WEBVTT - The YouTube Adpocalypse

0:00:04.240 --> 0:00:07.240
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff, a production of I Heart Radios,

0:00:07.320 --> 0:00:14.120
<v Speaker 1>How Stuff Works. Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff.

0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:17.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with

0:00:17.640 --> 0:00:19.480
<v Speaker 1>How Stuff Works and I heart Radio and I love

0:00:19.560 --> 0:00:24.000
<v Speaker 1>all things tech. And one thing I do a lot

0:00:24.040 --> 0:00:27.760
<v Speaker 1>of these days but actually planned to reduce in the

0:00:27.840 --> 0:00:31.479
<v Speaker 1>future is that I watch a lot of online web series,

0:00:31.680 --> 0:00:37.000
<v Speaker 1>particularly on YouTube. I watched series about video games, pop culture,

0:00:37.159 --> 0:00:41.600
<v Speaker 1>film criticism, and vlogs a s MR Videos. I watch

0:00:41.640 --> 0:00:44.080
<v Speaker 1>a lot of stuff on YouTube, and one thing I've

0:00:44.080 --> 0:00:48.400
<v Speaker 1>seen a few times is how YouTube's monetization policies can

0:00:48.440 --> 0:00:51.400
<v Speaker 1>have a really big impact on the channels that I watch.

0:00:51.800 --> 0:00:54.440
<v Speaker 1>So today I want to talk a bit about the

0:00:54.480 --> 0:00:59.040
<v Speaker 1>business side of YouTube and how things have changed for creators,

0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:03.240
<v Speaker 1>particularly fairly recently. Now to understand what's been going on,

0:01:03.760 --> 0:01:07.240
<v Speaker 1>it's good to think of the story involving three major

0:01:07.440 --> 0:01:12.440
<v Speaker 1>groups or factions. First, you've got YouTube itself. This is

0:01:12.480 --> 0:01:16.160
<v Speaker 1>the publishing platform that enables users to share their videos

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:19.760
<v Speaker 1>and have those videos paired with advertisers. YouTube takes a

0:01:19.840 --> 0:01:24.400
<v Speaker 1>percentage of the ad fees generated by videos, and generally speaking,

0:01:24.840 --> 0:01:27.440
<v Speaker 1>at percentage is pretty high. You know. You might have

0:01:27.520 --> 0:01:31.160
<v Speaker 1>heard that Apple in the iTunes store takes something like

0:01:31.319 --> 0:01:36.280
<v Speaker 1>thirty of all apps sales that goes to Apple itself.

0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:40.559
<v Speaker 1>YouTube does better than that for them, they do forty,

0:01:41.880 --> 0:01:44.560
<v Speaker 1>so nearly half of all the money generated by a

0:01:44.640 --> 0:01:49.360
<v Speaker 1>video goes to YouTube. More in that later. Then you've

0:01:49.400 --> 0:01:53.440
<v Speaker 1>got the creators. These are the people actually making the videos.

0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:56.440
<v Speaker 1>They run the range of no budget creators who rely

0:01:56.560 --> 0:01:59.680
<v Speaker 1>heavily on their own appeal to attract viewers, or upon

0:01:59.720 --> 0:02:02.800
<v Speaker 1>acular strategy for the type of content that they provide,

0:02:03.320 --> 0:02:05.440
<v Speaker 1>and it goes all the way up to highly produced

0:02:05.600 --> 0:02:10.080
<v Speaker 1>videos from established studios. If the creator meets a certain threshold,

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:13.359
<v Speaker 1>they can choose an option to monetize their videos, which

0:02:13.360 --> 0:02:16.600
<v Speaker 1>allows YouTube to pair those videos with ads. A change

0:02:16.600 --> 0:02:21.440
<v Speaker 1>in monetization policy can have a dramatic impact on a creator.

0:02:21.840 --> 0:02:26.119
<v Speaker 1>And the third group or faction would be the advertisers themselves. Typically,

0:02:26.160 --> 0:02:29.560
<v Speaker 1>these are ad companies with many clients that offer up

0:02:29.960 --> 0:02:33.760
<v Speaker 1>different goods and services, so you'll have a dozen or

0:02:33.800 --> 0:02:39.240
<v Speaker 1>so ad companies that represent hundreds of different brands. Rarely

0:02:39.280 --> 0:02:43.000
<v Speaker 1>will such a company like McDonald's or Levi's interact directly

0:02:43.080 --> 0:02:46.320
<v Speaker 1>with a platform like YouTube, but it can happen more frequently,

0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:49.400
<v Speaker 1>they will rely upon a third party advertising firm to

0:02:49.480 --> 0:02:52.800
<v Speaker 1>hash all this out, And so the business of YouTube

0:02:52.840 --> 0:02:57.000
<v Speaker 1>depends upon these three prongs working together. The more views

0:02:57.120 --> 0:03:01.040
<v Speaker 1>a monetized video gets, the more it earns. Longer videos

0:03:01.040 --> 0:03:04.000
<v Speaker 1>can also have mid role ads, which creates a revenue

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:07.920
<v Speaker 1>generating stream for creators and for YouTube itself. For that reason,

0:03:08.280 --> 0:03:11.480
<v Speaker 1>the platform began to encourage YouTube creators to make longer

0:03:11.560 --> 0:03:14.519
<v Speaker 1>videos a few years back. This was in stark contrast

0:03:14.520 --> 0:03:16.840
<v Speaker 1>with the early days of YouTube and which most videos

0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:20.280
<v Speaker 1>had a hard ten minute limit for running time. You

0:03:20.280 --> 0:03:23.920
<v Speaker 1>couldn't go beyond that. These days, YouTube would rather have

0:03:24.040 --> 0:03:27.600
<v Speaker 1>longer videos that encourage more activity on the platform, meaning

0:03:27.639 --> 0:03:32.400
<v Speaker 1>that after someone watches one video, they're likely to watch another. Now,

0:03:33.280 --> 0:03:36.440
<v Speaker 1>I didn't include viewers in those three prongs because we

0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:39.720
<v Speaker 1>don't have quite as much to do with the business

0:03:39.720 --> 0:03:42.200
<v Speaker 1>side of it. We generate the views that pull the

0:03:42.280 --> 0:03:45.680
<v Speaker 1>levers on those advertising dollars, but other than that, we

0:03:45.760 --> 0:03:48.960
<v Speaker 1>don't really have much involvement in the business. That stuff

0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:52.440
<v Speaker 1>lies more with the platform and the creators. Now, let

0:03:52.480 --> 0:03:55.360
<v Speaker 1>me give you a quick rundown on the history of

0:03:55.480 --> 0:03:58.840
<v Speaker 1>monetization on YouTube. So we can kind of understand where

0:03:58.840 --> 0:04:01.160
<v Speaker 1>we came from and where we are now. When YouTube

0:04:01.280 --> 0:04:04.680
<v Speaker 1>launched in two thousand five as an independent service before

0:04:04.680 --> 0:04:07.280
<v Speaker 1>it was part of Google, there was no monetization on

0:04:07.320 --> 0:04:10.920
<v Speaker 1>the platform. Now that changed in August two thousand six,

0:04:11.200 --> 0:04:15.960
<v Speaker 1>when YouTube launched its first ad concept, called participatory video ads,

0:04:16.000 --> 0:04:20.440
<v Speaker 1>along with brand channels. Brand channels are exactly what they

0:04:20.480 --> 0:04:23.440
<v Speaker 1>sound like, channels that are owned by specific companies and

0:04:23.520 --> 0:04:26.400
<v Speaker 1>meant to act as a type of marketing towards customers.

0:04:26.440 --> 0:04:30.880
<v Speaker 1>So you could have Nike having a Nike channel, for example.

0:04:31.360 --> 0:04:34.680
<v Speaker 1>The participatory video ads would appear in the upper right

0:04:34.720 --> 0:04:39.400
<v Speaker 1>corner of the screen among video choices, so you could

0:04:39.440 --> 0:04:42.520
<v Speaker 1>think of the right rail having a list of videos,

0:04:42.560 --> 0:04:46.520
<v Speaker 1>and the top one would be an AD, but there

0:04:46.440 --> 0:04:49.760
<v Speaker 1>are others would just be other YouTube videos. So YouTube

0:04:49.800 --> 0:04:53.200
<v Speaker 1>had yet to introduce a method for content creators who

0:04:53.240 --> 0:04:57.279
<v Speaker 1>weren't representing brands to monetize content. The only money that

0:04:57.360 --> 0:05:00.240
<v Speaker 1>was really going anywhere was going to YouTube. Google Goal

0:05:00.400 --> 0:05:04.080
<v Speaker 1>purchased YouTube for more than one point five billion dollars

0:05:04.200 --> 0:05:06.919
<v Speaker 1>in October two thou six, just a couple of months

0:05:06.960 --> 0:05:11.280
<v Speaker 1>after the rollout of this initial ad strategy. A year later,

0:05:11.720 --> 0:05:15.440
<v Speaker 1>YouTube launched in video ads. This would be August two

0:05:15.440 --> 0:05:19.400
<v Speaker 1>thousand seven. Instead of a commercial running before or during

0:05:19.440 --> 0:05:23.800
<v Speaker 1>a show, these were overlay ads that were flash based

0:05:23.839 --> 0:05:26.880
<v Speaker 1>and appeared on top of the video, so the lower

0:05:27.000 --> 0:05:30.320
<v Speaker 1>twenty percent part of a video could have an ad

0:05:30.320 --> 0:05:33.080
<v Speaker 1>appear after fifteen seconds of the video had already played.

0:05:33.480 --> 0:05:36.919
<v Speaker 1>The goal was to make the overlay transparent and to

0:05:36.960 --> 0:05:39.680
<v Speaker 1>have them run for only around ten seconds, so you'd

0:05:39.680 --> 0:05:43.440
<v Speaker 1>have a little message upp here on that bottom that

0:05:43.520 --> 0:05:47.600
<v Speaker 1>would somewhat obscure that portion of the video and would

0:05:47.600 --> 0:05:51.120
<v Speaker 1>be an ad for something. Again, YouTube restricted these ads

0:05:51.120 --> 0:05:53.800
<v Speaker 1>to run on content from a select group of partners,

0:05:54.200 --> 0:05:59.000
<v Speaker 1>and individual content creators were generally not eligible for this. So,

0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:02.560
<v Speaker 1>in other words, if you were Joe Schmo and you

0:06:02.600 --> 0:06:05.839
<v Speaker 1>were creating your own vlog and it was getting a

0:06:05.920 --> 0:06:10.200
<v Speaker 1>good following, you still weren't eligible to uh to have

0:06:10.360 --> 0:06:13.360
<v Speaker 1>ads run on your your videos. In December of two

0:06:13.360 --> 0:06:17.000
<v Speaker 1>thousand seven, YouTube launched the Partner program, in which individual

0:06:17.000 --> 0:06:20.720
<v Speaker 1>creators could apply to become partners, which would enable advertising

0:06:20.839 --> 0:06:23.680
<v Speaker 1>on their videos. It did require that they meet certain criteria.

0:06:23.720 --> 0:06:27.040
<v Speaker 1>We'll talk more about that a little bit later. By

0:06:27.040 --> 0:06:30.359
<v Speaker 1>November two thousand eight, YouTube would launch pre roll ads,

0:06:30.640 --> 0:06:33.680
<v Speaker 1>making videos more like television programs. Pre roll ad is

0:06:33.720 --> 0:06:36.080
<v Speaker 1>just what it sounds like, you have an ad that

0:06:36.200 --> 0:06:40.000
<v Speaker 1>runs before the video that you've selected to watch. But

0:06:40.080 --> 0:06:43.600
<v Speaker 1>YouTube ads work a little differently from television ads. See

0:06:43.600 --> 0:06:47.280
<v Speaker 1>on TV, and advertiser pays for a specific time slot.

0:06:47.800 --> 0:06:50.360
<v Speaker 1>Advertisers might say I want to run an ad during

0:06:50.400 --> 0:06:55.320
<v Speaker 1>this sporting event or during this show. On YouTube, Google

0:06:55.360 --> 0:06:58.279
<v Speaker 1>can target ads to people who appear to have interests

0:06:58.360 --> 0:07:02.680
<v Speaker 1>that align with particular brand. By analyzing user behavior, Google

0:07:02.760 --> 0:07:05.880
<v Speaker 1>can predict which brands will resonate the most and match

0:07:06.000 --> 0:07:09.080
<v Speaker 1>those up to a viewers experience. So, rather than Coca

0:07:09.120 --> 0:07:12.040
<v Speaker 1>Cola saying I really like those let's play videos, put

0:07:12.120 --> 0:07:16.040
<v Speaker 1>us on those, it's Coca Cola saying, show us to

0:07:16.560 --> 0:07:19.320
<v Speaker 1>people who really like soft drinks. And this would end

0:07:19.400 --> 0:07:22.160
<v Speaker 1>up being part of the problem because there's a whole

0:07:22.240 --> 0:07:24.840
<v Speaker 1>lot of folks out there who likes stuff like soft

0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:27.920
<v Speaker 1>drinks who also like to watch some pretty questionable content,

0:07:28.480 --> 0:07:31.120
<v Speaker 1>and thus Coca Cola's ads would show up against stuff

0:07:31.160 --> 0:07:34.760
<v Speaker 1>that maybe Coca Cola wasn't so crazy about. Now, at

0:07:34.760 --> 0:07:38.160
<v Speaker 1>this point, it became possible to actually make a living

0:07:38.320 --> 0:07:41.240
<v Speaker 1>off of YouTube if you were just a regular person,

0:07:41.440 --> 0:07:44.880
<v Speaker 1>if you were a creator with an engaged, large following,

0:07:45.280 --> 0:07:48.119
<v Speaker 1>you could conceivably have enough views to earn decent money,

0:07:48.280 --> 0:07:51.240
<v Speaker 1>and eventually this would grow beyond decent money to a

0:07:51.320 --> 0:07:54.080
<v Speaker 1>metric crap ton of money if you were one of

0:07:54.080 --> 0:07:57.760
<v Speaker 1>a few mega popular creators. As still sort of the

0:07:57.760 --> 0:08:01.280
<v Speaker 1>wild West at this point. You two grew largely as

0:08:01.280 --> 0:08:05.679
<v Speaker 1>an alternative to classic television services, and in the earliest days,

0:08:06.080 --> 0:08:09.240
<v Speaker 1>people were uploading a lot of copyrighted work that would

0:08:09.320 --> 0:08:12.640
<v Speaker 1>land YouTube in hot water with various publishing companies, particularly

0:08:12.960 --> 0:08:16.600
<v Speaker 1>music labels and movie and television studios, But that gradually

0:08:16.600 --> 0:08:19.280
<v Speaker 1>gave way to more user generated stuff, which is what

0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:23.160
<v Speaker 1>the platform was envisioned as. Now. It's interesting to point

0:08:23.160 --> 0:08:25.320
<v Speaker 1>out that in the early days of YouTube, a lot

0:08:25.360 --> 0:08:31.000
<v Speaker 1>of the popular videos were unauthorized uploads of more traditional media,

0:08:31.520 --> 0:08:34.079
<v Speaker 1>because if you go to YouTube today, you're going to

0:08:34.160 --> 0:08:38.079
<v Speaker 1>see a lot of authorized uploads of that same sort

0:08:38.120 --> 0:08:42.280
<v Speaker 1>of traditional media up on YouTube. So everything comes full

0:08:42.320 --> 0:08:45.320
<v Speaker 1>circle eventually, and here's where we run into the first

0:08:45.360 --> 0:08:50.040
<v Speaker 1>points of friction. YouTube is primarily a publishing platform. The

0:08:50.080 --> 0:08:53.840
<v Speaker 1>company does produce some of its own content, but it's

0:08:53.920 --> 0:08:57.760
<v Speaker 1>mostly known as being the place where creators can publish

0:08:57.880 --> 0:09:00.880
<v Speaker 1>their works, so YouTube is the video store, not the

0:09:00.920 --> 0:09:06.600
<v Speaker 1>studio producing the videos. Generally speaking, the video producers developed

0:09:06.640 --> 0:09:09.600
<v Speaker 1>their own voice, their own style, their type of content.

0:09:10.040 --> 0:09:12.800
<v Speaker 1>They find what works and they build an audience on that.

0:09:13.200 --> 0:09:17.520
<v Speaker 1>Some content creators do music, some tutorials, some do let's

0:09:17.520 --> 0:09:21.839
<v Speaker 1>play videos, some do scripted works like sketches, and some

0:09:21.920 --> 0:09:26.680
<v Speaker 1>incorporate pretty edgy material in their videos. Or sometimes they

0:09:26.760 --> 0:09:31.360
<v Speaker 1>might include intentionally offensive material knowing that controversy will result

0:09:31.400 --> 0:09:35.000
<v Speaker 1>in more views and that results in more money. Now,

0:09:35.040 --> 0:09:39.839
<v Speaker 1>initially that benefits YouTube because YouTube only makes money as

0:09:39.920 --> 0:09:43.440
<v Speaker 1>videos earned views, So as those videos rack up the views,

0:09:43.520 --> 0:09:46.959
<v Speaker 1>advertisers fork over more cash and YouTube takes that healthy

0:09:48.240 --> 0:09:53.280
<v Speaker 1>slice of all those revenues. Now. One example YouTubers pointed

0:09:53.320 --> 0:09:58.360
<v Speaker 1>to as a problem of this kind of philosophy, this

0:09:58.440 --> 0:10:02.920
<v Speaker 1>idea of YouTube being totally cool with controversial material as

0:10:02.920 --> 0:10:05.120
<v Speaker 1>long as it was bringing money in was a channel

0:10:05.120 --> 0:10:08.160
<v Speaker 1>that was run by Mike and Heather Martin. The couple

0:10:08.280 --> 0:10:10.560
<v Speaker 1>created a series of videos in which they would pull

0:10:10.559 --> 0:10:14.720
<v Speaker 1>what they called pranks on their young kids, but others

0:10:15.040 --> 0:10:19.360
<v Speaker 1>saw these pranks as borderline or sometimes beyond borderline abuse.

0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:23.440
<v Speaker 1>And it was this that the parents were profiting from.

0:10:23.440 --> 0:10:26.200
<v Speaker 1>In other words, they were mistreating their children, at least

0:10:26.200 --> 0:10:29.440
<v Speaker 1>in the eyes of these critics, and they were using

0:10:29.480 --> 0:10:32.320
<v Speaker 1>that as a form of entertainment through which they were

0:10:32.360 --> 0:10:36.600
<v Speaker 1>making money. Um Rose Hill, who was the biological mother

0:10:36.679 --> 0:10:39.679
<v Speaker 1>of two of the children in the Martin household says

0:10:39.720 --> 0:10:42.440
<v Speaker 1>that she had been flagging videos as being in violation

0:10:42.440 --> 0:10:45.720
<v Speaker 1>of YouTube's standards as early as October two thousand sixteen,

0:10:46.320 --> 0:10:49.559
<v Speaker 1>and yet little appeared to be done about it. YouTube

0:10:49.559 --> 0:10:51.640
<v Speaker 1>did not seem to take any of the videos down

0:10:51.760 --> 0:10:54.440
<v Speaker 1>or demonetize them or anything. It was only after the

0:10:54.520 --> 0:10:57.840
<v Speaker 1>channel made the news and a massive negative backlash mounted

0:10:57.880 --> 0:11:00.360
<v Speaker 1>against the Martins that things seemed to be set in motion.

0:11:00.840 --> 0:11:04.240
<v Speaker 1>It reinforced the perception that YouTube was loath to move

0:11:04.440 --> 0:11:07.320
<v Speaker 1>against a creator that's getting a lot of views because

0:11:07.400 --> 0:11:10.959
<v Speaker 1>those creators are a healthy source of revenue for the company. So,

0:11:11.520 --> 0:11:15.360
<v Speaker 1>at least initially, there's very little incentive for YouTube to

0:11:15.400 --> 0:11:20.120
<v Speaker 1>do anything about offensive or questionable content if it's driving views,

0:11:20.160 --> 0:11:23.560
<v Speaker 1>because that would hurt its revenue. But then we have

0:11:23.760 --> 0:11:26.319
<v Speaker 1>the third point of that triangle, and I'm going to

0:11:26.440 --> 0:11:28.719
<v Speaker 1>use a lot of different metaphors for things with three components.

0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:32.720
<v Speaker 1>Maybe at some point I'll use tricycle. The third part

0:11:33.200 --> 0:11:37.600
<v Speaker 1>is the advertisers. Now, advertisers are understandably sensitive about the

0:11:37.600 --> 0:11:41.400
<v Speaker 1>types of content they run ads against, the association of

0:11:41.400 --> 0:11:45.680
<v Speaker 1>the advertiser with questionable content could be harmful for the brand.

0:11:46.240 --> 0:11:49.160
<v Speaker 1>Protecting a brand is an important part of advertising. So

0:11:49.400 --> 0:11:52.360
<v Speaker 1>if a soft drink company executive suddenly finds out then

0:11:52.440 --> 0:11:55.400
<v Speaker 1>add for their company's flagship product is running against a

0:11:55.480 --> 0:11:59.560
<v Speaker 1>video that contains racial slurs or hate speech, calls for

0:11:59.640 --> 0:12:03.320
<v Speaker 1>violent or other objectionable material, there's a good chance someone's

0:12:03.320 --> 0:12:06.280
<v Speaker 1>about to get fired. So we've got YouTube and creators

0:12:06.679 --> 0:12:09.400
<v Speaker 1>pushing the envelope and driving lots of views to videos

0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:12.680
<v Speaker 1>of questionable content. This powder keg just needed a spark

0:12:12.760 --> 0:12:15.320
<v Speaker 1>to set it off. The spark first arrived in late

0:12:15.320 --> 0:12:18.679
<v Speaker 1>two thousand sixteen, and the powder keg blew in February

0:12:18.760 --> 0:12:22.320
<v Speaker 1>two thousand seventeen. That's when advertisers began to take note

0:12:22.320 --> 0:12:24.920
<v Speaker 1>that their ads were running against videos that had hate

0:12:24.960 --> 0:12:28.800
<v Speaker 1>speech and extremist content in them, particularly in the UK.

0:12:29.760 --> 0:12:32.560
<v Speaker 1>The advertisers, in an effort to protect their clients and

0:12:32.640 --> 0:12:36.360
<v Speaker 1>mitigate the fallout of such associations, began to pull ads

0:12:36.400 --> 0:12:39.679
<v Speaker 1>from YouTube. Their main objection was that they had no

0:12:39.760 --> 0:12:43.000
<v Speaker 1>control over what types of videos could run their ads,

0:12:43.040 --> 0:12:46.079
<v Speaker 1>and so they could end up being associated with ideologies

0:12:46.120 --> 0:12:48.960
<v Speaker 1>and messaging that was in conflict with their public image.

0:12:49.160 --> 0:12:51.599
<v Speaker 1>And that was just the beginning. I'll explain more in

0:12:51.679 --> 0:12:53.840
<v Speaker 1>just a second, but first let's take a quick break.

0:13:01.160 --> 0:13:04.360
<v Speaker 1>I mentioned before the break that advertisers were pulling their

0:13:04.400 --> 0:13:08.080
<v Speaker 1>spots from YouTube. They represented some really big clients, including

0:13:08.080 --> 0:13:12.920
<v Speaker 1>Coca Cola, The Guardian, Johnson and Johnson, and the Government

0:13:12.920 --> 0:13:16.320
<v Speaker 1>of the United Kingdom. Their move began to create sort

0:13:16.400 --> 0:13:20.319
<v Speaker 1>of a domino effect, and one domino to fall was

0:13:20.360 --> 0:13:26.080
<v Speaker 1>a reassessment of Google itself. Analyst Brian Weezer moved Google

0:13:26.160 --> 0:13:31.160
<v Speaker 1>stock from a buy recommendation to a hold recommendation based

0:13:31.160 --> 0:13:34.440
<v Speaker 1>off the February two, seventeen scandal. He pointed out that

0:13:34.480 --> 0:13:38.440
<v Speaker 1>Google had quote a serious issue in the UK with

0:13:38.559 --> 0:13:42.280
<v Speaker 1>brand safety issues end quote, and that they could end

0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:46.200
<v Speaker 1>up devaluing the company. Now. Suffice to say, this was

0:13:46.240 --> 0:13:49.920
<v Speaker 1>a lot of incentive for YouTube to do something about

0:13:49.960 --> 0:13:54.360
<v Speaker 1>all this. One high profile case where YouTube did act

0:13:54.800 --> 0:13:59.360
<v Speaker 1>involved Felix Kilberg, better known by his screen name as

0:13:59.400 --> 0:14:03.000
<v Speaker 1>Beauty Pie, Kilberg published a video that showed two men

0:14:03.040 --> 0:14:06.840
<v Speaker 1>holding up a reprehensible message written on a sign and

0:14:06.840 --> 0:14:10.160
<v Speaker 1>I'm not going to repeat it here. This prompted Disney

0:14:10.200 --> 0:14:13.520
<v Speaker 1>Maker Studios, which had been producing Pautie Pie shows, to

0:14:13.640 --> 0:14:17.360
<v Speaker 1>cut all ties with the creator. YouTube canceled a YouTube

0:14:17.400 --> 0:14:21.520
<v Speaker 1>red series called Scared Pauti Pie. YouTube Read is a

0:14:21.560 --> 0:14:25.120
<v Speaker 1>subscription service that, in return for a monthly fee unless

0:14:25.120 --> 0:14:28.240
<v Speaker 1>you watch videos without ads and view special content. Just

0:14:28.360 --> 0:14:31.840
<v Speaker 1>for those subscribers, Google removed kale Berg from the preferred

0:14:31.840 --> 0:14:34.960
<v Speaker 1>premium ad tier as well, which cut back how much

0:14:34.960 --> 0:14:38.000
<v Speaker 1>he could make on his videos. It was a pretty

0:14:38.320 --> 0:14:42.360
<v Speaker 1>pretty extreme punishment. UM, I don't know if it was

0:14:42.400 --> 0:14:46.440
<v Speaker 1>completely unwarranted. I have some pretty strong feelings about it

0:14:46.480 --> 0:14:49.480
<v Speaker 1>in general, but there were other YouTubers who felt like

0:14:49.600 --> 0:14:56.560
<v Speaker 1>that was a particularly harsh judgment against another creator, and

0:14:56.560 --> 0:14:58.760
<v Speaker 1>other people said no, he got exactly what he deserves.

0:14:58.760 --> 0:15:02.240
<v Speaker 1>So it kind of runs the gamut. Now. I've placed

0:15:02.240 --> 0:15:04.600
<v Speaker 1>a lot of the responsibility for how things have shaken

0:15:04.600 --> 0:15:07.480
<v Speaker 1>out at YouTube on the platform and the creators, but

0:15:07.520 --> 0:15:09.920
<v Speaker 1>I want to make it clear that advertisers were also

0:15:10.240 --> 0:15:13.640
<v Speaker 1>somewhat responsible, with some pretty bad choices of their own.

0:15:14.040 --> 0:15:18.360
<v Speaker 1>In April two thousand seventeen, PepsiCo had an ad featuring

0:15:18.440 --> 0:15:21.000
<v Speaker 1>Kindall Jenner handing over a can of Pepsi to a

0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:24.200
<v Speaker 1>police officer during a protest. This was at the height

0:15:24.280 --> 0:15:27.200
<v Speaker 1>of the initial protests in the Black Lives Matter movement,

0:15:27.640 --> 0:15:31.520
<v Speaker 1>and so PepsiCo was widely criticized for trying to exploit

0:15:31.640 --> 0:15:35.480
<v Speaker 1>a social movement for the purposes of advertising a soft drink.

0:15:35.920 --> 0:15:38.200
<v Speaker 1>Pepsi would pull the ad after just a few days,

0:15:38.520 --> 0:15:41.800
<v Speaker 1>including pulling it from YouTube. The move of a major

0:15:41.880 --> 0:15:45.760
<v Speaker 1>company pulling more advertising from YouTube fueled even more companies

0:15:45.760 --> 0:15:48.520
<v Speaker 1>to follow suit. Even without the public image issues that

0:15:48.520 --> 0:15:53.200
<v Speaker 1>Pepsi faced. The sudden departure of numerous big money advertisers

0:15:53.440 --> 0:15:57.360
<v Speaker 1>prompted YouTube executives to make some pretty hasty and broad decisions,

0:15:57.760 --> 0:16:01.520
<v Speaker 1>leading to what was called the ad PoCA lips. Now essentially,

0:16:02.000 --> 0:16:06.840
<v Speaker 1>YouTube effectively demonetized any channels that were not considered to

0:16:06.880 --> 0:16:11.160
<v Speaker 1>be family friendly, but the definition of family friendly was

0:16:11.280 --> 0:16:14.640
<v Speaker 1>left rather vague, and YouTube began to rely heavily on

0:16:14.680 --> 0:16:19.200
<v Speaker 1>algorithms to determine whether or not a channel's content qualified

0:16:19.520 --> 0:16:22.760
<v Speaker 1>for the tag family friendly or not. Now, to be

0:16:22.800 --> 0:16:25.880
<v Speaker 1>fair to YouTube, the company had little other choice than

0:16:25.920 --> 0:16:29.440
<v Speaker 1>the hand things over to an automated protocol. Today, around

0:16:29.480 --> 0:16:33.040
<v Speaker 1>four hundred fifty hours of video are uploaded to the

0:16:33.040 --> 0:16:37.480
<v Speaker 1>platform every single minute. The site racks up a billion

0:16:37.560 --> 0:16:41.200
<v Speaker 1>hours of you time every day. With that much content

0:16:41.320 --> 0:16:45.120
<v Speaker 1>being added every minute, it's impossible to put human beings

0:16:45.120 --> 0:16:47.160
<v Speaker 1>in charge of vetting all of it and making sure

0:16:47.240 --> 0:16:50.600
<v Speaker 1>none of it contains material that violates YouTube's policies or

0:16:50.640 --> 0:16:54.720
<v Speaker 1>will upset advertisers. For that reason, the company has developed

0:16:54.760 --> 0:16:59.320
<v Speaker 1>programs that try to do that automatically. Part of this

0:16:59.440 --> 0:17:03.480
<v Speaker 1>depends upon the metadata that's connected to the videos in question.

0:17:03.880 --> 0:17:07.920
<v Speaker 1>A metadata is data about data, so YouTubers build out

0:17:08.000 --> 0:17:12.439
<v Speaker 1>metadata like tags and descriptions so that their videos will

0:17:12.480 --> 0:17:14.760
<v Speaker 1>show up in search results. That way, when you pop

0:17:14.800 --> 0:17:17.960
<v Speaker 1>into YouTube search and you're searching for a specific thing,

0:17:18.040 --> 0:17:21.520
<v Speaker 1>like the other day, I search for Gauntlet to play

0:17:21.560 --> 0:17:25.359
<v Speaker 1>through because I was feeling nostalgic, then it gives you

0:17:25.400 --> 0:17:29.080
<v Speaker 1>the results that are relevant. It helps boost the video's

0:17:29.200 --> 0:17:32.359
<v Speaker 1>visibility and makes it more likely that people will find

0:17:32.520 --> 0:17:36.119
<v Speaker 1>the video. And since you only make money if a

0:17:36.119 --> 0:17:39.199
<v Speaker 1>lot of people are viewing your stuff, it's important to

0:17:39.280 --> 0:17:42.920
<v Speaker 1>include the information and your metadata. If you don't your

0:17:43.000 --> 0:17:44.920
<v Speaker 1>video is not likely to be seen by very many

0:17:44.960 --> 0:17:48.119
<v Speaker 1>people at all, so the algorithms look for the tags

0:17:48.160 --> 0:17:51.960
<v Speaker 1>that could indicate whether or not a video contains objectionable material,

0:17:52.400 --> 0:17:56.640
<v Speaker 1>and again, the term objectionable isn't terribly well defined here.

0:17:57.640 --> 0:18:01.399
<v Speaker 1>YouTube did create a checklist for advertisers in an effort

0:18:01.480 --> 0:18:05.359
<v Speaker 1>to win them back, and the checklist would allow companies

0:18:05.440 --> 0:18:08.359
<v Speaker 1>to select the types of material they did not want

0:18:08.400 --> 0:18:12.480
<v Speaker 1>their ads to support. Categories include stuff like profanity and

0:18:12.560 --> 0:18:17.040
<v Speaker 1>rough language or sexually suggestive content, which is stuff similar

0:18:17.080 --> 0:18:18.760
<v Speaker 1>to what you would see in a film's m p

0:18:18.960 --> 0:18:22.639
<v Speaker 1>A A rating description. But there were other categories as well,

0:18:22.720 --> 0:18:27.520
<v Speaker 1>such as tragedy and conflict or sensational and shocking that

0:18:27.640 --> 0:18:31.440
<v Speaker 1>raised questions and it could mean that people doing valuable

0:18:31.440 --> 0:18:35.280
<v Speaker 1>work in fields that need coverage would find themselves without

0:18:35.280 --> 0:18:38.280
<v Speaker 1>a means of earning enough money to pay for production costs.

0:18:39.080 --> 0:18:42.200
<v Speaker 1>And you do painted with a pretty broad brush. People

0:18:42.240 --> 0:18:46.320
<v Speaker 1>who had never had an issue with demonetization found themselves

0:18:46.400 --> 0:18:49.960
<v Speaker 1>hit hard by it. YouTube pointed out that the company

0:18:50.040 --> 0:18:53.720
<v Speaker 1>had an appeals process that creators could follow if they

0:18:53.800 --> 0:18:57.040
<v Speaker 1>felt that their work had been unfairly targeted, and there

0:18:57.040 --> 0:18:59.760
<v Speaker 1>were a lot of people who definitely felt that way.

0:19:00.240 --> 0:19:03.720
<v Speaker 1>For example, people advocating for human rights for people in

0:19:03.760 --> 0:19:09.080
<v Speaker 1>the LGBTQ community saw some of their videos demonetized, and

0:19:09.160 --> 0:19:11.639
<v Speaker 1>the message seemed to be that their goal, that of

0:19:11.840 --> 0:19:15.600
<v Speaker 1>extending human rights to a vulnerable population of people, was

0:19:15.680 --> 0:19:19.560
<v Speaker 1>somehow not add friendly or it was taboo, which is

0:19:19.600 --> 0:19:23.040
<v Speaker 1>a pretty crappy message to get. It reinforces the idea

0:19:23.080 --> 0:19:26.480
<v Speaker 1>that the world is against you when your video series

0:19:26.560 --> 0:19:30.520
<v Speaker 1>that's all about trying to extend human rights to people

0:19:31.359 --> 0:19:36.280
<v Speaker 1>is demonetized because the people in question somehow fall into

0:19:36.320 --> 0:19:42.920
<v Speaker 1>a category that isn't advertiser friendly. Uh. It's dehumanizing, really,

0:19:43.480 --> 0:19:46.680
<v Speaker 1>And that's just one example of the types of videos

0:19:46.720 --> 0:19:50.320
<v Speaker 1>that were targeted. YouTube was seen as being overly cautious

0:19:50.480 --> 0:19:53.000
<v Speaker 1>in order to appease the advertisers that were pulling out

0:19:53.040 --> 0:19:56.760
<v Speaker 1>of the platform, and the appeals process wasn't exactly a

0:19:56.880 --> 0:20:00.320
<v Speaker 1>smooth one. Creators who had a flagged video would get

0:20:00.320 --> 0:20:02.560
<v Speaker 1>a notification that their video was in a sort of

0:20:02.760 --> 0:20:06.040
<v Speaker 1>limbo in which it was not currently counting towards monetization,

0:20:06.840 --> 0:20:11.320
<v Speaker 1>but an appeal could, in theory, overturn that, and the

0:20:11.400 --> 0:20:14.920
<v Speaker 1>flagging process was based on machine learning, which also meant

0:20:14.960 --> 0:20:17.960
<v Speaker 1>that the appeals process was effectively part of the training

0:20:18.080 --> 0:20:21.760
<v Speaker 1>model for the system. You have a computer system that

0:20:22.280 --> 0:20:25.479
<v Speaker 1>identifies what it believes to be a video that has

0:20:25.520 --> 0:20:29.960
<v Speaker 1>objectionable material, It flags the video. The videos immediately demonetized,

0:20:30.520 --> 0:20:33.639
<v Speaker 1>and then by appealing the decision and having a human

0:20:34.440 --> 0:20:38.399
<v Speaker 1>go over the result and either uphold it or overturn it,

0:20:38.880 --> 0:20:43.560
<v Speaker 1>you train the machine learning model. That's great if you're

0:20:43.600 --> 0:20:45.760
<v Speaker 1>doing it in a lab, but when you're doing it

0:20:45.880 --> 0:20:49.000
<v Speaker 1>out in the real world, where it's actually affecting people's

0:20:49.000 --> 0:20:52.719
<v Speaker 1>ability to earn money, it's less great. So the content

0:20:52.800 --> 0:20:56.840
<v Speaker 1>creator was meant to send an appeal request, and in theory,

0:20:56.920 --> 0:20:59.280
<v Speaker 1>that would push the video to a human staffer at

0:20:59.320 --> 0:21:01.920
<v Speaker 1>YouTube whose of it was to manually review the video

0:21:01.960 --> 0:21:06.320
<v Speaker 1>to see if in fact the demonetization was justified. That

0:21:06.520 --> 0:21:10.040
<v Speaker 1>was the theory. However, that could not really work in

0:21:10.160 --> 0:21:14.960
<v Speaker 1>practice because the number of videos being uploaded each day

0:21:15.359 --> 0:21:17.879
<v Speaker 1>and the number getting flagged would have made that almost

0:21:17.960 --> 0:21:20.399
<v Speaker 1>as impossible as having humans view all the videos in

0:21:20.440 --> 0:21:24.040
<v Speaker 1>the first place, and so YouTube put in some additional rules.

0:21:24.640 --> 0:21:28.520
<v Speaker 1>Appealed videos would only go to human reviewers if those

0:21:28.600 --> 0:21:31.080
<v Speaker 1>videos had more than one thousand views in the most

0:21:31.280 --> 0:21:34.840
<v Speaker 1>recent seven days, or if you had a subscriber base

0:21:34.960 --> 0:21:37.920
<v Speaker 1>of at least ten thousand people, then a human would

0:21:37.960 --> 0:21:40.800
<v Speaker 1>review a flag video even if it hadn't yet met

0:21:40.840 --> 0:21:44.400
<v Speaker 1>the metric of one thousand views in seven days. Besides

0:21:44.440 --> 0:21:46.359
<v Speaker 1>the fact that YouTube was having to deal with an

0:21:46.520 --> 0:21:49.959
<v Speaker 1>enormous number of appeals, the company also wanted to make

0:21:50.000 --> 0:21:53.639
<v Speaker 1>sure it was addressing the concerns of the big earners first,

0:21:54.080 --> 0:21:58.080
<v Speaker 1>the most popular channels on YouTube. Many videos performed best

0:21:58.560 --> 0:22:01.240
<v Speaker 1>in the short term after uploading to the site, no

0:22:01.359 --> 0:22:04.280
<v Speaker 1>big surprise there. Right a new video goes up, people

0:22:04.640 --> 0:22:08.159
<v Speaker 1>flocked to it. There are fan bases who eagerly anticipate

0:22:08.240 --> 0:22:10.840
<v Speaker 1>the next video or episode, and so you see the

0:22:10.920 --> 0:22:15.360
<v Speaker 1>vast majority of activity hit those videos right away. YouTube

0:22:15.400 --> 0:22:18.320
<v Speaker 1>wanted to prioritize those videos over ones that might get

0:22:18.400 --> 0:22:21.480
<v Speaker 1>a lot of views over a very long span of time,

0:22:21.600 --> 0:22:23.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, the sort of stuff that tends to do

0:22:23.720 --> 0:22:26.720
<v Speaker 1>well on search. It might be more evergreen, so the

0:22:26.800 --> 0:22:29.879
<v Speaker 1>earnings month to month may be low but consistent. So

0:22:29.960 --> 0:22:32.080
<v Speaker 1>if I did a video that was sort of a

0:22:32.160 --> 0:22:35.840
<v Speaker 1>how to guide on something that would remain relevant for years,

0:22:36.520 --> 0:22:39.159
<v Speaker 1>I might not have a ton of traffic to that

0:22:39.359 --> 0:22:42.320
<v Speaker 1>video on any given month, but I would have consistent

0:22:42.440 --> 0:22:47.480
<v Speaker 1>traffic throughout the whole run of the lifetime of the video. Meanwhile,

0:22:47.560 --> 0:22:50.719
<v Speaker 1>someone else who's posting a new episode of a web series,

0:22:51.119 --> 0:22:53.960
<v Speaker 1>they're going to see the vast majority of activity on

0:22:54.119 --> 0:22:58.240
<v Speaker 1>their video in the in the near immediate fall health

0:22:58.320 --> 0:23:02.760
<v Speaker 1>of uploading it. So those first few days are critical

0:23:03.160 --> 0:23:06.000
<v Speaker 1>for those kind of series. And worse, there was a

0:23:06.080 --> 0:23:09.520
<v Speaker 1>growing concern among creators that this would mean a really

0:23:09.600 --> 0:23:12.920
<v Speaker 1>big drop in revenue, since the time they need monetization

0:23:13.160 --> 0:23:16.640
<v Speaker 1>would be shortly after the video goes live. So if

0:23:16.840 --> 0:23:21.239
<v Speaker 1>you upload a video, algorithm decides its objection it's got

0:23:21.280 --> 0:23:24.600
<v Speaker 1>objectionable material in it, flags it, and then you're not

0:23:25.040 --> 0:23:28.800
<v Speaker 1>You're demonetized and your video is just now live. It

0:23:28.920 --> 0:23:32.520
<v Speaker 1>could be the sweetest spot to earn money, and you

0:23:32.680 --> 0:23:36.040
<v Speaker 1>can't earn anything because you've been demonetized. The longer you

0:23:36.280 --> 0:23:39.120
<v Speaker 1>your video spins in limbo, the more money the creators

0:23:39.240 --> 0:23:42.760
<v Speaker 1>would lose. And as for older videos, there was a

0:23:42.800 --> 0:23:45.560
<v Speaker 1>concern that creators wouldn't even see that those had been

0:23:45.640 --> 0:23:48.480
<v Speaker 1>demonetized because all the focus would be directed towards the

0:23:48.560 --> 0:23:53.000
<v Speaker 1>latest videos that they're posting, So older videos typically don't

0:23:53.119 --> 0:23:56.920
<v Speaker 1>earn a ton individually, but collectively they can still act

0:23:56.960 --> 0:23:59.280
<v Speaker 1>as a pretty healthy source of revenue. So if you're

0:23:59.320 --> 0:24:01.840
<v Speaker 1>a creator who has been active for several years and

0:24:01.960 --> 0:24:04.919
<v Speaker 1>you have a big back catalog of videos, you might

0:24:05.000 --> 0:24:07.600
<v Speaker 1>have a decent amount of money coming in from views

0:24:07.800 --> 0:24:11.240
<v Speaker 1>on those videos, And if an older video suddenly becomes

0:24:11.320 --> 0:24:14.520
<v Speaker 1>relevant again for some reason, you could stand to benefit

0:24:14.600 --> 0:24:17.760
<v Speaker 1>from that. But if it's been demonetized, you never see

0:24:17.800 --> 0:24:19.800
<v Speaker 1>that money, and there's a good chance you wouldn't even

0:24:19.840 --> 0:24:22.760
<v Speaker 1>know about the demonetization because your focus is on what's

0:24:22.760 --> 0:24:25.920
<v Speaker 1>going up next instead of what you uploaded years ago.

0:24:26.640 --> 0:24:30.240
<v Speaker 1>This pushed many creators to consider leaving the platform altogether.

0:24:30.720 --> 0:24:33.840
<v Speaker 1>Some looked at alternatives like Twitch, where they can live

0:24:33.960 --> 0:24:37.280
<v Speaker 1>stream and use in platform features as a means of

0:24:37.359 --> 0:24:41.160
<v Speaker 1>earning money. Others moved to Patreon, in which users could

0:24:41.200 --> 0:24:44.040
<v Speaker 1>pledge a recurring amount of money to the creator, either

0:24:44.119 --> 0:24:47.040
<v Speaker 1>on a scheduled basis such as a monthly payment, or

0:24:47.119 --> 0:24:50.080
<v Speaker 1>on a per upload basis. But these methods meant the

0:24:50.119 --> 0:24:52.800
<v Speaker 1>creators had to rely upon fans who were able and

0:24:52.960 --> 0:24:57.439
<v Speaker 1>willing to pay for something actively. They were only passively

0:24:57.560 --> 0:25:01.040
<v Speaker 1>paying for earlier asked in the fact that they were

0:25:01.080 --> 0:25:04.200
<v Speaker 1>watching ads as opposed to actually handing over money to

0:25:04.359 --> 0:25:07.720
<v Speaker 1>view videos. Now, if we are to believe some of

0:25:07.760 --> 0:25:11.480
<v Speaker 1>the top creators on the platform, the initial fallout was

0:25:11.600 --> 0:25:15.560
<v Speaker 1>pretty dramatic. Phil DeFranco said add earnings on his channel

0:25:15.600 --> 0:25:19.560
<v Speaker 1>fell by eight percent following the flight of advertisers, though

0:25:19.640 --> 0:25:22.240
<v Speaker 1>by mid April those earnings had leveled out to a

0:25:22.359 --> 0:25:26.320
<v Speaker 1>thirty percent drop from the average. It's still not great, obviously,

0:25:26.480 --> 0:25:31.120
<v Speaker 1>but better than others stated less extreme drops in revenue,

0:25:31.520 --> 0:25:33.280
<v Speaker 1>but a lot of people said, yeah, it took a hit.

0:25:33.920 --> 0:25:36.960
<v Speaker 1>Making things worse was an overall feeling that YouTube wasn't

0:25:37.040 --> 0:25:40.119
<v Speaker 1>very good at communicating out the changes to creators or

0:25:40.160 --> 0:25:42.720
<v Speaker 1>explaining how their work was falling into one of these

0:25:43.520 --> 0:25:47.320
<v Speaker 1>categories that advertisers were opting out of, or presenting a

0:25:47.440 --> 0:25:50.240
<v Speaker 1>sort of best practices approach so that they could make

0:25:50.359 --> 0:25:53.600
<v Speaker 1>certain their work wasn't being demonetized. There seemed to be

0:25:53.680 --> 0:25:56.320
<v Speaker 1>a lack of communication on YouTube's part, which made the

0:25:56.359 --> 0:26:02.360
<v Speaker 1>creators feel truly abandoned. Then things got really crazy. I'll

0:26:02.359 --> 0:26:13.480
<v Speaker 1>explain more after the break. In late two thousand and seventeen,

0:26:13.800 --> 0:26:17.800
<v Speaker 1>yet another YouTube controversy made headlines. This time it was

0:26:17.920 --> 0:26:22.320
<v Speaker 1>all about how several channels creating videos ostensibly for children

0:26:22.680 --> 0:26:28.359
<v Speaker 1>had bizarre, disturbing, and sometimes blatantly inappropriate material in those videos.

0:26:29.119 --> 0:26:33.920
<v Speaker 1>They inhabited YouTube Kids, which is a standalone app and

0:26:34.000 --> 0:26:37.720
<v Speaker 1>it's marketed as a safe space for kids entertainment. The

0:26:37.880 --> 0:26:40.960
<v Speaker 1>idea was that you, as a parent or caregiver, could

0:26:41.000 --> 0:26:44.000
<v Speaker 1>download the app on a mobile device, hand that mobile

0:26:44.000 --> 0:26:46.440
<v Speaker 1>device over to a kid, and feel safe in the

0:26:46.520 --> 0:26:48.800
<v Speaker 1>knowledge that the child was only going to see family

0:26:48.920 --> 0:26:52.879
<v Speaker 1>friendly content through that app. The general belief was that

0:26:53.000 --> 0:26:55.480
<v Speaker 1>YouTube would have a system in place to block any

0:26:55.600 --> 0:27:00.960
<v Speaker 1>material that didn't meet the app's family friendly standards, but

0:27:01.840 --> 0:27:06.919
<v Speaker 1>that's not what happened. Some people made really disturbing videos

0:27:07.400 --> 0:27:12.800
<v Speaker 1>using popular characters to lure kids into watching popular trademarked characters,

0:27:12.840 --> 0:27:15.879
<v Speaker 1>a lot of them Disney characters, and tricking kids to

0:27:15.960 --> 0:27:19.880
<v Speaker 1>watching them, and these videos were trending. They were popular

0:27:20.000 --> 0:27:22.320
<v Speaker 1>enough so that they were showing up on related videos

0:27:22.640 --> 0:27:26.040
<v Speaker 1>or recommended videos when kids were watching other stuff, and

0:27:26.200 --> 0:27:29.040
<v Speaker 1>kids tend to watch a lot of stuff, and they

0:27:29.080 --> 0:27:32.120
<v Speaker 1>will often watched the same thing many times, so these

0:27:32.200 --> 0:27:35.399
<v Speaker 1>videos were racking up views, which meant more ad dollars

0:27:35.480 --> 0:27:39.359
<v Speaker 1>for YouTube. Now the videos were getting flagged. There wasn't

0:27:39.560 --> 0:27:43.080
<v Speaker 1>much activity to show for it, not much response from YouTube,

0:27:43.119 --> 0:27:46.080
<v Speaker 1>at least in the early days. But then these stories

0:27:46.160 --> 0:27:50.280
<v Speaker 1>broke about these videos and YouTube had another pr disaster

0:27:50.520 --> 0:27:54.080
<v Speaker 1>to deal with. This is the same year when the

0:27:54.160 --> 0:27:57.760
<v Speaker 1>apocalypse thing had started, so creators throughout their hands and

0:27:57.880 --> 0:28:01.480
<v Speaker 1>essentially said they're preventing us for making money while you're

0:28:01.560 --> 0:28:04.320
<v Speaker 1>also allowing this kind of stuff to go on on

0:28:04.480 --> 0:28:08.800
<v Speaker 1>your kids app. It wasn't a good look. It made

0:28:08.840 --> 0:28:13.159
<v Speaker 1>YouTube look like hypocrites. Now. Adding to that scandal was

0:28:13.280 --> 0:28:16.760
<v Speaker 1>one in December two thousand and seventeen when Logan Paul,

0:28:17.040 --> 0:28:21.440
<v Speaker 1>who was is an extremely popular YouTuber. He had really

0:28:21.520 --> 0:28:25.359
<v Speaker 1>made his fame on Vine and then when Vine closed down. Uh,

0:28:25.880 --> 0:28:27.840
<v Speaker 1>he had already done some stuff on YouTube, but he

0:28:28.119 --> 0:28:31.280
<v Speaker 1>managed to kind of leverage his popularity over to YouTube's

0:28:31.320 --> 0:28:35.520
<v Speaker 1>platform anyway. In December two thousand seventeen, he posted a

0:28:35.640 --> 0:28:40.440
<v Speaker 1>video that showed a hanging corpse in it. Uh. Logan

0:28:40.480 --> 0:28:43.000
<v Speaker 1>Paul was walking through an area in Japan known as

0:28:43.120 --> 0:28:48.960
<v Speaker 1>the Suicide Forest and encountered this corpse and caught it

0:28:49.040 --> 0:28:53.440
<v Speaker 1>on video and uploaded it. The video received millions of views.

0:28:53.600 --> 0:28:56.360
<v Speaker 1>It ended up trending on YouTube. It became the focal

0:28:56.440 --> 0:29:01.120
<v Speaker 1>point for a huge blowback from the YouTube community. Here

0:29:01.280 --> 0:29:06.680
<v Speaker 1>was a video that clearly violated YouTube's policies. Numerous people

0:29:06.760 --> 0:29:11.520
<v Speaker 1>had flagged it for review. YouTube didn't remove the video.

0:29:12.240 --> 0:29:15.600
<v Speaker 1>Logan Paul or someone on his staff removed the video,

0:29:15.960 --> 0:29:20.440
<v Speaker 1>but YouTube, the platform, seemed to do nothing, and that really,

0:29:20.800 --> 0:29:25.520
<v Speaker 1>in many people's minds, cemented the idea that YouTube's rules

0:29:25.760 --> 0:29:28.120
<v Speaker 1>didn't apply to people if they were at a certain

0:29:28.240 --> 0:29:32.320
<v Speaker 1>level of success and were seen as the future of YouTube. Moreover,

0:29:33.040 --> 0:29:37.320
<v Speaker 1>advertisers didn't pull their spots from Logan Paul's videos, which

0:29:37.360 --> 0:29:40.080
<v Speaker 1>seemed to suggest that it was the financial aspect of

0:29:40.120 --> 0:29:43.720
<v Speaker 1>the platform's rules that matter, not the ethical ones. So

0:29:44.120 --> 0:29:47.400
<v Speaker 1>there's a lot of blame to go around here. Advertisers have.

0:29:48.000 --> 0:29:49.680
<v Speaker 1>They have some of the blame, a lot of the

0:29:49.720 --> 0:29:54.600
<v Speaker 1>blame because while they reacted strongly to Beauty Pie, they

0:29:54.680 --> 0:29:59.080
<v Speaker 1>did not react strongly to Logan Paul, and so YouTube

0:29:59.200 --> 0:30:02.280
<v Speaker 1>was given a very strong incentive to react to the

0:30:02.360 --> 0:30:06.840
<v Speaker 1>Pauti Pie scandal by punishing Pauti Pie. But because the

0:30:06.880 --> 0:30:10.280
<v Speaker 1>advertisers didn't freak out, YouTube didn't have a whole lot

0:30:10.360 --> 0:30:16.040
<v Speaker 1>of incentive to uh, punish logan Paul because they were

0:30:16.120 --> 0:30:19.240
<v Speaker 1>making money. No One, no one on the let me

0:30:19.400 --> 0:30:22.200
<v Speaker 1>give you a check side of the equation was complaining.

0:30:23.080 --> 0:30:27.600
<v Speaker 1>Video viewers and other content creators were complaining. But since

0:30:27.640 --> 0:30:30.680
<v Speaker 1>they're not the ones handing checks over to YouTube at least,

0:30:30.680 --> 0:30:33.760
<v Speaker 1>as is the way the argument goes, YouTube just didn't care.

0:30:34.560 --> 0:30:37.640
<v Speaker 1>One thing YouTube did do, though, was to restrict its

0:30:37.720 --> 0:30:42.040
<v Speaker 1>Partner program, which allows content creators to opt into monetization

0:30:42.080 --> 0:30:44.640
<v Speaker 1>in the first place. This is the criteria you have

0:30:44.840 --> 0:30:49.160
<v Speaker 1>to meet in order to be considered in a part

0:30:49.200 --> 0:30:52.239
<v Speaker 1>of the partner program. So you have to meet these uh,

0:30:52.440 --> 0:30:57.400
<v Speaker 1>these requirements first before you can actually join. Before the

0:30:57.480 --> 0:31:00.120
<v Speaker 1>new restrictions were put in place, the general rule was

0:31:00.160 --> 0:31:03.440
<v Speaker 1>that a channel had to hit ten thousand views to

0:31:03.560 --> 0:31:07.640
<v Speaker 1>qualify as a YouTube partner across the channel. So if

0:31:07.720 --> 0:31:12.040
<v Speaker 1>you had a thousand videos and they each had ten

0:31:12.160 --> 0:31:16.560
<v Speaker 1>views each, you hit ten thousand views, that's It may

0:31:16.600 --> 0:31:19.880
<v Speaker 1>be that you only have ten people watching, but you

0:31:19.960 --> 0:31:22.640
<v Speaker 1>still have ten thousand views across your entire channel. That

0:31:22.680 --> 0:31:24.640
<v Speaker 1>would be enough for you to qualify as YouTube partner

0:31:24.760 --> 0:31:28.560
<v Speaker 1>under the previous rules, but the update changed that. They

0:31:28.680 --> 0:31:32.960
<v Speaker 1>changed it to four thousand hours of watch time over

0:31:33.040 --> 0:31:37.480
<v Speaker 1>the previous twelve months, which clearly favored longer videos over

0:31:37.600 --> 0:31:41.200
<v Speaker 1>shorter ones, since you could create very short videos and

0:31:41.360 --> 0:31:44.720
<v Speaker 1>rack up ten thousand views relatively quickly. But if you

0:31:44.840 --> 0:31:49.040
<v Speaker 1>have short videos, accumulating four thousand hours of view material

0:31:49.280 --> 0:31:52.160
<v Speaker 1>would take a lot longer. If your average video is,

0:31:52.560 --> 0:31:57.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, two minutes long, just getting an hour makes

0:31:57.080 --> 0:31:58.320
<v Speaker 1>mean that you have to get a whole lot of

0:31:58.400 --> 0:32:01.360
<v Speaker 1>views on that one video. But if your average video

0:32:01.480 --> 0:32:04.240
<v Speaker 1>is an hour and a half long, then it doesn't

0:32:04.320 --> 0:32:07.240
<v Speaker 1>take as many full views to hit that four thousand

0:32:07.320 --> 0:32:11.280
<v Speaker 1>hour water mark. Now, in addition, a channel would need

0:32:11.320 --> 0:32:14.840
<v Speaker 1>to have at least a thousand subscribers before it could

0:32:14.840 --> 0:32:18.320
<v Speaker 1>be considered for the Partner program. Existing channels that had

0:32:18.400 --> 0:32:21.800
<v Speaker 1>previously qualified for the Partner Program under the ten thousand

0:32:21.960 --> 0:32:25.960
<v Speaker 1>views rule but had not yet hit the four thousand

0:32:26.040 --> 0:32:31.360
<v Speaker 1>hours one thousand subscriber benchmark would end up being demonetized.

0:32:31.760 --> 0:32:36.320
<v Speaker 1>So there were people who had been qualified under the

0:32:36.360 --> 0:32:39.760
<v Speaker 1>Partner program previously, they did not get grandfathered in when

0:32:39.760 --> 0:32:43.760
<v Speaker 1>these changes were made, they were affected to Now YouTube

0:32:43.960 --> 0:32:47.760
<v Speaker 1>claimed that of those affected by these changes them were

0:32:47.760 --> 0:32:50.440
<v Speaker 1>making less than a hundred bucks a year on videos

0:32:50.840 --> 0:32:53.600
<v Speaker 1>that it was a very small amount of money that

0:32:53.840 --> 0:32:56.800
<v Speaker 1>wasn't being paid out and therefore was not having a

0:32:57.000 --> 0:33:03.640
<v Speaker 1>meaningful impact on people. Fast forward to February two thousand nineteen.

0:33:04.280 --> 0:33:08.040
<v Speaker 1>That's when Matt Watson, a former YouTuber, posted a video

0:33:08.160 --> 0:33:11.000
<v Speaker 1>showing that there was a disturbing trend on the platform

0:33:11.560 --> 0:33:17.400
<v Speaker 1>in which Skivie people were uploading videos showing kids doing

0:33:17.840 --> 0:33:22.800
<v Speaker 1>just stuff like nothing bad, just kids being kids. But

0:33:22.960 --> 0:33:27.400
<v Speaker 1>in the comments section, people were posting time stamps of

0:33:27.520 --> 0:33:32.200
<v Speaker 1>specific moments of the video that, out of context, would

0:33:32.240 --> 0:33:38.000
<v Speaker 1>sexualize the content, and that was where the huge issue was.

0:33:38.400 --> 0:33:43.000
<v Speaker 1>Watson demonstrated that YouTube's recommendation algorithm could quickly pull up

0:33:43.080 --> 0:33:46.760
<v Speaker 1>one of these videos, and he started with a bikini

0:33:46.920 --> 0:33:49.480
<v Speaker 1>hall video in which a woman was showing off bathing

0:33:49.520 --> 0:33:53.080
<v Speaker 1>suits she had purchased, and using only the recommended videos

0:33:53.160 --> 0:33:57.840
<v Speaker 1>that appear alongside the one you're watching, Watson quickly navigated

0:33:57.880 --> 0:34:00.800
<v Speaker 1>to a seemingly unrelated video of a young girl playing

0:34:01.280 --> 0:34:04.480
<v Speaker 1>in two clicks, and the comments were full of disturbing,

0:34:04.840 --> 0:34:12.240
<v Speaker 1>awful content that was enabling some truly hideous behavior. Watson's

0:34:12.280 --> 0:34:17.000
<v Speaker 1>point was that YouTube's algorithm was actually facilitating this sort

0:34:17.040 --> 0:34:20.480
<v Speaker 1>of behavior, making it easier for predators to seek out

0:34:20.600 --> 0:34:24.600
<v Speaker 1>each other and the content they wanted. The Verge ran

0:34:24.760 --> 0:34:29.239
<v Speaker 1>their own test after seeing Watson's video post, and they

0:34:29.520 --> 0:34:32.000
<v Speaker 1>used his methods, and they found that it took at

0:34:32.160 --> 0:34:35.560
<v Speaker 1>most six clicks to get to one of those videos

0:34:35.640 --> 0:34:39.520
<v Speaker 1>from the recommendation page, so they would start with a video,

0:34:40.120 --> 0:34:43.440
<v Speaker 1>and it found that if they just followed enough times

0:34:44.320 --> 0:34:47.480
<v Speaker 1>that being at most six, they would hit on one

0:34:47.520 --> 0:34:50.520
<v Speaker 1>of these. While Watson was adamant that he didn't want

0:34:50.560 --> 0:34:53.920
<v Speaker 1>another apocalypse and that he still had many friends who

0:34:53.920 --> 0:34:56.600
<v Speaker 1>were dependent upon YouTube for their living, he did want

0:34:56.719 --> 0:35:00.640
<v Speaker 1>something done about this problem, and he urged people to

0:35:00.800 --> 0:35:04.440
<v Speaker 1>reach out to the advertisers whose ads were being displayed

0:35:04.600 --> 0:35:08.360
<v Speaker 1>against this sort of content to have that content or

0:35:08.440 --> 0:35:10.960
<v Speaker 1>to have those ads pulled, because he was concerned that

0:35:11.000 --> 0:35:14.640
<v Speaker 1>YouTube wasn't going to do anything. So essentially he was saying, hey,

0:35:14.960 --> 0:35:18.360
<v Speaker 1>did you know that the ad for your product is

0:35:18.520 --> 0:35:24.399
<v Speaker 1>showing up on videos that are sexualizing children and don't

0:35:24.440 --> 0:35:26.440
<v Speaker 1>you think that's a bad thing? Then you want to

0:35:26.520 --> 0:35:30.040
<v Speaker 1>have your your ads pulled. And since YouTube had developed

0:35:30.040 --> 0:35:33.360
<v Speaker 1>a bit of a reputation for not responding to issues

0:35:33.440 --> 0:35:37.040
<v Speaker 1>like this in a timely or consistent manner, Watson decided

0:35:37.040 --> 0:35:40.440
<v Speaker 1>he'd go public with this discovery to create that pressure. Now,

0:35:40.560 --> 0:35:44.120
<v Speaker 1>some YouTubers disagreed with that strategy. Many said that Watson

0:35:44.200 --> 0:35:47.880
<v Speaker 1>simply should report incidents rather than try to get views

0:35:48.040 --> 0:35:51.080
<v Speaker 1>out of the issue. Some feared that the publicity would

0:35:51.120 --> 0:35:54.640
<v Speaker 1>prompt AD companies to pull out of YouTube altogether, creating

0:35:54.680 --> 0:35:59.239
<v Speaker 1>another round of the apocalypse. Personally, I find it hard

0:35:59.320 --> 0:36:02.120
<v Speaker 1>to figure out where I stand on this particular issue.

0:36:02.360 --> 0:36:06.239
<v Speaker 1>I do think reporting the incidents is important. Posting a

0:36:06.360 --> 0:36:08.680
<v Speaker 1>video about it could very well be in the best

0:36:08.760 --> 0:36:12.880
<v Speaker 1>interests of the people using YouTube, particularly if the YouTuber

0:36:13.040 --> 0:36:15.520
<v Speaker 1>chose not to monetize the video. So, in other words,

0:36:15.960 --> 0:36:19.080
<v Speaker 1>if Onston comes forward and says there's this terrible practice

0:36:19.120 --> 0:36:22.920
<v Speaker 1>that's going on and his video is not being monetized,

0:36:23.400 --> 0:36:27.640
<v Speaker 1>then at least you remove the criticism of, hey, you're

0:36:27.719 --> 0:36:29.880
<v Speaker 1>just trying to profit from this because you know it's

0:36:29.920 --> 0:36:31.799
<v Speaker 1>going to be a big controversy. It's going to drive

0:36:31.800 --> 0:36:33.800
<v Speaker 1>a lot of views, and therefore you can make money

0:36:34.440 --> 0:36:37.960
<v Speaker 1>off of it, and it removes that criticism. But if

0:36:38.000 --> 0:36:40.640
<v Speaker 1>the video pointing out the problem itself is monetized, then

0:36:41.400 --> 0:36:43.160
<v Speaker 1>you're like, well, you're now you're just trying to stir

0:36:43.280 --> 0:36:45.920
<v Speaker 1>up a hornet's nest for your own personal benefit. Even

0:36:46.000 --> 0:36:48.440
<v Speaker 1>if that's not the case, it's enough to create the

0:36:48.560 --> 0:36:52.399
<v Speaker 1>seed of doubt. On the other hand, YouTube definitely has

0:36:52.440 --> 0:36:55.360
<v Speaker 1>a history of turning a blind eye to problematic behaviors

0:36:55.520 --> 0:36:59.360
<v Speaker 1>on the platform, typically taking action only when the pressure

0:36:59.440 --> 0:37:02.520
<v Speaker 1>is too gray to ignore, and so I can sympathize

0:37:02.560 --> 0:37:04.880
<v Speaker 1>with Watson's point that this was something that needed to

0:37:04.920 --> 0:37:07.480
<v Speaker 1>be brought to light to create that pressure necessary to

0:37:07.600 --> 0:37:11.840
<v Speaker 1>enact change. At the same time, I also sympathize with

0:37:11.880 --> 0:37:14.480
<v Speaker 1>all the creators out there who are depending heavily on

0:37:14.600 --> 0:37:19.520
<v Speaker 1>YouTube for their living. They've spent countless hours shooting, editing,

0:37:19.640 --> 0:37:23.520
<v Speaker 1>and uploading videos for their audiences. They face challenges like

0:37:23.840 --> 0:37:27.560
<v Speaker 1>sweeping changes to monetization policies, which is sort of like

0:37:27.680 --> 0:37:30.160
<v Speaker 1>coming into work and learning that your paycheck has been

0:37:30.200 --> 0:37:33.799
<v Speaker 1>cut by and they can't tell you why or how

0:37:34.080 --> 0:37:37.200
<v Speaker 1>you can fix it. That's how people who depend upon

0:37:37.280 --> 0:37:40.360
<v Speaker 1>YouTube feel, and they face burnout as they try to

0:37:40.400 --> 0:37:43.000
<v Speaker 1>create more videos to meet demand and to earn money.

0:37:43.360 --> 0:37:46.239
<v Speaker 1>You know, knowing that each new video that comes out

0:37:46.560 --> 0:37:50.919
<v Speaker 1>earns most of its money on its initial release means

0:37:51.000 --> 0:37:52.680
<v Speaker 1>that for you to keep making money, you have to

0:37:52.800 --> 0:37:56.439
<v Speaker 1>keep producing videos, and that takes its toll. As someone

0:37:56.520 --> 0:38:00.080
<v Speaker 1>who makes his living creating content week to week, I

0:38:00.160 --> 0:38:02.760
<v Speaker 1>can tell you it's not always easy. Sometimes it requires

0:38:02.800 --> 0:38:04.640
<v Speaker 1>a lot of work to scrape up the motivation and

0:38:04.800 --> 0:38:08.320
<v Speaker 1>energy to do the job. You can ask Tari sometimes

0:38:08.480 --> 0:38:11.440
<v Speaker 1>pitch a fit before I come into the studio, and

0:38:11.520 --> 0:38:14.560
<v Speaker 1>by sometimes I mean pretty much every time. Having a

0:38:14.640 --> 0:38:19.120
<v Speaker 1>capricious platform doesn't make it any easier now. It also

0:38:19.200 --> 0:38:22.879
<v Speaker 1>reminds me of what Bernie Burns of Rooster Teeth would

0:38:22.960 --> 0:38:26.280
<v Speaker 1>point out pretty frequently. I've heard him say this in person,

0:38:26.640 --> 0:38:29.560
<v Speaker 1>I've heard him say it on podcasts and videos, and

0:38:29.719 --> 0:38:34.000
<v Speaker 1>I think it's a really important point. When you rely

0:38:34.160 --> 0:38:38.120
<v Speaker 1>on someone else's platform, you are creating a recipe for

0:38:38.280 --> 0:38:42.120
<v Speaker 1>things to go wrong sooner or later. So in other words,

0:38:42.280 --> 0:38:45.640
<v Speaker 1>it's the old adage don't put all your eggs in

0:38:45.840 --> 0:38:50.359
<v Speaker 1>one basket, because when that platform changes, you may find

0:38:50.440 --> 0:38:56.040
<v Speaker 1>yourself a disadvantage with no recourse, no solution. It's much

0:38:56.160 --> 0:38:59.960
<v Speaker 1>better to spread that risk around. Having your own platform

0:39:00.440 --> 0:39:02.719
<v Speaker 1>is helpful too, if you can do it, because you

0:39:02.800 --> 0:39:05.640
<v Speaker 1>have ultimate control over your own platform. So, for example,

0:39:05.680 --> 0:39:07.840
<v Speaker 1>with the Rooster teeth. They have their own website and

0:39:07.880 --> 0:39:10.560
<v Speaker 1>they host all their videos on their website. They also

0:39:10.760 --> 0:39:13.800
<v Speaker 1>host them on YouTube because that's where the audience is.

0:39:14.600 --> 0:39:16.880
<v Speaker 1>Then that's the flip side. Getting people to come to

0:39:17.000 --> 0:39:20.560
<v Speaker 1>you remains a huge challenge. It's hard to get people

0:39:21.000 --> 0:39:24.680
<v Speaker 1>to come to your owned and operated site. People go

0:39:24.920 --> 0:39:27.600
<v Speaker 1>where the content is, and as YouTube gets hundreds of

0:39:27.680 --> 0:39:32.200
<v Speaker 1>hours of content each minute, it's definitely that destination. So

0:39:33.239 --> 0:39:35.800
<v Speaker 1>it's easy to say, don't put all your eggs in

0:39:35.840 --> 0:39:38.680
<v Speaker 1>one basket, but it's also hard to build your own

0:39:38.719 --> 0:39:41.040
<v Speaker 1>platform and then convince people to go to it, so

0:39:41.200 --> 0:39:45.120
<v Speaker 1>it's not like there's a one size fits all solution. However,

0:39:45.600 --> 0:39:50.759
<v Speaker 1>it does again reinforce the point that depending entirely on

0:39:50.880 --> 0:39:54.640
<v Speaker 1>YouTube means that whenever there's a change, you're gonna be

0:39:54.880 --> 0:39:57.080
<v Speaker 1>affected by it and there may not be much you

0:39:57.120 --> 0:39:59.680
<v Speaker 1>can do about it. The same thing is true as

0:39:59.719 --> 0:40:03.400
<v Speaker 1>certain and I've seen this in my actual professional career,

0:40:03.560 --> 0:40:08.200
<v Speaker 1>where you might have articles that do really well in

0:40:08.320 --> 0:40:11.160
<v Speaker 1>Google Search because of the algorithm, and then Google will

0:40:11.239 --> 0:40:13.640
<v Speaker 1>change the algorithm and now those articles don't do so

0:40:13.719 --> 0:40:16.360
<v Speaker 1>well in search anymore, and you'll notice as a result,

0:40:16.640 --> 0:40:21.640
<v Speaker 1>traffic to your website drops dramatically. That impacts revenue and

0:40:21.680 --> 0:40:25.840
<v Speaker 1>impacts how much money you make from advertising. And again

0:40:25.920 --> 0:40:28.960
<v Speaker 1>it shows that if you're beholden to a third party

0:40:29.600 --> 0:40:32.960
<v Speaker 1>for traffic to your stuff, for people to actually get

0:40:33.000 --> 0:40:37.680
<v Speaker 1>their eyeballs on it and to consume it and thus

0:40:37.760 --> 0:40:41.960
<v Speaker 1>to generate revenue for you, then you could be up

0:40:42.000 --> 0:40:45.560
<v Speaker 1>the creek. And as The Verge points out, YouTube's own

0:40:45.680 --> 0:40:50.280
<v Speaker 1>course doesn't seem to have original content creators in mind

0:40:50.600 --> 0:40:54.480
<v Speaker 1>at all. YouTube seems to have kind of moved away

0:40:54.640 --> 0:41:00.160
<v Speaker 1>from that d I Y you know, home video content

0:41:00.320 --> 0:41:04.920
<v Speaker 1>creator model. When YouTube presents pitches to advertisers, they're not

0:41:05.040 --> 0:41:10.359
<v Speaker 1>typically showing these individual content creators, even the really popular ones.

0:41:10.760 --> 0:41:12.960
<v Speaker 1>More and more of the sizzle reel that the company

0:41:13.000 --> 0:41:16.759
<v Speaker 1>shows off includes stuff like music videos and clips of

0:41:16.880 --> 0:41:21.279
<v Speaker 1>television shows and movies, clips of celebrities, uh, stuff from

0:41:21.320 --> 0:41:24.440
<v Speaker 1>popular late night TV shows. In other words, it's that

0:41:24.560 --> 0:41:26.560
<v Speaker 1>stuff I was talking about at the beginning when YouTube

0:41:26.560 --> 0:41:30.080
<v Speaker 1>first started and people were uploading pirated content and the

0:41:30.360 --> 0:41:34.080
<v Speaker 1>industry was freaking out. Now that's what YouTube is relying

0:41:34.160 --> 0:41:37.359
<v Speaker 1>on in their in their sizzle reels, because now they

0:41:37.520 --> 0:41:42.719
<v Speaker 1>have these working relationships with these these big production studios

0:41:43.120 --> 0:41:45.839
<v Speaker 1>it's no longer adversarial now it's you know, a sort

0:41:45.840 --> 0:41:50.239
<v Speaker 1>of a symbiotic relationship, and the content is always more

0:41:50.360 --> 0:41:54.080
<v Speaker 1>highly produced than what d I Y video content creators

0:41:54.120 --> 0:41:57.560
<v Speaker 1>can do, even though YouTube build its business around those

0:41:57.719 --> 0:42:01.880
<v Speaker 1>content creators. And so the feeling among a lot of

0:42:01.960 --> 0:42:04.800
<v Speaker 1>creators is that they've been completely left out in the cold,

0:42:05.280 --> 0:42:08.040
<v Speaker 1>that they've been abandoned by the platform they helped build.

0:42:08.640 --> 0:42:10.640
<v Speaker 1>And so that's where we are right now, with content

0:42:10.719 --> 0:42:13.759
<v Speaker 1>creators concerned about their livelihood and looking at possible ways

0:42:13.800 --> 0:42:17.680
<v Speaker 1>to offset their dependence upon YouTube. Meanwhile, YouTube continues to

0:42:17.840 --> 0:42:20.719
<v Speaker 1>court big names and entertainment and groups that can create

0:42:20.800 --> 0:42:23.760
<v Speaker 1>highly produced content, and there's still the worry that another

0:42:23.840 --> 0:42:28.520
<v Speaker 1>apocalypse could be coming. So it's, uh, it's kind of

0:42:28.560 --> 0:42:31.320
<v Speaker 1>a concerning time if you're a content creator. UM. I

0:42:31.400 --> 0:42:35.840
<v Speaker 1>know a lot of content creators who, even fairly recently,

0:42:36.160 --> 0:42:39.040
<v Speaker 1>have expressed a lot of concern about this, some of

0:42:39.080 --> 0:42:42.720
<v Speaker 1>whom have gotten out of the content creation business pretty

0:42:42.840 --> 0:42:45.560
<v Speaker 1>much entirely. And it's a shame because they made really

0:42:45.680 --> 0:42:50.240
<v Speaker 1>good stuff. But they were also affected by these moves.

0:42:50.560 --> 0:42:54.480
<v Speaker 1>Some of them had content that wasn't at all objectionable,

0:42:55.040 --> 0:42:57.320
<v Speaker 1>but for one reason or another it would get flagged

0:42:57.480 --> 0:42:59.760
<v Speaker 1>that way, they'd have to go through the whole appeals

0:42:59.760 --> 0:43:02.080
<v Speaker 1>pro sess and it would happen with all their videos.

0:43:02.120 --> 0:43:05.160
<v Speaker 1>And if you've created you know, more than a hundred videos,

0:43:05.600 --> 0:43:08.759
<v Speaker 1>going through that process again and again just to just

0:43:08.920 --> 0:43:13.040
<v Speaker 1>to have monetization turned back on, I think it's demoralizing.

0:43:13.760 --> 0:43:18.680
<v Speaker 1>So it's a pretty rough landscape out there for the independent,

0:43:19.320 --> 0:43:23.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, small creators. There's some some of the big

0:43:23.280 --> 0:43:26.759
<v Speaker 1>names who are still doing quite well. Um you know,

0:43:26.840 --> 0:43:29.880
<v Speaker 1>they're they're big enough where they can operate on a

0:43:30.080 --> 0:43:34.800
<v Speaker 1>level at least, you know, similar to the established studios.

0:43:35.120 --> 0:43:37.359
<v Speaker 1>But for a lot of others, they feel like they've

0:43:37.400 --> 0:43:40.759
<v Speaker 1>been completely abandoned and left out, so they're looking for alternatives.

0:43:41.400 --> 0:43:43.520
<v Speaker 1>A lot of folks have moved to Patreon or to

0:43:43.880 --> 0:43:46.919
<v Speaker 1>Twitch in the hopes that perhaps they can at least

0:43:47.200 --> 0:43:51.279
<v Speaker 1>convince their audience to follow along with them. It's tough,

0:43:51.600 --> 0:43:54.320
<v Speaker 1>and it's one of the reasons why I've never spent

0:43:54.600 --> 0:43:57.040
<v Speaker 1>a huge amount of time trying to develop my own

0:43:57.080 --> 0:44:01.480
<v Speaker 1>YouTube video series, because I know that at the challenges

0:44:01.760 --> 0:44:07.239
<v Speaker 1>would be beyond just your average production challenges. You know,

0:44:07.320 --> 0:44:10.640
<v Speaker 1>even after something has been produced and published, you still

0:44:10.800 --> 0:44:14.800
<v Speaker 1>have challenges making sure that it remains monetized and that

0:44:14.920 --> 0:44:18.960
<v Speaker 1>you recapture the costs of production. Anyway, that wraps up

0:44:19.040 --> 0:44:25.120
<v Speaker 1>this episode about the apocalypse and YouTube's demonetization practices, and

0:44:25.239 --> 0:44:28.600
<v Speaker 1>maybe they will change over the course of twenty nineteen.

0:44:28.640 --> 0:44:30.520
<v Speaker 1>We'll have to take a look again in the future.

0:44:30.880 --> 0:44:34.040
<v Speaker 1>If any of you have suggestions for future podcast topics,

0:44:34.200 --> 0:44:36.600
<v Speaker 1>you can reach out to me by email the addresses

0:44:36.719 --> 0:44:40.000
<v Speaker 1>tech stuff at how stuff works dot com, or you

0:44:40.040 --> 0:44:44.200
<v Speaker 1>can drop on by our website that's text stuff podcast

0:44:44.480 --> 0:44:46.719
<v Speaker 1>dot com. There you're gonna find an archive of all

0:44:46.800 --> 0:44:50.520
<v Speaker 1>of our shows, links to our social media, as well

0:44:50.520 --> 0:44:53.319
<v Speaker 1>as a link to our online store where you can

0:44:53.640 --> 0:44:58.600
<v Speaker 1>purchase stuff that's got tech on it. Deck stuff Stuff

0:44:59.400 --> 0:45:01.880
<v Speaker 1>and you can be super duper cool and remember that

0:45:01.960 --> 0:45:04.279
<v Speaker 1>every purchase you make goes to help the show and

0:45:04.320 --> 0:45:07.280
<v Speaker 1>we greatly appreciate it. And I'll talk to you again

0:45:08.040 --> 0:45:14.680
<v Speaker 1>really soon. Hext Stuff is a production of I Heart

0:45:14.760 --> 0:45:18.160
<v Speaker 1>Radio's How Stuff Works. For more podcasts from my heart Radio,

0:45:18.520 --> 0:45:21.640
<v Speaker 1>visit the i heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever

0:45:21.760 --> 0:45:23.280
<v Speaker 1>you listen to your favorite shows.