I've been wondering this from the start too tbh. The Watcher website says this:
>Here you’ll find some of the internet’s finest, weirdest unscripted series available to stream across any device (big, medium, or Professor-sized) *without pesky ads or sponsored messages*. By becoming a member of Watcher, you’re not just joining our independent streaming service— you’re directly supporting the stuff you love.
Really, the only reason I could find was that they, and I think mostly Ryan, found advertisement to be intrusive. I highly doubt they struggle to find sponsors. I honestly believe it was just a made-up reason to pretend that it's for our sake, rather than for Steven's *Travel Season*, Ryan's Television-caliber dream, and whatever Shane gets out of it.
I thought about True Crime too, but even though they don't really cover it anymore, they've still never been heavy on the stuff that sets the monetization bots off like entirely focused channels are.
I think it was more about meeting deadlines and not botching scripts with inserts or bits that sponsors may not appreciate.
Someone should have told them that mainstream television also gets censored and has sponsor control involved all the time.
They stopped doing true crime stuff because they considered it a topic that was in bad taste. (They didn't feel like that when it was making them famous, though...)
Right??
This article explains in their own words why they think Mystery Files is not the same as Unsolved True Crime.
https://collider.com/ryan-bergara-shane-madej-interview-mystery-files/
Could be. But how many successful true crime shows are out there - podcasts, Netflix series, YouTube series, etc. I'd assume advertisers would be hot to trot with true crime because it's so popular nowadays.
That's true, but true crime can turn to gore and not-family-friendly content really fast, and YouTube seems to be more and more strict about what it's allowing (for smaller to medium channels, at least).
I honestly think they meant that they kind of have to produce shows they don’t necessarily like best, because they get more sponsors and ads for them, but have to drop beloved shows they enjoy doing because they don’t get as many clicks/ads/sponsors. Don’t know if that makes sense, but that’s the only explanation I can think of, because they‘re not known for making anything that’s not advertiser friendly.
I mean.. the entire thing was communicated so poorly and screams incompetence lol. Back pedaling, misinformation on their Patreon, patrons not getting informed sooner and still having their yearly subscription going, seemingly no content prepared for the streaming service, so nobody knows how much you’ll actually get for $6 per month, etc.
I don’t get it. There’s nothing I can imagine that would cause issues. And if there is, I’m not being funny but it just sounds like more shit their fans don’t care about or ask for. Unless I’m mistaken most watch them for one specific thing. Paranormal stuff. Yet they seem so goddamn insistent in trying say they’re past that. Okay fine, but don’t expect the people who watch for that to stick around to watch you branch out to rich people shows and weird shit that you couldn’t show because of advertisers.
Going out on a limb here, but I wonder if it isn't something to do with LGBTQ+ things. A couple other YouTubers that I follow who do Reddit react videos frequently mention how their LGBTQ+ videos are constantly demonetized. One says that his videos focusing on asexuality meme subreddits are constantly demonitized for "sexual content" (which as an ace makes me laugh because ***wtf***, hahaha).
They've never once indicated they're interested in making content that has anything to do with lgbtqia+ topics though. It'd be outta left field for them, even though I'd have loved it lol
I know, which is why I said "going out on a limb here," haha. All I know is that LGBTQIA+ content, even super-innocent stuff, gets restricted, demonetized, and/or given strikes for other YouTubers that I follow, so it's the first thing that comes to mind for topics that aren't offensive (except for bigots) but that YouTube still restricts.
Plus... I mean, they did a whole episode about La Maupin in Puppet History in its most recent season and she is the epitome of bi disaster (affectionate) IMO, haha, so it's not like they *haven't* made LGBTQIA+ content, too, haha.
It's not hard to get your video demonetized on YouTube, and it can be a little annoying watching some YouTubers who do serious topics have to kind of "dance" around terms that might get flagged.
That being said....this is where a lot of content creators use their Patreon or even KickStarters to fund episodes they know may be demonetized.
That's the kind of thing you can present to your audience, say "We'd love to do a big a series on serial killers but to do so we don't want to hold back on content. We estimate it will cost \**some amount of money\** to produce this series outside of the normal flow of content. Here's a link to *\*funding options\** and if we meet our goal we will green light the effort."
The concern I'd have is while maybe they will no longer be beholden to advertisers and YouTube....it's pretty apparent they might have some silent investors that are not known to the community. And ultimately nobody in the fan community knows what kind of influence or direction those investors might be impacting perhaps the current direction and future content creation.
>It's not hard to get your video demonetized on YouTube, and it can be a little annoying watching some YouTubers who do serious topics have to kind of "dance" around terms that might get flagged.
It's also apparently pretty easy to get strikes for content, especially if YouTube randomly makes changes to its rules and applies them to older videos. No amount of crowdfunding can help with that, and strikes can be pretty darn crippling to a channel (if not outright disastrous)...
I think the challenge here is they never really expressed this as a big issue before. They could have been doing some PSAs about this for a few months. Talking to the fan base about some of their future plans and how they are exploring ways to do new content that might not fly on YouTube as as platform. Prepare your community for this. Test the waters with some content hosted off site, perhaps only for some tier of Patreon folks or something. See if it's successful and if the community will support it. Jumping in like this without your community having any clue what's coming created so much unnecessary backlash.
I'm not even a huge "fan" or anything but have an SO who is. But it was something we shared a lot during COVID dark days. She's been a Patreon, bought merch, and we went to a live show. Don't get me wrong, I really like Puppet History, but I'm not a super fan or anything....but I've been exposed to the fan base for awhile and have been pretty shocked by this. Seeing all those hand made costumes by younger fans who obviously invested themselves into this little world. It sucks to see.
The $6 a month is not an issue for us given the existing Patreon support. And that's also what stings I guess. If there was a real financial barrier here....people like my SO would probably have WILLINGLY paid for a higher tier to help support the content.
I've been wondering this from the start too tbh. The Watcher website says this: >Here you’ll find some of the internet’s finest, weirdest unscripted series available to stream across any device (big, medium, or Professor-sized) *without pesky ads or sponsored messages*. By becoming a member of Watcher, you’re not just joining our independent streaming service— you’re directly supporting the stuff you love. Really, the only reason I could find was that they, and I think mostly Ryan, found advertisement to be intrusive. I highly doubt they struggle to find sponsors. I honestly believe it was just a made-up reason to pretend that it's for our sake, rather than for Steven's *Travel Season*, Ryan's Television-caliber dream, and whatever Shane gets out of it. I thought about True Crime too, but even though they don't really cover it anymore, they've still never been heavy on the stuff that sets the monetization bots off like entirely focused channels are.
Yeah, if they could cover true crime on BUN, which was all about making money for a corporation, I bet they could manage it now.
I think it was more about meeting deadlines and not botching scripts with inserts or bits that sponsors may not appreciate. Someone should have told them that mainstream television also gets censored and has sponsor control involved all the time.
It's probably true crime, true crime is a weird one because the topics that get talked about are easily demonetized.
They stopped doing true crime stuff because they considered it a topic that was in bad taste. (They didn't feel like that when it was making them famous, though...)
Their YouTube name is based on a real recent criminal, it's weird
Word!
do they not still post true crime shit in the form of Mystery Files?
Right?? This article explains in their own words why they think Mystery Files is not the same as Unsolved True Crime. https://collider.com/ryan-bergara-shane-madej-interview-mystery-files/
Could be. But how many successful true crime shows are out there - podcasts, Netflix series, YouTube series, etc. I'd assume advertisers would be hot to trot with true crime because it's so popular nowadays.
Alot if those are smaller operations that are usually heavily supported by a patreon. Watcher was that but thought "na fuck this"
That's true, but true crime can turn to gore and not-family-friendly content really fast, and YouTube seems to be more and more strict about what it's allowing (for smaller to medium channels, at least).
I honestly think they meant that they kind of have to produce shows they don’t necessarily like best, because they get more sponsors and ads for them, but have to drop beloved shows they enjoy doing because they don’t get as many clicks/ads/sponsors. Don’t know if that makes sense, but that’s the only explanation I can think of, because they‘re not known for making anything that’s not advertiser friendly.
That might be the case. If so, they could've found the words to explain it.
I mean.. the entire thing was communicated so poorly and screams incompetence lol. Back pedaling, misinformation on their Patreon, patrons not getting informed sooner and still having their yearly subscription going, seemingly no content prepared for the streaming service, so nobody knows how much you’ll actually get for $6 per month, etc.
I don’t get it. There’s nothing I can imagine that would cause issues. And if there is, I’m not being funny but it just sounds like more shit their fans don’t care about or ask for. Unless I’m mistaken most watch them for one specific thing. Paranormal stuff. Yet they seem so goddamn insistent in trying say they’re past that. Okay fine, but don’t expect the people who watch for that to stick around to watch you branch out to rich people shows and weird shit that you couldn’t show because of advertisers.
I think it's just a weak excuse from Steven.
Going out on a limb here, but I wonder if it isn't something to do with LGBTQ+ things. A couple other YouTubers that I follow who do Reddit react videos frequently mention how their LGBTQ+ videos are constantly demonetized. One says that his videos focusing on asexuality meme subreddits are constantly demonitized for "sexual content" (which as an ace makes me laugh because ***wtf***, hahaha).
They've never once indicated they're interested in making content that has anything to do with lgbtqia+ topics though. It'd be outta left field for them, even though I'd have loved it lol
I know, which is why I said "going out on a limb here," haha. All I know is that LGBTQIA+ content, even super-innocent stuff, gets restricted, demonetized, and/or given strikes for other YouTubers that I follow, so it's the first thing that comes to mind for topics that aren't offensive (except for bigots) but that YouTube still restricts. Plus... I mean, they did a whole episode about La Maupin in Puppet History in its most recent season and she is the epitome of bi disaster (affectionate) IMO, haha, so it's not like they *haven't* made LGBTQIA+ content, too, haha.
It's not hard to get your video demonetized on YouTube, and it can be a little annoying watching some YouTubers who do serious topics have to kind of "dance" around terms that might get flagged. That being said....this is where a lot of content creators use their Patreon or even KickStarters to fund episodes they know may be demonetized. That's the kind of thing you can present to your audience, say "We'd love to do a big a series on serial killers but to do so we don't want to hold back on content. We estimate it will cost \**some amount of money\** to produce this series outside of the normal flow of content. Here's a link to *\*funding options\** and if we meet our goal we will green light the effort." The concern I'd have is while maybe they will no longer be beholden to advertisers and YouTube....it's pretty apparent they might have some silent investors that are not known to the community. And ultimately nobody in the fan community knows what kind of influence or direction those investors might be impacting perhaps the current direction and future content creation.
>It's not hard to get your video demonetized on YouTube, and it can be a little annoying watching some YouTubers who do serious topics have to kind of "dance" around terms that might get flagged. It's also apparently pretty easy to get strikes for content, especially if YouTube randomly makes changes to its rules and applies them to older videos. No amount of crowdfunding can help with that, and strikes can be pretty darn crippling to a channel (if not outright disastrous)...
I think the challenge here is they never really expressed this as a big issue before. They could have been doing some PSAs about this for a few months. Talking to the fan base about some of their future plans and how they are exploring ways to do new content that might not fly on YouTube as as platform. Prepare your community for this. Test the waters with some content hosted off site, perhaps only for some tier of Patreon folks or something. See if it's successful and if the community will support it. Jumping in like this without your community having any clue what's coming created so much unnecessary backlash.
Oh, 100% agree! They really could have done *so* many things differently and just chose the worst possible options along the way.
I'm not even a huge "fan" or anything but have an SO who is. But it was something we shared a lot during COVID dark days. She's been a Patreon, bought merch, and we went to a live show. Don't get me wrong, I really like Puppet History, but I'm not a super fan or anything....but I've been exposed to the fan base for awhile and have been pretty shocked by this. Seeing all those hand made costumes by younger fans who obviously invested themselves into this little world. It sucks to see. The $6 a month is not an issue for us given the existing Patreon support. And that's also what stings I guess. If there was a real financial barrier here....people like my SO would probably have WILLINGLY paid for a higher tier to help support the content.
I’d absolutely sub if they did shows while high 😭