|
|
|
|
|
|
by Bodell
1855 days ago
|
|
|
Disclosure: I do pay for premium because I do not like ads. However, I find myself more sympathetic to the issue you’ve described. Perhaps if people felt that the “content creators” would revive a fair shake of those premium monthly charges I pay they would be more likely to enter into such an agreement. As it stands this is simply not the case and the same holds true for most all content streaming services. The provider and about 1% of contributors get the real lions share, the rest are fighting for scraps (often at the mercy of YouTube’s moderation algos, e.g. getting banned, having videos removed or demonetized because a computer doesn’t really know what it’s looking at.) On top of that YouTube uses my demographic and video watching data to serve me ads everywhere else, my email, my browser, etc. not exactly a fair trade off in simply removing ads from the videos themselves. It truly is not an egalitarian system, therefore the erosion of trust, and as a consequence the unwillingness of its consumers to “play ball”, is simply a product of their own making. |
|
|
This is a good point and a much bigger issue than I was initially thinking. Even if 100% of my YouTube ad money and premium subscription went directly to the creators I watch, proportioned by how much time I spent on each channel, I wouldn't do it. That's because there's a weird inequality created by virality. If you're really successful, you can make millions of dollars a year solo. If you don't get past the algorithm or your content is niche, you might have a team of 5 people and make less than 100k a year in total (and obviously there's a very long tail of people trying to make a career of YouTube who are currently failing to do even that).
At the end of the day, I think this is ... bad. It may seem "fair" for people to be paid linearly with how much their creations are consumed, but the nature of digital media is such that if something is mainstream enough, boring enough, safe enough, it can scale basically forever with no added costs. (It's why Disney movies can make a billion dollars.) If someone whose work I follow is already making six figures a year, I'd much rather continue watching their content for free (which comes at no cost to them because digital media can be copied), while supporting niche creators who are trying to make rent at the end of the month instead. It may not be "fair" (ad blocking is only a step removed from piracy, they're both effectively copyright subversion), but copyright and endless remuneration based on popularity is creating a bad media landscape. I want to see a better one.