Head Censor stepping down.
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
481–490 of 550 posts
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#482That crazy push for 10min and longer videos was a sole reason why tiktok happened. I still remember that there used to be short and super informative videos before but now everything is so stretched out with low info density
God, I wondered why these youtubers can't stop with the super long introductions, walkarounds to tell us something basic that could be explained in 2-3 minutes TOPS.
It has to be long for you to get any ad revenue, I thought?
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. It is a somewhat-less-bad form of even more advertising. If you think paying to avoid some advertising is reasonable, why is paying more to avoid more advertising unreasonable?
It's unreasonable to expect YouTube Premium to filter out content inserted by the video creator when that's not the terms either you or the creator were given. I pay for Nebula and don't see any ads or sponsorships there, but I don't begrudge the sponsorships on regular YouTube. If the sponsorships bug you that much, use sponsorblock.
It's totally reasonable: users would be happier, YouTube can charge more for it (YT Premium+?), and YT analytics can detect when a sponsor segment (which many videos already label, and which are known to be about 60s long) is skipped and pass those metrics on to the content creator so the sponsor isn't being cheated.
Everybody wins. (Yes this doesn't work for heavily integrated sponsorships but it'd still get most of them.)
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#484She is the last exec I expected to step down.
YouTube vastly improved in the recent years. If there's anyone who should step down, it's Sundar. What an uninspiring leader.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#485YouTube for the things I enjoy has improved dramatically because the comment section is vastly improved. Everyone used to use YouTube comments as an example of a comment section dumpster fire, but they fixed it. I've seen the recommendations get better then worse then better again as they tweaked the algorithms. Right now it's better than it's ever been. Again, for me. One complaint: I like to upload interesting clip…
It’s weird. I can’t relate to what you’re saying in the slightest.
Recommendations have gone from bad, to bad, then to bad again, to me.
More and more the comments section strikes me as inauthentic and phony, at least earlier I’d get a chuckle out of some random comment now it’s only cringe.
YouTube under Woncicki has been grossly inadequate when it comes to its sliding rules and random choices to ban things, unban other, changing rules on the fly and in other cases completely selling out both users and advertisers for god only knows whose agenda.
YouTube had a real chance of being the true replacement for TV MSM, now it’s almost the same. The encouraged content is long, useless, and inauthentic, just like normal TV. You can find some interesting stuff from time to time but the opportunity they had was way larger, and they let it go because Woncicki wanted to provide as much and advertiser-friendly environment as possible, which in my opinion is short sighted. Advertising was going to come anyway as MSM is dying a slow death, all YouTube had to do is hold, but they buckled and sold short.
IMO, YouTube is going in the wrong direction on almost all fronts. I only hope that they actually realize that they need to spin it off into a separate company away from Google’s enterprise BS.
Ps to people downvoting: use your words.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would it have a negative impact on either the promoted businesses or the content creators? Promoted businesses currently pay based on (an estimate of) the number of views that the video will get. This would trivially adjust to paying based on the number of views that the sponsorship within the video gets -- that's why I mentioned the requirement to make this available through analytics. If the cost per view stays…
So, you appear to dismiss my concerns completely, demand a feature, and then insist... that hardly anyone will use it? And that because hardly anyone will use it, that means promoters are safe... unless they're not, in which case, they had it coming? A sponsor pays $10,000 to a content creator. And then, they get zero views of their embedded ad in the video. They got literally nothing for their $10,000 investment. An…
Sponsors don't pay a fixed amount to creators. They pay for (estimated) views.
What I'm proposing is exactly, 100% symmetric to how advertisers who pay Google for YouTube ad placement are already treated -- they pay for views, and YouTube can and does choose to not show those ads to some users, those who pay for Premium. Is that unfair for the ad buyers? Sure, if you squint right… but they're not being deprived something they paid for, they're just not being offered the option to put in ads in front of that particular market.
Before Youtube Premium, I would have said the same thing about blocking first-party ads in YouTube. It was weird they didn't do that thing. And then they did it. So now it's not weird I guess?
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#487She is the last exec I expected to step down. YouTube vastly improved in the recent years. If there's anyone who should step down, it's Sundar. What an uninspiring leader.
[deleted]
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#488YouTube for the things I enjoy has improved dramatically because the comment section is vastly improved. Everyone used to use YouTube comments as an example of a comment section dumpster fire, but they fixed it. I've seen the recommendations get better then worse then better again as they tweaked the algorithms. Right now it's better than it's ever been. Again, for me. One complaint: I like to upload interesting clip…
> I've seen the recommendations get better then worse then better again as they tweaked the algorithms. Right now it's better than it's ever been. Again, for me. Teach me your secret to receiving good recos. The bad quality of recos is the total downturner for me. Nothing, absolutely nothing interesting for months. All that's being recommended is totally generic high view stuff, not at all related to my channels or c…
Maybe you’ve got some garbage in your YT history? I’ve found recommendations to get insanely good in the last year. I’ve gotten a ton of channels whose views number Start liking videos more and using the “don’t recommend channel” feature. I went hard on that feature for a day or two and I think it helped.
It might be interesting to start a fresh account and figure out how to game the recommendations for specific types of content. I might do that this weekend.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
If speculating is a waste of time then this sub-thread is spectacularly pointless (and against HN guidelines btw). Think before you post.
Care to elaborate how I violated the HN guidelines?
> Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it.
Re: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki is stepping down
#490YouTube recommendations have always sucked for me. But ever since Shorts was released, I constantly get amazing science channel shorts that are usually bite sized chemistry or physics experiments. I'm really enjoying them. Not sure how they even came to be recommended to me because I was never one to search for them before. Kids have it so good these days.
Maybe they learned from TikTok? What matters most is what people watch from beginning to end, not what people "like and subscribe" to. Short videos are an easier signal for this than 1-20min+ videos.
That is definitely the case.
I guess I was thinking more in terms of how the recommendations just one day populated with cool science content for no obvious reason in a format (shorts) that works so well.