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

YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

marker.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 249 posts

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#141

Post by darkwizard42 »

mrtksn wrote: post #63
sokoloff wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don’t want to funnel money to a landlord, buy a property. I did and now funnel even more money to my mortgage company and have to handle and pay for repairs, but none to a landlord. It’s almost like having desirable housing is something that a lot of people are willing to spend money on.

Almost as if there are two kind of people out there: those with fully paid housing those who have to pay. In most places being the one or the other creates class changing lifestyle difference under the same employment.

This doesn't even make any sense. Everyone has to pay for their housing... you either opt into two different schemes, own it or rent it and both come with upsides and downsides.

It is up to the person to decide which works for them and in the means that works for them. You can go to many cities where it makes outright more sense to just rent (and maybe more prudent to do so while you don't have a steady stream of income from streaming yet).

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#142

Post by Kalium »

williamdclt wrote: post #46
Philip-J-Fry wrote: post #25

Why should these creators deserve to be paid more? Making money on YouTube and Patreon is a privilege not a right. Yes the big creators make a lot of money, but that's because a lot of users are watching them. If someone is trying to make a career out of YouTube while only making $10,000 a year then the only problem is the person trying to make a career out of that. Making $10,000 on YouTube at all puts you well far…

> For decades actors, musicians and artists have put up with this Well, it's not that simple is it. For decades actors, musicians and artists have been complaining that they have to live in misery to pursue their art and fighting for better conditions, it's not like they've always been OK with the status quo. It's a more general question: should art be subject to the market laws, or should society subsidize art produ…

Who would be in charge of choosing which artists and which art gets subsidized by society? How do we decide when we've subsidized artists enough and should move on to all the other things society might want to do?

I'm not being flippant. This is a serious question that needs to be addressed in any would-be public art program. Sooner or later you run into limits.

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#143

Post by darkwizard42 »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #115

That's because the rent is too damn high.

Then why don't the creators move? This is a job that can be done from anywhere (with maybe decent internet access) but that opens up so many lower COL areas in the US and honestly world fitting that bill.

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#144

Post by Kalium »

meheleventyone wrote: post #38
marcus_holmes wrote: post #12

99% of creatives have never been able to pay their rent by selling what they make. It's not even about how good they are - some people produce amazing stuff but it's not something that enough other people want to own (or listen to, or watch, or whatever). The lucky few whose creative spark happens to coincide with market demand get to do that all day long. For the rest of us, it's a day job to pay the rent (which mig…

> It's not even about how good they are - some people produce amazing stuff but it's not something that enough other people want to own (or listen to, or watch, or whatever). This isn't even the problem. It's that to be successful you need to be more than good at your job you need to be great at doing a few other jobs as well. Namely running a business and marketing. And lucky in catching the break the propels you up…

> This isn't even the problem. It's that to be successful you need to be more than good at your job you need to be great at doing a few other jobs as well. Namely running a business and marketing. And lucky in catching the break the propels you upwards.

This sounds like a great description of art as a profession for roughly the past five to seven centuries. It sounds like really very little has changed, except perhaps more people having a chance to compete.

Could a central coordinator devote greater resources to a more diverse set of content? It is, as you say, absolutely possible. Though there are perhaps a few questions to be asked about why such a central coordinating force would make better choices, and if the artists would rather give up their choices to work on what the coordinator has blessed would agree this is better.

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#146

Post by marcus_holmes »

meheleventyone wrote: post #38
marcus_holmes wrote: post #12

99% of creatives have never been able to pay their rent by selling what they make. It's not even about how good they are - some people produce amazing stuff but it's not something that enough other people want to own (or listen to, or watch, or whatever). The lucky few whose creative spark happens to coincide with market demand get to do that all day long. For the rest of us, it's a day job to pay the rent (which mig…

> It's not even about how good they are - some people produce amazing stuff but it's not something that enough other people want to own (or listen to, or watch, or whatever). This isn't even the problem. It's that to be successful you need to be more than good at your job you need to be great at doing a few other jobs as well. Namely running a business and marketing. And lucky in catching the break the propels you up…

I agree completely, but I wanted to draw a distinction between "the lucky few" who naturally make what people want to buy, and those who treat it as a job (and are excellent at marketing, business, etc).

The idea that to be a successful creator you just need to be good at whatever creative activity it is, is pernicious and wrong.

To be a successful creator you need to be either incredibly lucky, or actually a successful business founder whose business model happens to include creating stuff.

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#147

Post by alistairSH »

"Minor League Baseball still not paying rent for most baseball players"

"Playing Fridays at the local pub still not paying rent for most guitar players"

Etc.

Entertainment of all varieties is all "winner take all" occupation - the best make big money, and everybody else makes do with table scraps.

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#148

Post by Strom »

devoutsalsa wrote: post #68
dec0dedab0de wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're not getting paid enough they should stop doing it. If enough of them stop doing it, then the rest will start to get paid more.

In general I agree with your statement. But the grim reality is that good jobs are hard to get. It’s not always possible to find better opportunity. And you may not have the resources necessary to find something better (e.g. I can’t afford to go in a better job opportunity‘a interview, because I can’t get time off my current job, and I need this job to survive. About 10 years ago I was living in San Francisco on less…

This is such a bizarre take. You're living in San Francisco, one of the most prestigious cities in the world, and yet you're describing your situation as if you're living in Sangvor, Tajikistan.

No one in San Francisco is stuck. [1] By skipping a few of those movie tickets and buying months in advance you could get a plane ticket out of there. In plenty of places in the US there isn't even an airport, not to mention outside the US.

> I couldn’t cook much, as I didn’t have a kitchen.

You don't need a kitchen. You can just have an electric stove in your bedroom. [2]

You're right in saying that you were super lucky. Lucky to live in San Francisco.

--

[1] Except for the mentally ill and people with other similarly valid severe disabilities.

[2] https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/07/19/us/0722-hkecon-pr...

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#149

Post by s0rce »

PurpleFoxy wrote: post #80
woutr_be wrote: post #43

Am I wrong to think about “creators” as just businesses? If you’re not making enough money through your business, then maybe you need to reconsider your business plan. You know what you get on Youtube, you don’t have a contract saying how much you’ll be making from creating content for them. Maybe I lack empathy here, but it seems most people saw this as an easy money maker, but were wrong.

The problem is you are thinking about making money as the goal and content creation as the method. Most of these people are thinking about content creation as the goal and making money and an unfortunate side requirement.

It seems like a universal basic income would address this "unfortunate side requirement" better than somehow making all youtubers get paid enough to make rent. This would let people take the risk of doing content creation, either they get lucky and make a lot of money or they can indefinitely subsist on UBI. In the end society wins (in my opinion) by getting lots of people doing stuff they are interested in.

Re: YouTube and Patreon Still Aren’t Paying the Rent for Most Creatives

#150

Post by dec0dedab0de »

devoutsalsa wrote: post #68
dec0dedab0de wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're not getting paid enough they should stop doing it. If enough of them stop doing it, then the rest will start to get paid more.

In general I agree with your statement. But the grim reality is that good jobs are hard to get. It’s not always possible to find better opportunity. And you may not have the resources necessary to find something better (e.g. I can’t afford to go in a better job opportunity‘a interview, because I can’t get time off my current job, and I need this job to survive. About 10 years ago I was living in San Francisco on less…

sure, but these are not jobs, they are things anyone can do, and might get paid for. If they got rid of the payments all together, people would still do it for free.
Post reply on HN