| > Given the perception of many YouTubers as being more 'pure' ideological advocates What do you mean by this? Perhaps I haven't searched deep enough, but to me, YouTube these days consists primarily of: - Content creators, who are in it absolutely for the money, and whatever channel they run is just an excuse to get people to view ads (including product placement, and ads for creator's Patreon); - Conspiracy nuts, who may or may not also be in it for the ad money; - People reposting copyrighted content without having the copyright (i.e. the category that's responsible for YouTube's success in the first place); - Media companies posting copyrighted content legally to take over the ad revenue stream. There's some sprinkling of people who genuinely want to talk about their hobbies or ideas, without optimizing it for monetization. And here and there someone uploads some random video to share with friends. But the way I experience YouTube, almost all content creators are either marketers or wannabe marketers. |
But that's where people end up, not where they begin. Usually. At least that's the perception, for the kinds of channels you probably find most of the HN folks watching - including the channel ran by the man in question.
Somebody starts a channel about something they're passionate about, and are able to bring something to the table in relation to it, which lets them make some really cool videos that most people couldn't do.
Over time, things start moving in the direction you mentioned as it turns from a passion project they expect to go nowhere into a living. However I don't think most viewers exactly see it this way. I think there are a variety of reasons for this, including in particular just how far the medium pushes parasocial relationships. The slow change is also a factor for both the audience and the YouTuber themselves, I think.