Dearest readers, in many ways YouTube has replaced my dependence on cable TV a long time ago; Netfflix is the other half that together with YouTube made me cut the cord. However, for all the wealth it has created as well as many regular incomes and a boost to multiple industries that benefit from its content creation, sharing and its advertising platform, it is a system that fundamentally does not work. I know, I know- it seems hypocritical to criticize something I like and use every day as if I could live without it. The reason why it only seems so versus it being factually true is that, just as there is no good government without a strong opposition, there is no good service (including YouTube) without criticism and calls for improvement and better focus on longevity. Speaking of longevity, I will give you some very good reasons why YouTube, in its current state and as it relates to its longevity, simply does not work.
The first thing to note is that YouTube still does not seem to be profitable or significantly profitable. It has been discussed in the media and other circles that, due to the colossal resources necessary to run a video streaming platform, YouTube is Google's way of fighting competition in the video streaming category, preventing new entrants in this field from gaining traction, and finally it is useful when Alphabet tries to convince investors that they have another powerful and viable ad platform outside of Google ads. Now, what I dislike about this is that it is one of a growing number of businesses that are technically powered by a recycled process of investment, going into debt to gain more traction and market share at a loss, asking for more investment, then doing it all over again. The reason why I dislike this process is because it collapses entirely if you cannot get more money into it, and this is a key feature of a ponzi scheme, which in and of itself is fraud. I am acquainted with people who lost money in ponzi schemes, and it is really sad to say the least.
The second thing to note is that our temporary complacency, laziness and desire for convenience that are YouTube's greatest retention tools. If you want a great is example, there is none greater than the Joe Rogan show, one of the largest podcasts on the planet. I have heard from so many people online and in person that they barely watch it for no other reason except for the fact it is now on Spotify and they do not use it on a regular basis. Sure, they can have the video or audio version of it on Spotify. Sure, they can download the episodes easily so they do not have to waste their data when they listen to it or watch it away from wifi. None of that matters. Many of us became lazy, complacent, or simply uninterested in questioning YouTube's role in our online media consumption. This, totally, sucks. Youtube has become state TV, except the state is the entire planet. The one thing I know about state TV in almost every country is that most people consider it background noise, a necessary evil or something else along those lines. That does not bode well for Youtube's future.
The third thing to note is that we are sort of going back in time when it comes to media formats. Of all the people I know who use YouTube for music, podcasts, news and other content that requires attention to just audio without the video, over half of the content they consume is audio only! This means that YouTube is currently losing tons of money streaming tons of videos where people are interested in just the sound which takes up way less bandwidth. This has been happening for at least a few years now, yet YouTube is so slow to evolve and optimize that they have not yet come up with options to choose audio only for their videos at greatly reduced bandwidth! This is ridiculous and shows us that YouTube has become well fed, happy and very lazy. That, again, does not bode well for its longevity.
Finally, YouTube is increasingly being used by creators as a springboard for them to create their own separate channels and networks outside of YouTube with their own subscription models. Many of us know at least one content creator who partially or completely left YouTube in favour of their own media site. In trying to take on legacy media, YouTube has instead created new media outlets that have now come full circle and become, in the stylings of Rick and Morty, the legacy media with extra steps (some would call YouTube that exact thing as well haha). So, instead of channels packaged into a cable TV subscription, we now have this weird new landscape of decentralized cable TV-like channels, each with their own separate subscription. Have your digital media subscriptions been adding up to the point you are paying a lot all over again like you used to with cable TV? Do not blame yourself- blame YouTube for making you feel like it was all going to be "free" and "forever". We should have known that this revolution, like every other, was always destined to come full circle.
Is YouTube something destined from the start to not work long term? Was it always destined to be the tool with which to steal from the legacy rich to give to the new rich (with extra steps)? Or, will this entire years' long social-digital experiment give birth to something long lasting and sustainable? Your guess is as good as mine (if not better). Food for thought.
The first thing to note is that YouTube still does not seem to be profitable or significantly profitable. It has been discussed in the media and other circles that, due to the colossal resources necessary to run a video streaming platform, YouTube is Google's way of fighting competition in the video streaming category, preventing new entrants in this field from gaining traction, and finally it is useful when Alphabet tries to convince investors that they have another powerful and viable ad platform outside of Google ads. Now, what I dislike about this is that it is one of a growing number of businesses that are technically powered by a recycled process of investment, going into debt to gain more traction and market share at a loss, asking for more investment, then doing it all over again. The reason why I dislike this process is because it collapses entirely if you cannot get more money into it, and this is a key feature of a ponzi scheme, which in and of itself is fraud. I am acquainted with people who lost money in ponzi schemes, and it is really sad to say the least.
The second thing to note is that our temporary complacency, laziness and desire for convenience that are YouTube's greatest retention tools. If you want a great is example, there is none greater than the Joe Rogan show, one of the largest podcasts on the planet. I have heard from so many people online and in person that they barely watch it for no other reason except for the fact it is now on Spotify and they do not use it on a regular basis. Sure, they can have the video or audio version of it on Spotify. Sure, they can download the episodes easily so they do not have to waste their data when they listen to it or watch it away from wifi. None of that matters. Many of us became lazy, complacent, or simply uninterested in questioning YouTube's role in our online media consumption. This, totally, sucks. Youtube has become state TV, except the state is the entire planet. The one thing I know about state TV in almost every country is that most people consider it background noise, a necessary evil or something else along those lines. That does not bode well for Youtube's future.
The third thing to note is that we are sort of going back in time when it comes to media formats. Of all the people I know who use YouTube for music, podcasts, news and other content that requires attention to just audio without the video, over half of the content they consume is audio only! This means that YouTube is currently losing tons of money streaming tons of videos where people are interested in just the sound which takes up way less bandwidth. This has been happening for at least a few years now, yet YouTube is so slow to evolve and optimize that they have not yet come up with options to choose audio only for their videos at greatly reduced bandwidth! This is ridiculous and shows us that YouTube has become well fed, happy and very lazy. That, again, does not bode well for its longevity.
Finally, YouTube is increasingly being used by creators as a springboard for them to create their own separate channels and networks outside of YouTube with their own subscription models. Many of us know at least one content creator who partially or completely left YouTube in favour of their own media site. In trying to take on legacy media, YouTube has instead created new media outlets that have now come full circle and become, in the stylings of Rick and Morty, the legacy media with extra steps (some would call YouTube that exact thing as well haha). So, instead of channels packaged into a cable TV subscription, we now have this weird new landscape of decentralized cable TV-like channels, each with their own separate subscription. Have your digital media subscriptions been adding up to the point you are paying a lot all over again like you used to with cable TV? Do not blame yourself- blame YouTube for making you feel like it was all going to be "free" and "forever". We should have known that this revolution, like every other, was always destined to come full circle.
Is YouTube something destined from the start to not work long term? Was it always destined to be the tool with which to steal from the legacy rich to give to the new rich (with extra steps)? Or, will this entire years' long social-digital experiment give birth to something long lasting and sustainable? Your guess is as good as mine (if not better). Food for thought.