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

YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 325 posts

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#81

Post by TaylorAlexander »

wbillingsley wrote: post #74
lazyjones wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not shocked they are making $20M or so. I'm slightly shocked that the money comes from advertisers interested in influencing 6-7 year old kids.

Then again, thinking about the kids' tv shows that only really existed to sell the toys (eg, Transformers) it's not that surprising.

Not surprising, but I find the practice disturbing. I imagine it's hard for busy parents to police the commercials the children sees, and much of the marketing to children likely occurs in this unwanted but hard to avoid space. The end result is corporations trying to train children that the best way to live and enjoy one's self is if they buy a steady stream plastic goods made overseas, eventually to be discarded in landfills.

One could imagine a world where advertising to children is no longer considered appropriate, with the understanding that the young minds of the world should not be manipulated by corporate interests.

Or those who want that kind of environment need to find a new way to fund media.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#82

Post by freyir »

Rjevski wrote: post #70
diminish wrote: post #64

My 6 y.o. lives in a youtube universe. Every content he creates, he makes a video and publishes on youtube. Making slimes, building stamps, building paper train wagons, visiting places, and of course unpacking toys and stuff. He always concludes video or other stories like `pls press the Like button, and subscribe to my channel in order not to miss a thing`. When I talk too much he says 'papa skip ad', with a tap ges…

You should explain to him that whatever you publish on the Internet is forever and whether he'd like someone in his adult life to be able to find that content.

Why should anybody be embarrassed about playing with toys or making stamps as a child?

It's the stupid stuff they'll do in high school and college they should be worried about.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#83

Post by PavlovsCat »

joering2 wrote: post #23

Who is watching these videos? Youtube TOS states you have to be at least 13 years old to use their site. If I were to see my 13 (or older) children watching a 7 year old unwrapping toys, I think I would go to the psychiatrist just to check them out. Unless of course YouTube allows for their own TOS to be violated and they have a right to do so in the spirit of greed; their pockets are clearly filled up by children cl…

> If I were to see my 13 (or older) children watching a 7 year old unwrapping toys, I think I would go to the psychiatrist just to check them out.

Oh, 13 years is nothing... watching is nothing.... if I ever meet an adult who makes videos aimed at kids, where they're either saying nothing, or infantilizing themselves as extremely as possible, I have so many questions to ask them, and already one answer I reject beforehand, and that's "money through advertisements shown to small children".

Speaking of that, we'll never know how many million dollars YouTube made (or god forbid is still making) on ads on ElsaGate-type videos. It's not like that would be hard to find out for them in one week, and it's not like it couldn't be argued to be a sound investment in PR to donate some or all of that ill-gotten money to charities that help with child abuse or trauma. But I guess it's even better PR-wise to just change the subject and never bring it up again, as they kinda did last year.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#85

Post by noonespecial »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #81
wbillingsley wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then again, thinking about the kids' tv shows that only really existed to sell the toys (eg, Transformers) it's not that surprising.

Not surprising, but I find the practice disturbing. I imagine it's hard for busy parents to police the commercials the children sees, and much of the marketing to children likely occurs in this unwanted but hard to avoid space. The end result is corporations trying to train children that the best way to live and enjoy one's self is if they buy a steady stream plastic goods made overseas, eventually to be discarded in…

>a steady stream plastic goods made overseas, eventually to be discarded in landfills.

I don't know what ads your kids are getting but with the possible exception of the "Wish App" ads (which I fervently wish would die a fiery death at the very heart of the sun), most of the ads pitched to my kids are hawking digital ephemera of some sort or another.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#86

Post by ALittleLight »

budadre75 wrote: post #80

I feel sad about my life working so hard and will never able to even compete with this kid.

On the flip side there are probably peasants in rural East Asia who labor in extremely challenging conditions and make a fraction of what you do. If they understood that your job was to (probably) sit in an air conditioned room tapping keys and talking to people for a few hours a day for significant wealth they might feel what you feel.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#87

Post by kartan »

TravHatesMe wrote: post #16

What I find interesting is that many of these youtubers have created personas to appeal to their audience, like true entertainers. However loyal viewers are fooled into this false sense of reality, where they are friends with content creator and this is not a persona at all, he's my friend. Over time, the content creator and the audience share so many moments together, it becomes an emotional bond and a substitute fo…

> If the content creator chooses to optimize the money-making persona, it eventually leads to sensationalized content to generate the maximum possible number of views.

In the past brand prestige protected the media from this to happen. A backslash on a TV will make all advertisers to flee.

YouTube does not suffer from this. They host radical, xenophobic, and misogynistic content without consequences. Because they label themselves as a tech company, a middleman that has no responsibility on their own content. But are they? Meanwhile we buy what YouTube advertisements show they have no reason to stop.

When you optimize society to generate money instead of generate value you get to this weird situation.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#88

Post by brennebeck »

lazyjones wrote: post #69
zanek wrote: post #29

My 7 year old son watches Dude Perfect on YouTube, which I had never heard of. Apparently its all the rage, in elementary schools and he heard about it via other kids. I watched a few to make sure they were ok, but they mostly came off as older guys doing elaborate stunts that kids would do on a much smaller scale (like throwing balls off tall buildings, fat suits on cars, etc ) I'm not shocked they are making $20M o…

> I'm not shocked they are making $20M or so. I'm slightly shocked that the money comes from advertisers interested in influencing 6-7 year old kids.

What do you think is more effective: an ad saying my child will like this toy or my child asking me for that toy? I think it all boils down to that, basically.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#89

Post by godot »

briga wrote: post #62
preommr wrote: post #52

There are so many things wrong with youtube such as accountability, standards and advertising value. These problems get even weirder when kids are involved. Obviously the reason this kid is making 22m is because other kids are watching. Which isn't bad. This kid basically won the lottery and good for him. But then you have things like elsagate which is/was (idk if it's over) so weird. I still don't know what the hell…

Well ten years ago kids were mindlessly watching cartoons on TV, which probably had just as much advetisement. The main difference with YouTube, I figure, is that the money is mainly going to content creators rather than TV executives. On the other hand, the recommended video feed is something akin to heroin for the brain, so giving kids unbridled access to YouTube is probably not the best parenting strategy

The main difference is not just the money going to content creators. Like preommr said, the real main difference is all the creepy stuff that's on Youtube that you don't normally see as an adult on your YT account recommended videos/related videos, but that kids see because things are targeted at them. There's some real creepy scary stuff out there. TV back in the days, even if kids watch them obsessively, at least don't have "dangerous" stuff like that. They were curated by reasonable people working at the networks, not algorithms.

I will never give my kid unbridled access to YT. When she's old enough to watch videos, I would consider downloading specific content from YT filtered by myself, for offline viewing.

Re: YouTube top earners: A seven-year-old making $22M

#90

Post by kartan »

mikeortman wrote: post #54
buzzy_hacker wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Over time, the content creator and the audience share so many moments together, it becomes an emotional bond and a substitute for people's social needs. I've wondered about this for podcasts too. I noticed a scary habit where I would play podcasts when I was feeling lonely. Over time, you feel like you're pals with the hosts and something about the audio format checks the social needs box in your brain, thinking th…

There is a good reason why the Kardashians are incredibly successful. They are able to convince their viewers they are part of the family with their shows. I think its because you feel included since most of the show is back-and-forth gossip on family issues where its common for the people in the scene to try and find a solution to a problem where the problem person is excluded from the conversation. As a result, I t…

> I think its because you feel included since most of the show is back-and-forth gossip on family issues where its common for the people in the scene to try and find a solution to a problem where the problem person is excluded from the conversation.

Yes. I see this kind of shows as social pornography. But meanwhile pornography is seen as something that you see in private and you are kind of ashamed to recognize that you see it publicly. This social pornography is widely accepted and even children watch it with, usually, their mothers.

Society needs to create a taboo about this kind of shows. It maybe OK to watch them on your own if you need it. But not to include children and not to make it the center of your life.

Post reply on HN