[3xblah]

Doesn't Google have millions of dollars in cash on hand. Perhaps it could pay YouTube content creators.

Google sells ad sales services utilising, in part, data collected on YouTube visitors.

An old saw amongst internet marketers was that "traffic" was the single most metric behind the financial success of any website. That idea only makes sense if the plan is to sell online ads or, in Google's case, provide online ad sales services. In lockdown, arguably the best "business plan" for a website is to sell essential goods/services.

What consumers might be reminded or become aware of during lockdown is that the internet, including the web, still continuses to work without any online ads. Ad buyers might not be buying onlne ads, but consumers are still paying for home internet access. Lo and behold, even when online ads are diminished, creative and generous people still create content and use the internet to share it.

[bkanber]

But why would Google pay YouTube creators out of pocket when the creators are perfectly willing to upload for free, as they have from the beginning?

[dragonwriter]

> Doesn't Google have millions of dollars in cash on hand.

Well, millions with a “b”.

> Perhaps it could pay YouTube content creators.

It...does.

> What consumers might become aware of during lockdown is that the internet, including the web, still continuses to work without any online ads.

It doesn't work without a revenue stream for the online service providers, whether that's ads (regular, “free” YouTube) or membership fees (YouTube Premium).