this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

58009 readers
2949 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] scrion@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

So, how will content creators be reimbursed for the long hours they put into creating YouTube videos? There are honest people out there who made content creation their job. I say that to express I'm not talking about content farms, clickbait creators or "Mr. Beast" types - those are all media companies, although they also have bills to pay.

Did you get a premium account?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No everything has to be for profit in this life.

I've no contract with them, I've not made any purchases. They post something online for anyone to see.

They are completely free of locking their content behind a paywall, there are plenty of platforms for that.

But I want to make my first statement clear: no every single thing any human being does has to be done just for the sole purpose of getting an economical profit. That would be the death of humanity.

I still remember 90s internet when we had tons of websites with lots of content that was just there because the creators were fans of such content, no further intentions. Barely any ads or monetization whatsoever. The 'shark' mentality is killing internet.

[–] scrion@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sure. But nobody had to invest multiple hours each day into maintaining their Geocities page - there are only so many animated GIFs you could load over a modem connection anyway. Also, are we really comparing the hosting expenses of fucking YouTube with static 90s fan pages?

People expect edited videos from content creators these days. Even someone filming a hobby in their home shop will get barked at for having bad audio quality, if, this week for once, they forgot to charge the batteries on their wireless Rode lavalier mic.

That's why so many content creators do have e. g. Patreon. Many of them are providing peeks behind the scenes and create transparency to show how much effort a single video takes, and even individuals often hire someone to do the video edits for them.

If you're fine watching unedited, 5-10 minute videos that can be churned out with next to no effort, all good. I'm really into 40-90 minute long videos and personally view YouTube as an alternative to obtain the content type I prefer, but I'd rather not sacrifice quality. I also prefer creators who provide a serialized format and upload a video every week - in that way, I guess I'm old fashioned.

This type of content is impossible to make without financial support, which I'll gladly provide one way or the other. However, how much the average person can afford in terms of monthly subscription fees is certainly limited, so a company offering access to multiple creators for a flat subscription fee is absolutely reasonable.

[–] far_university1990@feddit.de 0 points 3 months ago

People expect edited videos from content creators these days.

They do not, look how popular meme compilation are.

Even someone filming a hobby in their home shop will get barked at for having bad audio quality, if, this week for once, they forgot to charge the batteries on their wireless Rode lavalier mic.

Hater will hate, welcome to the internet.

If you're fine watching unedited, 5-10 minute videos that can be churned out with next to no effort, all good. I'm really into 40-90 minute long videos and personally view YouTube as an alternative to obtain the content type I prefer, but I'd rather not sacrifice quality.

This type of content is impossible to make without financial support,

Also, are we really comparing the hosting expenses of fucking YouTube with static 90s fan pages?

There were much edited 40-90 minute video before there were ad on youtube. There were high quality page long essay on internet before youtube exist. Do not need ad or revenue or money support to get your content.

In 90s people did thing because passion. Now because passion and money. Still can make thing only because passion, never got impossible.

[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I think the unskippable and autoplaying ads are the point for me where I start actively finding ways to avoid ads. Anything that tries to force itself in front of my eyes or eclipses the actual content is kind of a no go.

It's not that Youtube creators don't deserve to be compensated (many if whom provide content to YT for free just to share, let's remember) it's that Google needs to find less obnoxious means of serving ads.

I'd be really curious to see the actual numbers of how much Google gets in revenue from YT and how much actually goes to paying creators. I'm betting the ratio is not as slim as they make it sound.