Censoring, Suicidal Youtube
Hope you like your entertainment watered down.
In a potentially self-destroying move, Youtube has started to crush small channels.
Will this be the money-maker they're hoping for or a King-maker for other services?
At time of writing, Youtube has already started to hit channels that it deems too small for demonetisation, meaning smaller content creators are at risk of losing the few cents they would have made, something which is hugely demoralising to start-up channels and an off-putting attempt at further control from Youtube. In Theoryland (what a wonderful land that is), by doing this Youtube can sift the wheat from the chaff so entertainment is of a higher quality and you can always find something new... oh, hang on, that doesn't quite work.
You see, Youtube has always had more issues going spare than The Sun in Liverpool. Whilst it is currently the biggest provider of online video entertainment it has shown a total lack of willing to fix the shit that is killing it. Lets go to a personal bugbear of mine - how the hell do you find new content? I find it by putting in random words and hoping that Youtubes algorithms decide to let me see something that is actually new, not something I've already seen and had repeatedly recommended to me and not whatever is popular at the moment. And when I say popular, lets' be clear, I mean what is bringing in the most money for Googles big hungry baby. Even if I go onto a new, pristine video I can guarantee that the autoplay will railroad me toward something I've already seen or have shown zero interest in. The total lack of human insight is the biggest issue Youtube has. It's causing problems for Valve with their Steam service, it's causing problems right now on Youtube.
Other issues include Youtube adverts that run longer than the video you want to watch. There's a few of these floating around for different purposes but they all have two things in common - they run for between 10 and 25 minutes in length and are more like advertorial TV shows. This may be an evil masterstroke of Googles. They're currently looking to an ads removed version of the service for extra cash and the longer and more intrusive the adverts are, the more likely the audience will pay to remove them. I said 'maybe' lawyers, should I throw out an 'allegedly' for good measure too? Ongoing problems with spurious claims against channels, trademark trolls targeting channels in manners reminiscent of a mob shakedown and an unreliable live system that is especially egregious in several countries, coupled with no support from Youtube to creators makes it look increasingly like the baby has crapped in its diaper.
And now it expects you to clean up after it.
Youtubes idea is to send out really rather intimidating letters to channels that are small, threatening them with demonetisation, the inability to make money off the back of their own work, unless they 'fix' their views and subscriptions within 30 days. Anyone with under 10,000 views will be a potential target. Keep in mind that most content makers do it because they enjoy it. They're enthusiastic amateurs spending their own time and often their own money to make something which people can watch. The letter (well email, but it's phrased as if it were a full legal letter) is something I have yet to see firsthand, but I've viewed what some other people have been sent. In them, the presumption that they are little more than employees who should be thankful for any chance to make money and should work harder just so they don't lose that chance, comes across loud and clear. Except content creators are viewed more as a milkable assets who can work for free and like it. The idea seems to be that by doing so Google, Youtubes distracted babysitter, can focus on the big channels, the big boys and girls who are already raking it in and can make them the most money. This in turn will leave smaller channels unable to compete in a marketplace which is already saturated with competition and with automated systems that actively attempt to hide them as they aren't the current big thing.
There's always the usual corporate argument of "well, it's a business, we're just doing business AND our business is running at a loss so you should be thankful". A lot of people have been bringing this up in defense of Youtube but, whilst a business is meant to aim for profit and there's nothing inherently wrong with that, is Youtube actually trading at a loss? In 2016 the management section of Youtube, a Google subsidiary called Alphabet told everyone that Youtube was running at a loss. This was quickly mimicked by Google and Youtubes supporters and became the prevailing wisdom . . . however this may not actually be true.
Google has never correctly presented accounts for Youtube. In fact, last year Alphabet had more than $2 billion ripped out of IT'S profits for failing to correctly report earnings and for putting undue priority on Google products and services in search results without telling customers. Google have told us they're poor, pleading poverty cap in hand, but they've refused to hand evidence of that over in this regard. We do know that Alphabet/Youtube had revenue of more than $20 billion through advertising and searches, which is currently predicted to go up and doesn't include tax breaks and any subscription-based revenue for 2017. It could be that Youtubes' servers cost it more than $20 billion a year to run. There's a lot of content, which would be substantially less strain on their systems if the actual copyright-breaking and illegal stuff was removed (but that involves people actually looking at it and the letter doesn't show any willingness to work WITH those). Storing all of that is going to cost but there have been ways around that for years.
Take a look at Dtube, for example. It uses servers, renting them as they're needed at a reduced cost from all over the world. This means they can knock some on or off depending on their needs and they have have a much more stable financial framework, something Google, with it's obsession with latching onto every single search word and mouse button click, isn't willing to do.
Bias alert: I'm looking to start using Dtube, not because they pay at higher amounts but because they seem to have learnt from Youtubes problems.
You want an account? Fine, but an actual human being will sort it and check it to make sure you aren't a scammer or scumbag.
You want to upload a video or blog? Fine, it will get some time on the frontpage because every video does.
I've even seen their staffmembers actively watching and commenting on videos. Yes, it's still a small service but they're averaging at 2+ videos an hour and say that they, with their humans and paying for videos, are still sustainable, still in profit and more active with their community.
Right now, all Youtube cares about is profit and if it has to bury small creators under the floorboards to get it, even if it leaves us with the same homogenised garbage we see all the time, then it'll do it. Hell, it's started to rip up the carpet already.
Research:the fine folks at Marketwatch for their peerless financial reporting:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/alphabet-earnings-a-274-billion-hit-for-google-potential-youtube-results-for-investors-2017-07-21