@telecomsense: Subsidizing the Platform Giants, Part 1: What If YouTube Paid for Content?

[This is an important post from Jonathan Lee (@telecomsense) that fills in some of the available data on just how much of YouTube is music and infers what that means for royalties.]

YouTube Is Primarily a Music Service

Given recent headlines criticizing YouTube’s algorithms for promoting home movies of pre-teens to pedophiles, violent videos to young children, as well as political extremism/bullying, you might have the idea that a lot of people watch these videos; they don’t. As this fascinating post–describing documents that surfaced in Viacom’s copyright suit against Google–explains, YouTube became popular not because of homemade videos, but because it embraced piracy.

The model of other people’s copyrighted videos driving user traffic remains the secret of YouTube’s success. Social media monitoring firm Pex recently calculated that less than 1% of YouTube’s videos–0.64%–were responsible for over 80% of video views. The majority of these videos are music videos.

Read the post on TelecomSense

@loudmouthjulia: Creators finally know how much money YouTube makes, and they want more of it

[Editor Charlie sez:  Hey Susan, do you like apples?]

Alphabet CFO Ruth Porat told investors during an earnings call on Monday afternoon that YouTube pays out a majority of that advertising revenue to its creators. Although Porat wouldn’t say how much of the $15 billion goes to its content makers, she did specify those payouts belong to YouTube’s “content acquisition” costs, which run around $8.5 billion.

For people trying to make their living on YouTube, many feel like they don’t see nearly enough of that $8.5 billion. Top creators tend to earn the most ad revenue via higher rates — as long as their content is advertiser-friendly — because they generate a large number of views. Other advertising revenue then trickles down to the thousands upon thousands of creators who belong to YouTube’s Partner Program.

Many personalities have said they feel like they have to fight for advertising revenue, turning to subscription services like Patreon and signing brand deals since ad revenue isn’t reliable. Now, in the wake of major changes to YouTube’s advertising policies when it comes to content aimed at children (which may include popular video genres like gaming), advertising revenue looks even more fraught.

YouTube has long enticed creators to work on its platform with advertising revenue, but most creators didn’t know how much YouTube was making. Now they do — and, as one YouTube employee told The Verge, this feels like “a real seminal moment.”

Read the post on The Verge

@tanyabasu: YouTube’s algorithm seems to be funneling people to alt-right videos

161102113717-susan-wojcicki-youtube-ceo-1280x720-1

A new study suggests what we’ve suspected for years is right: YouTube is a pipeline for extremism and hate.

How do we know that? More than 330,000 videos on nearly 350 YouTube channels were analyzed and manually classified according to a system designed by the Anti-Defamation League. They were labeled as either media (or what we think of as factual news), “alt-lite” intellectual dark web, or alt-right.

Read the post on MIT Technology Review

Michael H. Keller: The Flourishing Business of Fake YouTube Views

Martin Vassilev makes a good living selling fake views on YouTube videos. Working from home in Ottawa, he has sold about 15 million views so far this year, putting him on track to bring in more than $200,000, records show.

Mr. Vassilev, 32, does not provide the views himself. His website, 500Views.com, connects customers with services that offer views, likes and dislikes generated by computers, not humans. When a supplier cannot fulfill an order, Mr. Vassilev — like a modern switchboard operator — quickly connects with another.

“I can deliver an unlimited amount of views to a video,” Mr. Vassilev said in an interview. “They’ve tried to stop it for so many years, but they can’t stop it. There’s always a way around.”

After Google, more people search on YouTube than on any other site. It is the most popular platform among teenagers, according to a 2018 study by the Pew Research Center, beating out giants like Facebook and Instagram. With billions of views a day, the video site helps spur global cultural sensations, spawn careers, sell brands and promote political agendas.

Read the post on the New York Times

@claireatki: Google’s ‘Hate’ Video Crisis Could Become a $1 Billion Problem

This week, Brian Wieser of Pivotal Research was the first analyst to downgrade Google because of the dustup.

It began last week when marketing giant Havas pulled all of its ads from Google’s YouTube UK site following a report from the Times of London that British government ads had been placed alongside videos from white supremacist David Duke and anti-Semitic pastor Steve Anderson.

Wieser told The Post on Wednesday that the impact will be felt by Google, which instead of discussing how to take away TV ad dollars in upcoming ad negotiations will now be mired in “brand safety issues.”

“The marginal increase [in ad dollars] is less likely to occur,” Wieser said.

He said the impact on Google was likely to be around 1 percent of its revenue base, or $1 billion.

“Google’s stated solution was late and woeful,” Wieser said. “Given numerous opportunities to nip it in the bud, they’ve seemingly made it worse.”

Read the post on The New York Post

@tpoletti: Google’s YouTube ad controversy should scare investors

When is an “ad credit” actually a refund?  As Chris wrote on MusicTech.Solutions, Google advertisers should be entitled to refunds stretching back years for Google’s failure to live up to its promises to protect advertisers from their ads appearing in terror videos.

Many Wall Street analysts are trying to play down the continuing advertising controversy at Google’s YouTube, but Alphabet Inc. investors are likely jittery — and should be.

Last week, Google updated its ad policies and expanded safeguards for advertisersafter some pulled advertising from YouTube because the video streaming site was displaying ads next  to inappropriate content that espoused hate or even terrorism. Google said in a blog post that it has put in place more controls for advertisers, and it is also taking a tougher stance on hateful, offensive and derogatory content….

The bigger fear for investors is that an advertiser backlash could spread from YouTube to Google’s overall search business, or cast a pall over YouTube’s planned “skinny bundle” service. Since the story broke, Alphabet shares have fallen nearly 4%.

Google’s efforts to handle the situation are getting mixed reviews from investors who see cause for concern.

“Their public statements do not suggest to us that the company appreciates the degree to which advertisers are concerned and the continuing announcements of advertisers suspending their activity on Google properties reinforces our view,” Pivotal analyst Wieser wrote.

Trip Chowdhry, an analyst with Global Equities Research, predicted that Google will need to give out ad credits to lure back advertisers, which would also impact YouTube revenue.

Read the post on MarketWatch

@thetrichordist: Timely Reprint: Do You Want Your Music Alongside Hate Rock Songs? Artist Face YouTube Music Dilemma

In light of the Google/YouTube boycott by brands whose ads have appeared next to hate speech. We thought we’d reprint this piece from November 2014!! Forget exploitative pay from Spotify! Do you want your music on YouTube Music? Will you be alongside Hate rock songs? Jihadi Recruitment Music Videos? Probably. YouTube is full of this […]

via Timely Reprint: Do You Want Your Music Alongside Hate Rock Songs? Artist Face YouTube Music Dilemma — The Trichordist