Your popularity is fickle, highly determined by your actions and how people perceive them. In social media, specifically YouTube, this is especially applicable for creators whose channel's are highly personal. Channels that nurture relationships with their audience, using feedback and engagements to direct content. Channels that are considered "audience first" and "sponsorship second" are especially volatile to public perception.
Why is this so? Generally speaking, the audience is self-aware, they know they are in a position of power, they know that they ultimately decide who lives and who dies on YouTube, so when they see something they deem to be morally or ethically incorrect they won't hesitate to pull the trigger.
What dictates whats morally and ethically correct within the realms of YouTube? I have no idea, to be honest, DramaAlert is a testament to the ambiguity of those concepts. The fact that this channel is still active and has a following is beyond me. I won't discuss why I feel this way as that would make me no better than the legend Keemstar himself (Probably has to do nature of his content). However, people are usually against anything corporate. Being labelled a sell out in the YouTube community is a huge deal, and can be what makes or breaks a channel, especially so, if the public considers the channel to be objective. Unfortunately, we don't live in a world where we can afford to disregard wealth to pursue objectivity. So how does one make money via sponsored content on YouTube during the ad-pocalypse? I believe the key is "goodwill".
Before the ad-pocalypse, there was the counter strike global (CS:GO) gambling controversy, courtesy of TmarTn and ProSyndicate. Skin gambling videos till this day can be highly lucrative for those who have a large following. Not only are the videos like crack cocaine and relatively easy to create, but skin gambling websites are willing to pay publishers a lot of money for sponsorships. Due to the attention from mainstream media and other reputable YouTube channels like H3H3, public opinion turned, consequently making skin gambling videos rather toxic.
During this period of volatility, the YouTuber Anomally successfully manoeuvred the skins gambling environment, with none of his gambling videos exhibiting any signs of disapproval from his audience. How you might ask? "Goodwill". Some might argue that his success was mostly due to his circumstances at the time, I definitely agree with those sentiments. However, I also believe "goodwill" was a significant factor, as shown here: Why I am being a sellout
TheLazyPeon is a channel to fits perfectly with previous statements defining a "personal" channel. With a subscriber count a little over 376,000, TheLazyPeon is a gaming review channel that prides itself in its "audience first" approach, rarely ever uploading sponsored content. Reviewing games (mostly MMOs) by providing pros and cons objectively and from the perspective of the average gamer. Over time this approach built a channel that is generally trusted and dependable.
One of the channel's most recent uploads was received with mixed feelings. The sponsored video currently sits at a "likes to dislike" ratio of around 66.7%, a ratio rather uncharacteristic of the channel. Generally speaking, the audience is aware of the ad-pocalypse and the underlying reasons why the channel posted the video, however, that did not stop some viewers from reacting negatively or at least sceptical.
Source
As alluded to earlier, the audience generally knows why this content was published. However, due to the fickle nature of the audience, and the personal nature of the channel it was received lukewarmly.
I believe that this upload wouldn't have had such a mixed reception if the channel had first, in an act of "goodwill", acknowledged the controversial nature of the content and its forecasted reception.
The Mcskillet channel is a prime example of how to successfully leverage "goodwill" against practices that could be considered ethically ambiguous.
Once the CSGO gambling controversy started to fade, McSkillet announced that he would be launching his very own skin gambling website. When Mcskillet revealed his future business venture, he accompanied this news with a commentary criticizing other gambling websites, commenting on what he deemed "shady" business practices, he even alluded to some sites being outright scams. I won't point out the obvious conflict of interest here, but his criticisms of the gambling sites
were perceived to be an act of "goodwill". His announcement was received quite well, with the general consensus sharing sentiments roughly around "Thanks for telling us, do whatever you want". His video can be found here.
In conclusion, exhibit "goodwill", build a relationship of trust, be transparent, and for the most part, people won't care what you do. In your pursuit of money don't be scared of being labelled a sellout, be scared of being labelled a "lying", "distrustful" sellout.
Regards,
No comments:
Post a Comment