have to keep getting more sensitive in order to keep up with workarounds. So the rate of growth of ads will be less than the rate of growth of shit people fling up there, and the spread will increase over time. Not that it’s important, but I laughed when I read the bit about “appealing” demonetization. Everybody knows 99.99% of the appeals never get looked at. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2016, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570/40 "2016-09-24T22:11:00Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > I thought there’s be more pushback on my belief that YT as we know it is doomed. No one disagree with that? If the content producers went on for years after their videos were demonetized, and they never previously noticed the effects of the demonetization, it’s pretty hard to see how they’re suddenly all going to go out of business and stop being content creators now that they’re receiving demonetization notices. But no - as long as there are teenagers getting their first iphones, there will always be a new crop of content creators coming up. YouTube is not doomed financially (although, eventually it will fall out of fashion, in the normal way of these things). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-recent-youtube-demonitization-kefuffle-and-why-its-business-model-is-doomed/766570.md?page=1)