Nah.
So sick of “creators” and “content”.
People used to make videos for fun. Choosing to be on YouTube for money is so stupid. They have no contract.
The only way to get them to move on is not supporting them, on YouTube.
I say this as a Nebula subscriber and direct payment to a few entertainers I like. But they are not on youtube.
Bazoogle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Most people are not choosing to be on youtube for money. They are on youtube to make videos, because they enjoy making videos. However, they need money to survive. If I like their content, and want them to make more content, then they need money. Otherwise they have to spend less time making videos and more time making money by some other contractual means.
You believe people making videos on youtube should move on and do, idk, real work or something? However, if that person has an audience that enjoys watching their videos, they very clearly want them to keep making videos. Them “moving on” would be the exact opposite of what they want.
If you’re under the impression that they could move to a non Google owned video streaming platform, there is no real option. People could make their own websites for their own videos, but viewers are not going to go to a hundred different websites. Not everyone’s content fits Nebula’s platform. There is no platform that can host videos in the same way YouTube can. Maybe one day peer tube will be good enough that we can realistically use that to spread the load of video hosting, but we are not there yet.
To suggest that YouTubers need to move on is truly wild. Especially given Nebula is made up of YouTubers.
NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
You saying youtube is the only way to make money? Even competition on youtube means its unlikely you will make money, I get its tough out there.
Look, if you are watching youtube, you are supporting youtube first. That is a fact, it is inescapable.
There are not alternatives, because people are still supporting youtube. There are options. People aren’t going to go to websites anymore? Ok, oh well, its dead. Sorry.
The worst part and you glossed over this: they have no contract. Their livelihood could be gone in a day if youtube decides to drop them, or reduce their pay, or even promote someone else. It is a bad business plan.
I am aware, I am putting money to support a place for them to go. To also quit playing the ad game. The two I watch on Nebula are Nebula only, but the growth of the patform won’t happen without support so here we are.
At the end of the day: Why the hell do we care so much about passive activities like watching people? I got rid of my TV back in the day for years, and frankly I think I might just get rid of all video consumption in the near future. I would rather be doing to watching.
Bazoogle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Literally in my comment that you quoted, I said there are other ways to make money. I said “making money by some other contractual means.” meaning non-youtube related methods for making money.
This whole reply chain is about using non-youtube clients. Literally not supporting youtube, or the creator as a consequence. If you use a non-youtube client and pay the creator director, you bypass supporting youtube in a monetary fashion at all.
This is just a lack of understanding on the scope of the requirements for video hosting on the scale of YouTube. To let anyone upload as much as they want whenever they want entirely for free? There are soooo many reasons why there are no other real options. It is cost. Virtually no other company has the capability to do what YouTube is doing. With how successful YouTube is, if it were even remotely possible, plenty of people would be doing it. The only other company that might have the ability to compete would be Amazon, but it literally would not be profitable for a long time, and that doesn’t solve anything for this conversation since Amazon is no different from Google.
The closest we get is platforms like Nebula, but that is very different. That is for established creators to be able to post either more in depth content, or exclusive content for a more reliable revenue source. Without YouTube (or a YouTube alternative), how would one become established enough to be able to join Nebula in the first place?
I didn’t directly mention it, but I did say they could make money in some other contractual means. That still applies if they lose their job overnight with youtube. But also, Nebula could stop get enough subscribers to be able to afford their creators and go under, virtually losing that revenue source overnight.
What gets me is you act like other jobs are way better, when there are literally massive layoffs happening in the US right now.
“Their livelihood could be gone in a day if Amazon decides to lay them off, or reduce their pay, or even hire someone else.” is also just as true.
Ignoring the conversation on the value of entertainment, Youtube is more than just entertainment. It is an incredibly large source of knowledge. Watching people is how so many things are learned. I am talking in person teaching, mentorship, training, lectures, conferences, presentations, and even videos. If you want to do something you’ve never done before, it would be done best by watching someone else do it first, and then attempting it yourself. When you attempted it, you may have missed some things, so you can rewatch to reinforce what you missed. This applies to videos and non-videos. It would be far less efficient to skip the watching/learning, and go straight into the doing. It would take longer to figure out and achieve a comprehensive understanding. Could it be done? Sure, eventually. But there is literally a famous quote for that:
“Only a fool learns from his own mistakes. The wise man learns from the mistakes of others.” ― Otto von Bismarck
NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Watching is the slowest way of learning though, particularly on youtube because they are trying to stretch eveything out.
Sorry I edited after you were beginning a response, but the contractual part is really a huge sticking point: the youtuber can be booted at any time, including forcing them to give back money AND youtube can keep showing their videos for revenue. It is predatory.
Using a third party client is still supporting youtube, because it keeps the belief they must be on youtube going. Also, if you are using a third part client, you are pretty much negating the notion that you are supporting the video maker (I hate the terms content and creator, yuck.)
At least you have an agreement, some basic work protections and can set your terms. But that is a completely different discussion. If anything youtube helps enable this problem, it simply transfers money up and pushes propaganda to keep doing it.
No I understand it completely. I say take ownership and do it yourself. I can share videos from my web site (that I made) to thousands without any extra cost to me. You will say but they wont find you on a website. Ok well then we are screwed, because the idea that I am going to use my work to support youtube is not an option, they are not getting my work.