Very valid point about the monetisation of creative work being a positive thing for thousands of people, who've essentially been able to work on their passion. We definitely support that, but this isn't just about one person being an asshole, there's a significant number of 'drama' channels who target vulnerable individuals in smear campaigns and make ludicrous incomes doing it.
We've seen a cancer patient ask for donations to support her treatment, and then be accused by one of these drama channels of faking her cancer. Even when she showed her cancerous breast, there was no retraction and when the donations dried up because of that 'drama' she died shortly after leaving the treatment centre. This sort of phenomenon has been called 'Harass for Cash', as that's essentially what it is. It's destroyed many, many lives, and has greatly influenced our perspective of YouTube monetisation.
We can't really blame YouTube as a platform for that kind of behaviour as they can't be liable for the actions of all the content creators, however they are notorious for favouring larger channels and we've seen huge hypocrisy in their judgements of who breaks their TOS and who doesn't. Essentially these bigger drama channels get away with a jaw dropping amount of TOS violations because they make YT money, whereas the smaller channels are suspended or receive a strike for the same or lesser 'crime'.
Anyway, thanks for your perspective, not putting all your eggs in one basket is definitely a good policy! :)
Oh certainly they don't treat channels equally. It even looked for a moment like they were going to be unfair to one of their big creators for a bit there when originally it looked like they were going to do nothing about Logan Paul but they punished Pewdiepie (not a fan of either but I think it should be fair, and it wasn't). Eventually they did something about Logan Paul, but it took them long enough, and it was likely only then due to the drama that unfolded given they originally manually reviewed the video and went "That's okay", yet at the same time they pull down videos that are very mild on smaller channels.
I guess no matter how many of those drama channels or Logan Paul's make money, I don't think it is fair for everyone to suffer and not make money due to them doing the wrong thing. A lot of the time in life innocent people suffer from the actions of others, but it shouldn't be the case with YT and I still think the fact good creators can be financially supported means that despite the shit that some people do, it is still better with the monetisation than not.
Unfortunatley a lot of small channels just got pushed into the not category which isn't fair.
For sure, we're definitely not advocating for video platforms to be demonetised again - I mean we are monetised here on DTube. I've just made the decision to demonetise the YouTube channel I have, and leave, as I've been so thoroughly disgusted by their hypocrisy that I personally don't want to earn anything from them.
The problem with YouTube monetisation is that it this adpocalypse has seemed to be extraordinarily biased. Smaller channels have been crushed and some of the bigger channels have had preferential treatment (like the Pewdiepie/Logan Paul example you made).
And I just saw the new terms for monetisation on YT that you mentioned in your first comment and it's just 🤦♀️ I don't really see the point of disabling monetisation until 1k subs. I remember starting out that it was so exciting and amazing to me to get my first $130 paycheck, it was a big encouragement that my time and work had some value.
When I say YouTube took a downturn after money was introduced, I mean in terms of content. I'm definitely for content creators getting paid for their work, but one of the problems with YouTube is that they've always rewarded the "wrong" content creators. I use quotation marks because it's subjective.
But the algorithms of YouTube rewards quantity over quality, like if you post a video every day, you're more likely to be featured in the related section etc. Do you remember the reply girls? Absolutely worthless content, but they flooded the site because they got rewarded for it. YouTube actually did something about that situation though.
The best channels, with the best content has a tendency to not get the exposure they deserve IMO. One of the reasons I like DTube is because there are no hidden algorithms so it's a leveled playing field.
Yeah the new changes seem pretty pointless. YouTube themselves point out that the creators with less than 1000 subs and 4000 hours watch time per year often make less than $100 a year but for some that amount still helps a lot and it also is something positive to see (like you said - it is encouraging), but also some make more under those thresholds but either way the attitude is just basically like "They make less than $100 a year - it's not like it's affecting channels that matter". 4000 hours watch time per year is demanding a lot too, especially for really time demanding types of content that take a long time to make. It's not really the little guys that are causing the most trouble anyway.
I understand leaving YouTube because you are disgusted with them. Their hypocrisy is one of a few reasons I'm not a rising star in the Creator Community anymore. Partially it was the pressure it was putting on my time too but I also didn't want to feel like I had to support all of their practices etc when I'm more likely to think critically about it and I don't think I can talk critically and objectively about it when I've got a badge as part of their community. I joined that community before the biggest waves of bullshit went down.
Going away from YouTube though I would be hesistant to only post on DTube though in case it goes down. I don't have a prediction on how well it would do, but the worst case scenario is always a possibility.