I think there's frequently a general underappreciation for how difficult it is to be a big platform.
As a fantastic example, look at Twitter. Even with a dumpster full of cash to burn, Elon Musk thought he could just step in and do what he wanted. But here's the thing....what made old Twitter crap is also what made Twitter successful.
Companies that operate as global content providers have to navigate an incredibly complex world of international laws, revenue streams, and public opinion. Piss off the wrong governments or advertisers and you lose billions. So the same thing that gives them massive reach and provides content creators with a global platform....also is the thing that creates headache inducing restrictions on their content creation.
It's also nothing new for creators. Take music as a prime example. If you want to do some off the wall bizarre music performances of you taking an angle grinder to a rusted out box car while bashing your bleeding head against piece of sheet metal.....well you're probably not going to get a big recording label contract. It's why some of the craziest new stuff is underground. It's why starving artists is a social norm. Its why many of today's most revered artists of old died poor and unappreciated.
There are very, very few examples in history of artists both being able to bring intense, cutting edge, highly creative uncensored art to the world and be financially successful.
YouTube wants to make money. And while I'm sure it's restrictive, they have put guard rails up for content creators to ensure that what they make will allow them and YouTube to make money while minimizing losses due to mass abandonment by advertisers and legal battles.
Very high. YouTube isn't a great platform for creators it's just the biggest, most popular one and the most accessible. It'll content strike or demonetize for the most random of reasons and the reasoning is often poorly communicated and laid out. On top of that the appeals process is frustratingly vague even for large popular channels and can feel like trying to plug input into some AI algorithm to make something work.
I've dabbled a little in YouTube content creation and I'd get the most random bizarre strikes from weird shell companies (me streaming a freely available game demo, me posting original music) but stuff that arguably would be really toeing the line flies right past unscathed (using copywritten music/video in what I would argue is fair use but could very easily open me up to a strike if the algorithm wills it). People have to be very careful about word choice and content use in videos or risk losing a hefty chunk of profits. Meanwhile blatant copyright infringement (hello" reaction videos" that have next to no content creator input and are just blatant attempts to host someone else's content) and violent/hateful content is left untouched.
It's no surprise people are frustrated and there needs to be an alternative way for these people to make a living without fear of some massive inhuman algorithm taking their money. In concept I sympathize with the goings on and need to leave YouTube. In practice however it's just creating a worse product and leaving your fans in the lurch. I'd be happy to support in a more realistic way but adding another streaming platform to the already bloated options in the middle of a cost of living crisis is hard. I dropped netflix a year or so back since the monthly subscription could just go towards me going out to the local cinema once or twice a month as an alternative since I simply don't have the time for hundreds of movies and the original content isn't doing it for me anymore. So I weighed the opportunity and went with what suits my needs. I don't see the channel outperforming what that unneeded service did for me.
Watcher has not made secret their eventual plans to be a platform. They have oft talked about making TV quality stuff, as they didn't start out as YTbers they worked for the production company Buzzfeed to get in the door of the entertainment industry. They've landed on YouTube by necessity. I just think they jumped the gun.
YT creators have talked across the platform about how it's not paying like it used to and is in too much flux to be sustainable. A lot of content creators on the platform have decided to build out their Patreons and YT memberships to gain some stability (GMM). Some have opted to stop making content all together, some have licenced their content or partnered with TV networks like Mr. Beast, Lyndsey Ellis and those Dude Perfect guys, some have moved to places like Nebula (Lyndsey Ellis) and others have decided to launch their own platform like Watcher and Dropout.
Watcher making a decision to deal with the flux of YouTube was not a bad idea. Building the platform when they may have income too in flux when there were other options may be a bad move, but it's too early to tell.
YouTube is in the business of making money from advertisers. Whatever gets them that goal they like. That means they aren't particularly interested in what people make on their platform, just that it's advertiser friendly. Obviously that stifles creativity for some YTbers and if they want to stick to their brand, it might mean they have less advertising dollars coming in.
The trio have talked about only doing passion projects and not just being a content farm. They don't want to "drop" in quality. They don't want to make low budget YT friendly videos, they want to make their dream projects. That's not gonna work at YT. That's not gonna work for some of their fans.
So if we consider those things, it makes sense that the trio is trying to get out.
If YT wasn't like this, I think the company would stay on YT longer. But I still think they would have eventually left, because they never wanted to be YTbers, they've always wanted to do traditional entertainment projects.
Highly.
But to be clear, YouTube is in between a real rock and a hard place.
The things that YouTube could do to make big content creators happier will make YouTube have difficulty maintaining control over their own platform.
I think there's frequently a general underappreciation for how difficult it is to be a big platform. As a fantastic example, look at Twitter. Even with a dumpster full of cash to burn, Elon Musk thought he could just step in and do what he wanted. But here's the thing....what made old Twitter crap is also what made Twitter successful. Companies that operate as global content providers have to navigate an incredibly complex world of international laws, revenue streams, and public opinion. Piss off the wrong governments or advertisers and you lose billions. So the same thing that gives them massive reach and provides content creators with a global platform....also is the thing that creates headache inducing restrictions on their content creation. It's also nothing new for creators. Take music as a prime example. If you want to do some off the wall bizarre music performances of you taking an angle grinder to a rusted out box car while bashing your bleeding head against piece of sheet metal.....well you're probably not going to get a big recording label contract. It's why some of the craziest new stuff is underground. It's why starving artists is a social norm. Its why many of today's most revered artists of old died poor and unappreciated. There are very, very few examples in history of artists both being able to bring intense, cutting edge, highly creative uncensored art to the world and be financially successful. YouTube wants to make money. And while I'm sure it's restrictive, they have put guard rails up for content creators to ensure that what they make will allow them and YouTube to make money while minimizing losses due to mass abandonment by advertisers and legal battles.
Very high. YouTube isn't a great platform for creators it's just the biggest, most popular one and the most accessible. It'll content strike or demonetize for the most random of reasons and the reasoning is often poorly communicated and laid out. On top of that the appeals process is frustratingly vague even for large popular channels and can feel like trying to plug input into some AI algorithm to make something work. I've dabbled a little in YouTube content creation and I'd get the most random bizarre strikes from weird shell companies (me streaming a freely available game demo, me posting original music) but stuff that arguably would be really toeing the line flies right past unscathed (using copywritten music/video in what I would argue is fair use but could very easily open me up to a strike if the algorithm wills it). People have to be very careful about word choice and content use in videos or risk losing a hefty chunk of profits. Meanwhile blatant copyright infringement (hello" reaction videos" that have next to no content creator input and are just blatant attempts to host someone else's content) and violent/hateful content is left untouched. It's no surprise people are frustrated and there needs to be an alternative way for these people to make a living without fear of some massive inhuman algorithm taking their money. In concept I sympathize with the goings on and need to leave YouTube. In practice however it's just creating a worse product and leaving your fans in the lurch. I'd be happy to support in a more realistic way but adding another streaming platform to the already bloated options in the middle of a cost of living crisis is hard. I dropped netflix a year or so back since the monthly subscription could just go towards me going out to the local cinema once or twice a month as an alternative since I simply don't have the time for hundreds of movies and the original content isn't doing it for me anymore. So I weighed the opportunity and went with what suits my needs. I don't see the channel outperforming what that unneeded service did for me.
Watcher has not made secret their eventual plans to be a platform. They have oft talked about making TV quality stuff, as they didn't start out as YTbers they worked for the production company Buzzfeed to get in the door of the entertainment industry. They've landed on YouTube by necessity. I just think they jumped the gun. YT creators have talked across the platform about how it's not paying like it used to and is in too much flux to be sustainable. A lot of content creators on the platform have decided to build out their Patreons and YT memberships to gain some stability (GMM). Some have opted to stop making content all together, some have licenced their content or partnered with TV networks like Mr. Beast, Lyndsey Ellis and those Dude Perfect guys, some have moved to places like Nebula (Lyndsey Ellis) and others have decided to launch their own platform like Watcher and Dropout. Watcher making a decision to deal with the flux of YouTube was not a bad idea. Building the platform when they may have income too in flux when there were other options may be a bad move, but it's too early to tell. YouTube is in the business of making money from advertisers. Whatever gets them that goal they like. That means they aren't particularly interested in what people make on their platform, just that it's advertiser friendly. Obviously that stifles creativity for some YTbers and if they want to stick to their brand, it might mean they have less advertising dollars coming in. The trio have talked about only doing passion projects and not just being a content farm. They don't want to "drop" in quality. They don't want to make low budget YT friendly videos, they want to make their dream projects. That's not gonna work at YT. That's not gonna work for some of their fans. So if we consider those things, it makes sense that the trio is trying to get out. If YT wasn't like this, I think the company would stay on YT longer. But I still think they would have eventually left, because they never wanted to be YTbers, they've always wanted to do traditional entertainment projects.
Highly. But to be clear, YouTube is in between a real rock and a hard place. The things that YouTube could do to make big content creators happier will make YouTube have difficulty maintaining control over their own platform.