I was curious how this would play out. Someone uploaded the Watts 1996 performance in March 2015. It was a bit truncated than mine, up this afternoon. At 2 PM, his had 7.8K views; mine, 136. 11 PM: His: 9.2K; mine: 9.8K. Honestly wasn't expecting that.
-
Show this thread
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @CableCoShow
This was fascinating, thanks. There are crucial differences: he’s creating superlative original content and rightly monetizes. So the incentive for attracting a large viewership is high. My content survives on the whims of its owners, and I don’t monetize.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @thedonz5 @CableCoShow
I do pay close attention to my thumbnails, though, selecting images that I think best reflect the content. But because this stuff isn’t mine, and turning it into $$ is nonexistent, my incentives for greater viewership are low.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
And, yes, beyond all that, not my style. Not keen on the “manipulation” aspect. More keen on if you build it, they will come. Naive, certainly. But there’s a purity and simplicity that I like. Plus one less thing to overthink.
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.