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

191–200 of 325 posts

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

#191

Post by dogma1138 »

xte wrote: post #184
dogma1138 wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im pretty sure that we can easily define metrics to measure that and we had. This cult of relativism really needs to stop.

The modern "need" (mania) of defining metrics have a deep root not in knowledge but in ignorance. Smart people can reason autonomously like Galilean scientific models, ignorant can only follow Aristotelian model. That's also the reason today we have substantial ZERO innovations and capacity to produce new things.

I think you have a poor understanding of what metrics mean, and in case it’s pretty ironic since Galileo essentially defined the modern scientific method of observation, experimentation, and mathematization which birthed quantitative assessment.

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

#192

Post by freeflight »

manmal wrote: post #78
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…

Pewdiepie definitely diverges strongly from Felix‘ IRL persona. Pewdiepie is an outgoing personality with misogynistic tendencies, playing with racial slurs every now and then, appealing to his Reddit/4chanish/incel followers (whom he now calls army of 9 year olds). IRL he seems to be awkward around other people, soft (nice), and obviously a bit depressed.

How would you know any of that without actually knowing him IRL for the contrast?

Afaik your IRL description is one he gave about himself, where he also explained that he initially used YouTube to get past his "awkward around other people" issue.

In that context, I find it hard to believe that people could consistently play a "fake-persona" without that ever influencing their normal mannerisms, particularly when they have to summon this "fake-persona" on a near-daily basis.

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

#193

Post by zimpenfish »

rorykoehler wrote: post #102
rapnie wrote: post #99

It may not be all that much fun and games.. Half a year ago I saw a documentary (can't remember which), where a number of popular YouTube vloggers were followed to see what being an influencer entails. While each of them were enjoying the good stuff - the money earned, the free gadgets and trips, etc. - in general each of them also felt trapped. To me it seemed like hell to live a life like this. Huge social pressure…

With $22m in the bank he could give it all up at a drop of a hat, put it all into passive investments and live the life of a king off the proceeds.

Bear in mind that was $22M just for the last year - he made $11M in 2017 as well. Probably made a few $M in 2016 too.

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

#194

Post by xte »

dogma1138 wrote: post #191
xte wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The modern "need" (mania) of defining metrics have a deep root not in knowledge but in ignorance. Smart people can reason autonomously like Galilean scientific models, ignorant can only follow Aristotelian model. That's also the reason today we have substantial ZERO innovations and capacity to produce new things.

I think you have a poor understanding of what metrics mean, and in case it’s pretty ironic since Galileo essentially defined the modern scientific method of observation, experimentation, and mathematization which birthed quantitative assessment.

I think not. I think I have a clear understating on how we trade Science for neoaristotelism because someone want brainless, managerial-driven, commercial-servant research instead of Science and culture.

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

#195

Post by buboard »

suddenstutter wrote: post #163
buboard wrote: post #132

There really needs to be some regulation or at least self-regulation for this kind of stuff. This child should remain the exception (this is technically child labor), and advertising to kids on youtube should catch up with TV standards. And i don't think this kind of publicity is doing any good to other children. Perhaps a startup that helps parents deal with this kind of stuff easier?

oh my god. Please don't bring the government into this.

the government is already the protector of google's business

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

#196

Post by dogma1138 »

xte wrote: post #187
salvar wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent, what are the metrics then? What makes a "how to do your nails" tutorial brainless stupidity?

Perhaps my poor English make hard for me to clearly express concepts, sorry. How to do your nails it's simply far less valuable than how a banks or a car work in knowledge terms, however on YT&c it get far more financial reward than a video on banking systems, mechanics etc. Home that's more clear.

I don’t think it’s has less value on a case by case basis, but this is also not relevant.

There is a big difference between education/enrichment and entertainment and while some content creators might walk the line between them there is a pretty big split.

I would say pre-defining what is “valuable” is probably not the best approach because it too prone to selection bias, an instruction video on how to do nails to a beautician is far more useful than a video explaining correspondenant banking systems.

That said the content as a whole can be measured in terms of its impact on cognitive and emotional state and well being especially on large sample sizes.

We already know that social media voyeurism causes a lot emotional distress, we know that certain types of content can make you “dumber” at least in the short term.

And on a larger scale we can check the social and individual benefits for specific cases, e.g. how many individuals who watched a specific subeset of content turned their life to the better in say a period of 5 years.

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

#197

Post by dogma1138 »

xte wrote: post #194
dogma1138 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a poor understanding of what metrics mean, and in case it’s pretty ironic since Galileo essentially defined the modern scientific method of observation, experimentation, and mathematization which birthed quantitative assessment.

I think not. I think I have a clear understating on how we trade Science for neoaristotelism because someone want brainless, managerial-driven, commercial-servant research instead of Science and culture.

You are really barking up the wrong tree, I think you took a wrong turn on your way to the rally comrade.

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

#198

Post by random878 »

Could anyone point me toward a more comprehensive analysis of incomes from YouTube?

Specifically, I'd like to get an idea about the distribution of income across active monetised accounts. This would be far more interesting to me than looking at some - I'm guessing - statistical outliers.

What does a average channel, with modest viewers, with niche content, earn for the producer?

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

#199

Post by xte »

krelian wrote: post #185
xte wrote: post #172

A small point: did anybody notice how this reward mechanism prize the "idiocy" far more than the "knowledge"? I mean most followed YT channels, most upvotes on FB etc are about "brainless things", "brainless contents" vs valuable technical or cultural contents. An YT channel about "just for laugh" or "sport" or "how to decorate nails" have FAR more subscribers and viewers than a tech, historic, physics, ... DIY chann…

Like you say, it's natural, just like in the past(?) when stupid reality shows and drama was gathering all the ratings. And I'll be honest (I'm not sure I'm one of many who feel this way), when you see guys like the Paul brothers in this list I can't help but think that the bad guys won.

Well it's natural in the sense that "mother or idiots is always pregnant" (ancient Italian proverb), but that's also not a thing we should prize.

I mean, in my poor English, that it's normal we have a bigger audience for a video of people doing parkour that for a video about Bayesian's filter but we must develop a way to prize more the latter than the former.

In physical world we have something like a doctor, lawyer, ... get paid more than a clown, so they can afford a better life, get prize by the society, inspire other's to take their path etc. Clowns have their role of course, we also need them, only they receive a proper reward.

We start to invert this trend with professional sportsmen's, movie/entertainment industry and now with social platform we bring that trend to the sky.

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

#200

Post by 666lumberjack »

random878 wrote: post #198

Could anyone point me toward a more comprehensive analysis of incomes from YouTube? Specifically, I'd like to get an idea about the distribution of income across active monetised accounts. This would be far more interesting to me than looking at some - I'm guessing - statistical outliers. What does a average channel, with modest viewers, with niche content, earn for the producer?

Not sure if it's exactly what you're after, but I know of this[0] video from CGPGrey talking about adsense specifically. There's also this[1] video breaking down the income sources for Linus Tech Tips and related channels, although they probably don't qualify as 'modest views'? This[2] is talking about twitch streamers rather than youtube channels, but it's quite an interesting breakdown too.

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW0eUrUiyxo [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t73wXF8IF-8 [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m5P_n5njCQ

Post reply on HN