At least, some of the recent controversies.

  • anlumo@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    On YouTube, creators don’t earn anything unless a new video is released frequently. They have to sustain a huge corporation based on that. I think that it’s a bad decision to go for that income structure in the first place, but there they are.

    • QHC@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      They don’t “have” to do anything. LMG chose to hire dozens and then hundreds of people in an effort to grow as fast as possible. Linus could have prioritized accuracy or quality over quantity, but that would have made less money, so he didn’t.

        • QHC@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not entirely sure what you mean. Are you saying we should criticize YouTube for making the algorithm that creators have to cater to, and not LMG for bowing to the demands of that algorithm?

          If so, I agree that YouTube should be criticized, but that doesn’t excuse LMG. Plenty of other channels have chosen not to go all-in on quantity and they have likely suffered financially for that decision. That is exactly what I mean by “priorities”.

    • GhostMagician@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      They chose to financially put themselves in a situation where they are forced to release content at that frequency because they chose to expand operations and drastically increase expenses compared to other channels. It’s their decisions that created the work cycle that is needed in pursuit of exponential growth over a more financially sustainable model that affords the luxury for a less hectic release schedule.

      It’s getting old seeing people keep making they have to do it this way when it is the situation they created for themselves.