Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube monetization analysis

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 168 posts

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#121

Post by kakarot »

krapp wrote: post #90
kakarot wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe the set of people willing to adopt a FOSS distributed peer-to-peer video streaming platform and the set of people who believe advertising to be tolerable would likely overlap enough to provide a better or more stable market than the existing web already provides. > And advertising on the web is already breaking down and likely doomed to fail as a concept. How did you reach these two conclusions?

From observing the hostility towards advertising on the web grow and become mainstream through the adoption of ad blockers, and ad-driven sites (like Youtube) seeming more and more desperate to actually find profitability through advertising. It seems to me that we're approaching a watershed where advertising on the web just stops being effective. And at least, on the web, sites can enforce some degree of control ove…

I use ad-blockers to prevent arbitrary parties from running arbitrary code on my computer. Not because I detest seeing a 5-10 second ad every 20-60m worth of videos or seeing a small text block or banner ad or sponsor list off to the side.

People use adblockers not only to block unauthorized code but because advertising has become an avenue for fingerprinting and tracking, and thus, longterm, a tool of socioeconomic oppression. People are also fed up with ridiculous loading times and payload size.

I have no problem with the way certain hosts choose to conduct advertising on their websites and I try not to block advertising on their websites.

There will be stability one day in the form of a truce between advertisers and end users, where lightweight, self-hosted static content that isn't fetched remotely clientside or laden with scripts will find a way to make money in the general market again.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#122

Post by mintplant »

mitchty wrote: post #106
wybiral wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm more inclined to think that the algorithms are just a bit naive at this point. Surely some advertisers out there do want to target that market. The notice on my videos is: Limited or no ads due to content identified as not suitable for most advertisers [1]. Your video remains fully playable and is eligible to earn subscription revenue from YouTube Red. [1] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en

Sure, just curious that the videos would be monetized after the first few days. From what I've heard the first few days of a video basically makes/breaks a lot of videos as far as monetization goes.

My guess is at this early stage of deployment, videos flagged by the algorithm to be demonetized (or a sample thereof) are automatically put into some manual review queue, for training and validation, which takes a few days to process through the volume.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#123

Post by sdsdsdsdsds »

j_s wrote: post #117
sdsdsdsdsds wrote: post #116

>>We used youtube’s official “DATA API v3” to get the top 25 related videos for 100k videos. We then scraped the related videos for information relating to monetisation status, views, etc. The corpus containing information of the scraped videos were then analysed in detail. Anyone knows any such list readily available? I have been wanting to Scrape 100k video URL videos for my own content classification. Any suggesti…

Have you considered the Internet Archive? Anyone where to get started with content classification would do well to consider Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn and TensorFlow: Concepts, Tools, and Techniques to Build Intelligent Systems written by the former head of video classification at YouTube ( https://amzn.com/B06XNKV5TS ). source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15772174

I brought the book for Black Friday. Its on my december readling list. I will look through internet archive. Thanks!

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#124

Post by nathcd »

kakarot wrote: post #120
nathcd wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, it's one thing for serial content like a podcast or talk show, it's another for more artistic endeavors where it would lesson the artistic credibility to have an ad ingrained into the video. > It's also not a suitable format for those who create many small 1-5m videos. I don't think having platform-handled dynamic ads (ie YouTube) differs from these dynamics in any meaningful way. The difference that matters i…

> This is a feature (of content-targeted advertising), not a bug. If a business model relies on tracking and targeting unknowing users who aren't aware that they can resist being tracked and targeted, maybe it was a crappy business model in the first place. This is a false dichotomy. There exists a large, partly unexplored space between hard embedded pre-recorded ads and targeted advertising that makes use of trackin…

Hmmm, that's a possibility I haven't considered. I suppose because I'm having trouble imagining what that in-between space looks like.

If an ad is targeted at a user, doesn't that necessarily mean they were tracked to some degree (i.e. some data is known about them, and an ad is being shown to them based on whatever that known data is)? Conversely, if nothing is known about the user (they haven't been tracked at all), how can an ad be targeted at them (besides knowing they are viewing a webpage on a certain topic, but then we're back at being content-targeted)?

The only possibility I can think of that's somewhat in-between, is a site tracking a user across their own site (first-party only), and targeting ads based on that collected data, rather than contracting that out to Google who can follow you across many sites. Is this what you have in mind? Other than this, I'm having trouble thinking of possibilities that exist between content-targeted and user-targeted via tracking. It's interesting to consider though.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#125

Post by philipov »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #102
alva wrote: post #52

I am almost certain another factor is clickthrough from "undesirable" referral links. ReviewBrah [0] (The Report of The Week) is the most family friendly channel with high subscribers that I can think of. He reviews fast food and has a unique fashion style and personality. Very clean. He has become a popular meme and is regularly linked to from 4chan. I struggle to find a single thing that could warrant demonetisatio…

I think you're over-generalizing from one example. I follow a few differnt channels that are totally harmless and boring, and they all complain about demonitization. It seems like the algorithm just defaults strongly towards demonitization. Maybe it will learn and get better, but at the moment lots of things are getting demonitized.

To me, it sounds like what's really happening is that the amount of content has vastly outstripped the amount of available, ahem, monetization.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#126

Post by siruncledrew »

wybiral wrote: post #22
RyanShook wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, Youtube demonetizes based on metadata. So any tags/descriptions with keywords that YT views as “controversial” the system will demonetize regardless of actual content in the video.

I uploaded a video yesterday that's already demonetized. It's part of a series to write an RSS feed reader in Python (specifically the part about adding static files to the server). Tags: python, rss, feedparser, feed reader, news aggregator, flask, css, static files It doesn't seem "controversial" to me.

With "flask", "python", and "feed" the NLP is assuming you are some kind of alcoholic snake wrangler?

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#127

Post by wybiral »

nana_gb wrote: post #112
wybiral wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I uploaded a video yesterday that's already demonetized. It's part of a series to write an RSS feed reader in Python (specifically the part about adding static files to the server). Tags: python, rss, feedparser, feed reader, news aggregator, flask, css, static files It doesn't seem "controversial" to me.

I'm 99.9% sure it's nothing to do with your tags and everything to do with some sort of speech to text analysis google is doing on your video. In my case, I have a demonitized tutorial video on how to download and upgrade my software. I was a bit surprised since it was a basic boring screen share video. Nothing controversial either, until I looked at the auto generated close captioning. I said "Prosper202" but Google…

That's a good point. I've seen my captioning be WAY off from what I actually said.

But when I request a manual review the videos do seem to get monetized again within a few days... Even with less than 1000 views.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#128

Post by nym »

mitchty wrote: post #93
wybiral wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Maybe YouTube needs to adjust their algorithm for that category or something.

I'd bet this behavior is their algorithm "working as intended". Aka, advertisers saying they don't want to waste ad spend on worthless programming videos. So they get demonetized for the first few days to reduce the impact of any ad spend on the times that would be most likely to get views, then turn it on so the drip of ad spend can treat the videos like problem children.

Udemy does a lot of advertising.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#129

Post by r3bl »

supermdguy wrote: post #110

Wow, this file is really popular! Some tools might be unavailable until the crowd clears. Even Google Docs is susceptible to the hacker news effect.

That is mostly a Google thing. I've seen small subreddits activating the same thing in Google Drive. I would say that the threshold might be as small as 1000 people trying to access it.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#130

Post by moduspol »

eref wrote: post #3

I think it is right to „soft“-censor in this way (i.e. the information is accessible but not promoted). Reality without sorting and filters would be inhuman because market incentives to grab people’s attention would maximally exploit our tribal instincts and thereby completely destabilize our societies. This is already happening and it needs to stop immediately.

Agreed. I mean, Russia already verifiably tried to influence the 2016 election, right?

Maybe the algorithm can be adjusted to not promote content that aligns with Russian interests. That way we can ensure people are only seeing the perspectives we want them to.

Post reply on HN