YouTube Unveils New Monetization Rules Killing Ad Revenue for Small Creators

Youtube is officially Monetizing its users. This limitation upon users to the disgruntlement of many, are they right to do this, or are they biting the hand that feeds them?

Amid seemingly endless controversies about content on YouTube (including, most recently, a Logan Paul video shot in Japan’s “suicide forest”), Google announced major changes last night to how videos would be monetized on the site. Going forward, the company says big channels included in its coveted Google Preferred program will be manually vetted for ad friendliness. Far more drastically, the video-sharing site is making it a lot harder for small channels to make money off the platform—and uploaders are pissed.

gizmodo.com...

What can be considered “right” in the free market?

Keeping in mind the user is provided a platform (YouTube) to post almost any type of content they wish, with no charge whatsoever.



Seems like a 1st world problem to me.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

There was a thread I posted about it but got removed because it was Mudpit material. The people who posted before you seemed to think it was a very Relevant topic.

When they started censoring selective videos based on what they liked and didn't like, it was the beginning of the end for youtube.

They've simply doubled down- they're probably trying to leverage their content into making themselves their very own news source to "compete" with cnn

im just waiting for the person or company that creates the competitor to youtube that fills this void they have created. whoever has the money has a great opportunity

I can't believe ppl actually pay for youtube red lol...


guess I can expect 100 hints at donating lol...


Sometimes you gotta work two jobs bruh.

I am.

Why is this in the mud pit?

Well this might be an opportunity for some competition to roll in.

Who are You Tubes main competitors?


If any

a reply to: lordcomac

When they started censoring selective videos based on what they liked and didn't like, it was the beginning of the end for youtube.

Slow suicide for youtube, along with slow intentional censorship by the few companies that own everything.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I was instructed to place it here.

originally posted by: TheScale
im just waiting for the person or company that creates the competitor to youtube that fills this void they have created. whoever has the money has a great opportunity

This also opens the door wide to competitors, they're probably drooling over this opportunity to make some serious cash because of youtubes new policy.

a reply to: lordcomac

When they started censoring selective videos based on what they liked and didn't like, it was the beginning of the end for youtube.

Where is the proof that “censorship” was “selective”?
Because it is easily verified that all sorts of content gets removed, for all kinds of reasons.
It’s also easily verifiable that much questionable content doesn’t get removed at all, which given that I’m assuming you’re pushing a “persecuted right wingers” narrative, doesn’t qualify as proof.

And in what context do you say the words “beginning of the end”?
Because as of now, YouTube is richer, bigger, and as popular as ever.

a reply to: BotheLumberJack

If all the small timers took all their videos off of Youtube all that would be left would be endless toy reviews,
stupid pranks and fake shock videos!

Youtube just killed its golden goose!

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: BotheLumberJack

If all the small timers took all their videos off of Youtube all that would be left would be endless toy reviews,
stupid pranks and fake shock videos!

Youtube just killed its golden goose!

They did, this is the beginning of the end. There's a lot of good stuff there still, but for people wanting revenue, they'll be looking elsewhere now.

Most of the small stuff is junk. If you think they represent quality video you have a much different idea of quality than I do. And the revenue generated by people with less than 1000 subscribers isn't worth the effort anyway. And the fact is, advertisers don't want to waste their ads on channels that have few views. When you get above 1,000, well, then, you're starting to show some promise. YouTube has certainly not killed the 'golden goose.' They need to promote people who have 100K subscribers and not waste their time and pennies on those who have two.

a reply to: schuyler

Time will tell. Like someone else said, MySpace use to be a 'thing' now Facebook is 20% larger than it.

youtube-creators.googleblog.com...

Starting today we’re changing the eligibility requirement for monetization to 4,000 hours of watch time within the past 12 months and 1,000 subscribers. We’ve arrived at these new thresholds after thorough analysis and conversations with creators like you. They will allow us to significantly improve our ability to identify creators who contribute positively to the community and help drive more ad revenue to them (and away from bad actors). These higher standards will also help us prevent potentially inappropriate videos from monetizing which can hurt revenue for everyone.

On February 20th, 2018, we’ll also implement this threshold across existing channels on the platform, to allow for a 30 day grace period. On that date, channels with fewer than 1,000 subs or 4,000 watch hours will no longer be able to earn money on YouTube. When they reach 1,000 subs and 4,000 watch hours they will be automatically re-evaluated under strict criteria to ensure they comply with our policies. New channels will need to apply, and their application will be evaluated when they hit these milestones.

a reply to: schuyler

Ebay did the same thing a few years ago, they focused on the big bulk sellers and pushed a lot of the small sellers out. The small sellers were selling unique items, antiques, just different stuff not mass produced.

Those small sellers went to Etsy, some made their own stores, and some even to Amazon.
Now Ebay is filled to the brim with the same ol' junk.

It obviously isn't working out for Ebay and my guess is that it won't work for Youtube either, time will tell

seekingalpha.com...

originally posted by: Willtell
Well this might be an opportunity for some competition to roll in.

Who are You Tubes main competitors?


If any

Vimeo, Dailymotion and twitch.

a reply to: schuyler

This is probably a good thing... Youtube has become ad saturated recently, and I personally avoid it for exactly that reason. Plus, up to 1000 users and 4000 watched hours is probably only making about peanuts anyway (it's about 80 cents for 1000 views). You need more like 1,000,000 views to actually make anything worthwhile.

They probably found that ads on small time users were getting "skipped" anyway (I know I "skip" ads if all I want is to watch a 30 second video), so it makes brand sense and business sense, and takes youtube back to what it was in the past... a place to watch user generated content, not have millions of people post some crap in the greedy hopes of making a few cents.

Sounds like a good opportunity for investment in a non-YouTube site.