What drives people to your business is that you are a place where small creators can showcase their abilities. It's even still in your bylines and policies. But you strip away their right to be paid, to protect your ad interests. But you *continue* to advertise to gain creators.
@forexposure_txt @TeamYouTube
So I had this thought on demonetization. Ultimately, YouTube, you know you have no platform without creators. Your OTT is not going to rake in the money you want it to, at least not enough in the short-term to sustain your business model.
-
-
Show this thread
-
You are effectively asking creators to put information on your website for free, knowing it will drive business, your algorithm will lure people to more videos, all to gain more traffic, profiting off their hard work, and then creating obscure rules why they shouldn't be paid.
Show this thread -
"Video is too short", "Video is too long", "Video said nipple", "Title says Bisexual", whatever. Anything to prevent paying. You are encouraging artists to take exposure to your website in lieu of payment with a vague promise that because you are generously giving them a seat
Show this thread -
at the back table in the gallery, they should be grateful they were approved at all, and if enough people wander in, or they shout enough people over, they'll make some money. But where does this lead us? Ultimately, you are encouraging the devalue of artists. To explain:
Show this thread -
It is hard for a non-artist to understand that if I watch a 4m video by an animator, it took them months to make. I just consume and move on. I have friends that can real-time sketch stories I tell them, and I can't fathom the amount of effort it takes to put into it.
Show this thread -
But you encourage people to believe that it doesn't take any time at all. Because it's not *valuable*. Because they complain about not being paid so leave the platform, but there are other "more dedicated" artists still doing it because of whichever reasons.
Show this thread -
This manipulation continues to drive the "For Exposure' mindset. You'll never pay most creators for their work, and you love the fact that you are still riding your reputation as "where the most creative can live", but you cannot survive without them, and you know that, too.
Show this thread -
The OTT and major-actor shows prove that. You're desperate to get out from under the thumb of creators that are gaining a voice. I remember
@RubberNinja 's video that was basically "why being an animator kinda sucks", and you chose to cast that net further and hurt more of them.Show this thread -
So the question is, what are you going to do to fix it,
@TeamYouTube? YouTube becoming a production company isn't going to save much, given your financials. So when are you going to stop paying creators in exposure and give them, ya know, cash?Show this thread -
Heck, give brand-new, trial run creators a penny for every 100 views, if they do the ground work. If they bust their ovaries to get to 1m views, you still only owe them 100$. But in doing that work, they forced thousands of people into your platform making you much more.
Show this thread -
I can't find the solution, but stop paying your creators in "the privilege of reaching millions of people", because it's just exposure-payment. That's all it is. "It was enough to be seen" means very little when they can't eat.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.