• IllNess
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    Most content creators don’t make money from ads. Google keeps on changing the rules to be able to monitize or keep monitizing their own videos. Google has put ads on videos when the creator did not reach the requirements to make money on ads.

    This is why creators have sponsorahips, affliate links, their own merch, Patreon, or OnlyFans. They also use Youtube more as an ad platform for their other social media accounts like Instagram and Tiktok. Depending on the content some creators get paid more on Tiktok.

    • micka190@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, if you listen to any content creator talk about sponsorship revenues it basically eclipses all other form of revenue for them.

      I think it was Pokimane who got tired of people donating money and then being assholes if she wasn’t basically gushing over them for hours, so she just went “You know what, I don’t actually need your Twitch dontations.” and just turned them off.

      Content creators make thousands of dollars per sponsorship deal minimum if they have a decent amount of viewers. Bigger creators like Ludwig get millions for some deals (Redbull gives him a crapload of money for product placement, for example).

      • scrion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The examples you cited are not individuals. Both Pokimane and Ludwig are basically media companies at this point in time.

        And yes, the amount of money you get from YouTube is a lot less, although I’m being told major YouTubers have direct platform deals. But that’s not the issue:

        In order to even get those lucrative sponsorships, you need the reach of a major platform in order to build an audience - that’s not happening without e. g. YouTube.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, but content creators haven’t deplatformed off YouTube. The closest might be streaming services like Nebula, but even those have subscriptions.

      YouTube pays little to content creators for hosting the content, but they also pay for hosting the content. I can’t think of a case where content creators would pay to host their videos for others to watch for free without ads or a subscription.

      • IllNess
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What’s most valuable to Google is the user data. Google is still able to get a lot of user data even if blockers are on. Ads are really just a way to get even more data. If you click an ad 10 times and buy something just 1 time, that information is more valuable than the ability to put ads in front of you.

          • IllNess
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I said one was more valuable. That doesn’t mean they don’t go well together.

            Anyway you can use data to nudge users. For example, Google can change search result orders. They can promote one company/research/ideology/party to the top and demote others.

            Finding out where certain people are important for law enforcement or press.

            Stores give out free wifi to track your MAC address and see where you go in stores. They sell this data, use it to track theives, or use it for better product placement.

            • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Anyway you can use data to nudge users. For example, Google can change search result orders. They can promote one company/research/ideology/party to the top and demote others.

              This is advertising.

              Finding out where certain people are important for law enforcement or press.

              This service isn’t that valuable, and extracting the value required is going to be a PR nightmare.

              Stores give out free wifi to track your MAC address and see where you go in stores. They sell this data, use it to track theives, or use it for better product placement.

              So A-B testing for their advertising?

              • IllNess
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I said one was more valuable. That doesn’t mean they don’t go well together.

                • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  But it goes back to my earlier assertion that the value of user data is generally to help with advertising.