• pulsewidth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is exactly the story behind Hot Ones and I disliked it from first view. Commenters like ‘OMG how does he get these guests. So glad he’s succeeding.’ Dude it’s literally a corporation.

    Just a ‘late night show’ format for celebrities to sell their latest book/movie in gen Z format.

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Sometimes I get the impression that social media fame is continuing the narrative of the American dream worldwide: strangely enough, many people assume that it happens regularly that someone steps out of their parent’s bedroom, records a few videos, and overnight, without much effort, becomes a multimillionaire – just like that.

    This is the absolute exception and has hardly happened at all for a long time. Online, it’s long been like the real world economy: without the support of powerful players, it’s basically impossible for anyone to become successful. It’s a tough business with an endless number of competing content producers, from whom influential financiers can choose the content and the faces to go with it and pocket the lion’s share.

    And there is yet another misconception underlying the illusion of quick money: you only earn enough to live on once you have a certain reach – something very few people achieve. Most work hard for ridiculously low income, if they earn anything at all.

    Consumers, on the other hand, persist in the attitude that the internet has taught them over the last twenty years: they expect high-quality content on a daily basis without having to pay anything for that. They assume that the producers of this content earn good money from it, but in the vast majority of cases - and if there is any money made in the first place - this is not true at all, because it is not the creative people who earn big, but those who exploit them.

    Anyone who believes that content producers can finance themselves through voluntary donations is usually completely wrong — Wikipedia’s fundraising campaigns, in which only a tiny percentage of users contribute anything, are just one example of many, even though Wikipedia is one of the most visited websites in many countries around the world.

      • DandomRude@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        3 days ago

        Exactly, it’s the American dream that has always been propagated to conceal the true circumstances and thus ensure that everything stays the same.

    • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Anyone who believes that content producers can finance themselves through voluntary donations is usually completely wrong

      It works quite well on Twitch - if you have a lot of viewers on Twitch, you usually get enough donations to live off of. YouTube just never managed to find a good way to make creators profit directly from their content.

      • DandomRude@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, having a large audience is the problem. If you have that, you can earn good money on YouTube too, especially since you can sign additional marketing deals. The thing is, though, that getting a large audience is anything but easy—most people who try fail.

        • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          The audience you need to make good money on YouTube, without external deals, is orders of magnitudes larger than on Twitch, though.

          It’s true that getting a large audience on Twitch is really hard nowadays, though. Seems like it was a lot easier a couple of years ago, not sure if it’s just because of changed algorithms or because of market saturation.

          • DandomRude@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yes, that may be true. I can’t say much about Twitch because I don’t know anything about it.

    • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      from whom influential financiers can choose the content and the faces to go with it and pocket the lion’s share.

      How? This kind of doesn’t make sense to me because it seems like some kind of talent manager wouldn’t have a lot to offer in terms of actually increasing someone’s chances of making it big on social media, if it’s a type of content that doesn’t require any special resources to produce and is suited to being made by one person.

      • DandomRude@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        There are basically two approaches:

        • Social media agencies that manage company accounts on behalf of their clients and have their employees produce content for them.
        • Agencies that operate their own accounts, which are financed through product placement, e-commerce (mostly dropshipping), or affiliate marketing.

        Typically, these companies pursue both approaches simultaneously.

        What they offer the actual content producers, i.e., the (sometimes even pseudo-self-employed) employees, is the following:

        • A salary or at least project-based remuneration
        • A network of contacts to advertising customers and thus lucrative sources of revenue that are pretty much unattainable for individuals without significant reach (they have sales people to protect those contracts from the people that do the content of course - usually these people are called account managers or something tacky along those lines)
        • A network of contacts to other “influencers” in order to gain subscribers, etc. through strategic cooperation
        • Know-how on how to build up accounts
        • Professional equipment (cameras, dongles, drones, video editing applications and so on) as well as social media marketing tools for reporting, planning, and automation, which are not exactly cheap
        • In some cases, substantial advertising budgets for ads to promote new accounts (performance marketing) and, in the case of campaigns for external clients, “seals of approval” from meta and other Plattforms (meta, Google or TikTok “Business Partner” for example — these seals are exclusively issued to companies who spend a significant amount on ads on the respective platform)
        • Opportunities to collaborate with other employees of the company, which can also create network effects.

        There are certainly other advantages, but the key point is the contact with advertising customers, i.e., companies that want to engage in social media marketing. These contacts are only accessible to private individuals if they already have one or multiple successful accounts, which unfortunately only very few of those aspiring to a professional career in this field ever achieve.

        • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          but the key point is the contact with advertising customers, i.e., companies that want to engage in social media marketing. These contacts are only accessible to private individuals if they already have one or multiple successful accounts, which unfortunately only very few of those aspiring to a professional career in this field ever achieve.

          I get the impression that you also generally have to already have a successful account to be considered by agencies, which would defeat the point somewhat of it being a way to get over the initial hurdle. I watch vtubers on Twitch and from what they sometimes say about how sponsorships work, much of it is somewhat automated and gated mainly by account popularity metrics, which makes sense because why would advertisers want to pay a premium to another middleman if they didn’t have to? There was a vtuber agency that collapsed recently when it came out that they were insolvent and had been defrauding many people they worked with along with various other corruption and abuse, and given how similar scandals aren’t uncommon and the need for creators to be doing the work of building themselves up as a business regardless, makes it seem like a pretty bad deal to have an all inclusive sort of contract with agencies.

  • Auth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Most youtubers are businesses owned by corporate networks. The person on screen is just the talent pretending to be an organic channel.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      68
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t understand why people are so shocked and horrified when it turns out that people who do entertainment for a living have been professional entertainers the whole time.

      • angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        57
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s because YouTube used to be mostly independent creators, even when people first started making money off it. That was the sales pitch.

        • slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          3 days ago

          I really honestly do miss youtube before it got monetised. Yeah the content overall was probably worse, but it was also in it’s baby shoes, but only seeing videos because beople wanted to make the video hit so different. Now it’s all commercials and talking about possible commercials, don’t say the nono words. And don’t talk bad about anyone, because maybe they’ll sponser them someday.

          • rtxn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Oldtube is still there, if you know where to look. Independent creators in the unfiction genre are still putting out gold that beats the hell out of the mass-produced FNAF/mascot horror/Scrimblo Files knock-offs. Kane Parsons, Alex Archives, Alex Kister, Mister Manticore, Remy Abode, Kris Straub, the list goes on. Alex Archives even stated that his entire body of work, both Ted’s Caving Journal and Hollow Birds, uses practical effects, free software, and free tutorials.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Most of them are pretending that they aren’t corporate. YouTubers are generally trying to keep up the illusion of authenticity, which on YouTube usually includes pretending that you’re on your own.

        • Darren@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I mean, the vast, vast majority of entertainment media is an act. Do you watch Top Gear and assume that everything they did happened organically?

      • Auth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I dont care if they are a 1 person business or a small team. What im talking about is when a Giant multinational corporation buys up 1000s of youtube channels. I want to watch 1 person or a small team not a big talent corp

      • Novaling@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, was gonna say this. Like what YTs are y’all watching? My subscriptions and recommendations are randos playing games with their friends, memes, cat vids, and randos talking about interesting topics or the latest shitty Tiktok trend that I can be horrified by. I’m very lost as to everyone only finding these talent/corporate YTs.

        I definitely have encountered the corporate YTs in the VTuber community, and I honestly think that’s why I hate Agency VTs so much compared to indie VTs. Watching Hololive/Kurosanji is like watching a bunch of coworkers play Mario Kart. Yeah, you “know” them and “get along”, but only in the superficial sense, cause you have to pay your bills. The shit always blows up later on anyway. Way more fun to watch some random with a mid setup play some obscure horror game by themselves or with actual friends.

      • [object Object]@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I was linking to it to show all sorts of things that can be manipulated, but now that I look back to it, it does look like I’m promoting it. Yeah, I’ll remove it.

  • Victor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Currently watching a bunch of videos detailing the fall of PirateSoftware. Such a sad person.

      • real_squids@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        Stopped reading after “if it’s promoted by YT it’s not worth watching”, that shit is based on your recently watched channels if your account settings aren’t all fucked up.
        If you turn off history - yeah, you’ll get default recommendations and those are cancer. Probably the only good reason to turn history on. Even then, it’s a bandaid on a horrible UI that gets worse every update.

        • slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          I use YT in the weirdest way possible. I’m not subscribed to anyone and my feed and recommendations do all the lifting. It works really well for my needs. I hardly ever see shit i’m absolutely not interested in, and i find new thimgs that i am interested in. But when it logged me out and i saw the default youtube recommendations… Holy shit that is some nightmare shit. It’s just absolute clickbait ass content for children or tiktok adults.

            • real_squids@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              Pretty sure if you’re logged out every region will be like that by default. That, or at least full of news and questionable news “commentators”. YT loves that stuff.