This is something that took place over the last few years. A number of prominent crypto "influencers" had their accounts banned by YouTube and other social media sites. There is no doubt these platforms see the threat crypto is to their business model and are doing all they can to stop word from spreading.
The latest to find himself in this situation is Davinci Jeremie, who had 82,000 followers on YouTube. The key word is "had" since the account was wiped out and everything associated with it is gone.
What was the reason for this eradication: the proverbial violation of terms of service.
When will people learn?
Source
The reason I use the term "influencer" is because there are a lot of people out there who make videos talking about cryptocurrency. They discuss how it will change the world while providing freedom from centralized entities. This is, naturally, a good thing and a step in the right direction for people. Some even broach the subject of Web 3.0 and the continued evolution of the Internet.
There is a challenge with what these people are doing. While they are talking about cryptocurrency, they are not involved with the platforms. Certainly, many are likely Bitcoin hodlers as well as some other cryptocurrencies. They might be investing to increase their bags like a lot of other people.
It is a good move since the likelihood of another bull run increases with each day. Ensuring one's personal finances is always the first step. We all have obligations that require meeting.
However, there is a deeper move taking place, one which these individuals miss. While they are posting all their content on the likes of YouTube and Twitter, they are omitting the actually applications that are catering to cryptocurrency. Instead of talking about what is happening, they can actually be a part of it.
Take the situation with data and how these centralized entities are using it for their own benefit. This is something that comes up in these crypto videos quite frequently. What is interesting is that as people are watching crypto videos, they are providing more support to the centralized establishment. Each time another video is uploaded to YouTube, that organization only grows in size.
Certainly, it is sensible to go where the audience is. There is no doubt that these centralized platforms still control the masses. At the same time, the content creators are earning an income from being associated with the likes of YouTube. That is, of course, until the account is wiped out. Then the owner of the account is forced to beg to try to get it back.
Ultimately, while all this is happening, these individuals, for the most part, are not supporting the crypto based projects. Even if one still uses the traditional social media, backing up one's work on a decentralized blockchain is not a bad idea. At the same time, videos are now able to receive the same treatment with IPFS.
Does this mean one is going to opt to go exclusively crypto? It is not likely although it is an option. Wayne Gretzky is credited with being the greatest hockey player who ever lived. When asked what made him so great he simple related how he always went to where the puck was going, not where it was.
Imagine where the industry would be if the crypto "influencers" actually supported cryptocurrency platforms instead of just talking about them. Considering the trend we are seeing, it is easy to guess that the puck is going towards DApps in the future, not the centralized realm. Even Jack Dorsey is talking about that for Twitter.
The Jeremie situation is a prime example of what takes place.
The decision has already gained attention by the wider crypto YouTube community. Earlier today, crypto YouTuber Sunny Decree posted a video discussing Jeremie’s permanent ban. “With this episode, I’m trying to support him,” Decree said.
Source
Notice how they support each other but not crypto projects. When will they learn?
This is not the first time YouTube (or the other sites) went down this path. Periodically, over the past year, YouTube has gone on a crypto culling, waning out a number of accounts. At times they reestablished them, but damage was done.
Simply looking at this from a business perspective, if one's business is a threat of eradication with the click of a button, it would only make sense to diversify to protect against the downside. Yet, these individuals appear to be keeping all their eggs in the centralized social media basket.
A case could be made that the decentralized applications are not up to par with the likes of YouTube. That certainly is a valid point that cannot be disputed. That is common in the early days of development. Look at YouTube a year or two after it was released and it is easy to see that it was not akin to the platform today.
However, together, we can bring more attention to these DApps while expanding the number of users across the crypto-sphere. At the same time, those who are in early are able to stake a position when the communities are small. This will set one apart as things grow in size and scope.
Plus there is the added bonus that each time a video or article appears, the activity pertaining to that is not being traced by YouTube or Facebook. Instead, it is being accessed by a variety of user interfaces, none relating directly to each other.
In the end, the trend that is being established will likely continue. YouTube and others will continue their assault on crypto while the other platforms keep developing. Over time, we will see the gap start to close in terms of the features offered, providing alternatives to people.
Those who are early to make the switch will likely benefit the most. This is how it usually works.
If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and rehive.
gif by @doze
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Good points indeed.
For me personally, I do try and support putting my content up on other places other than YouTube (such as on LBRY).
The issue is that, being that I only live off my crypto investments/YouTube channel, there is literally no way I could fund my channel solely through alternative means. As you noted, most of the audience is on YouTube. This means YouTube can afford to pay more to creators, since they get most of the online streaming advertising, for user hosted videos.
If there was a competitor that I saw which came in any way close to providing the monetary incentive that YouTube does, I would immediately switch to that. The problem is that nothing comes close, and without YouTube, my channel would not be a serious business, any longer. I'd have to dedicate more of my time to a "real" job (although being a content creator is definitely not easy), which would take away the bulk of time I spend researching, seeking/hosting interviews with thought leaders, and educating, to the best of my ability. Just being able to do content creation for a living is extremely humbling, but more and more difficult to achieve, for those just starting off, so there is definitely a void that is growing bigger and bigger. I do think the landscape will be different, and we are on the bumpy road to switching over to something else-- but the fact is, that we're just not there yet.
The only way it works, currently, is when a certain company can pay a creator like PewDiePie, or Joe Rogan, a HUGE upfront fee to switch. And this is usually only temporary, as we can see with Rogan's Spotify terms, or how PewDiePie left DLive to go BACK to YouTube.
At the end of the day, you have to at least observe the trend. The trend I see is that YouTube is making both creators and viewers unhappier with every change they implement, for the benefit of advertisers. This is going to come back to haunt them. Changes don't happen in a single day...usually.
"Nature knows not good or bad, but only consequence"
Great post, btw! Really appreciated hearing your nuanced and balanced perspectives, hence the motivation to leave a comment here. Cheers
HIVE > YouTube > Fox News
YouTube is struggling with fake Crypto Giveaway channels as well.
Let's keep telling the world about what our HIVE stands for while continue to build our ecosystem
You got that right @nathanmars.
We need to keep it going and keep offering an alternative to people.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Great point raised, some of these people are taking about bitcoin and decentralization and yet they're still building a platform with places that can wipe off their works and everything they've built with time. YouTube and centralisation is something that must go but it's sad they're not realising this.
YouTube has the traffic and the deep pockets. Until this is no longer true people will post content in the hopes of getting a payday. That is unless we provide them with an alternative..
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Deep pockets? Many even struggle to monetize their contents on YouTube, it's a huge work for years
I think it was meant that Google had deep pockets, not the posters on YouTube.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Oh that's relatively true about YouTube though. But my channel not my channel forever
It is likely that these platforms are also designing their crypto or their blockchain strategies and therefore for now they prefer that the topic slow down to give them time to implement their strategy in time.
E 'probabile che anche queste piattaforme stiamo ideando le loro crypto o le loro strategie in blockchain e che quindi per ora preferiscono che l'argomento rallenti per dargli tempo di attuare la loro strategia in tempo
Google hates crypto. They had a chance to create a Hive like platform in 2011 with Google +. Of course Google+ flamed out and rightfully so. Some will learn the hard way concerning centralized systems/platforms.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Yeah it is amazing that Google was never able to create a successful messenger. Hangouts isnt even doing that well I dont think.
It will take a bit more time but alternatives are popping up. When there is a host of options for people, we will likely see the centralized platforms suffering. This simply cannot adjust their business models to accommodate Web 3.0.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Your current Rank (29) in the battle Arena of Holybread has granted you an Upvote of 21%
Cuando se habla pero no se actúa pasa esto.
Y ciertamente como dijo esos crypto influencers no apoyan a las plataformas descentralizadas porque ven que no van a lograr lo que si logran en Youtube (en cuanto a dinero).
Por eso ya sería nuestra responsabilidad de hacer crecer esta plataforma hasta que esté a la altura de YouTube o mejor, no podemos esperar que otros lo hagan y nosotros no movernos.
The debate proposed by the subject of this post is very interesting and the way you spoke about it is quite striking.
I think some things need to change so that everyone can grow together.
I agree with the fact that whoever can change first will be the one who will receive the most benefits.
You mentioned that content can be censored on ipfs too - I was curious as to how that is possible - do you have any more info?
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
People bark a lot but are afraid of being responsible for their videos. We can also talk about the freedom of speech about being free, but when the defensive situation comes, for example, against the government, will we not run away? It is the same with cryptocurrency. You can advertise and talk a lot about them and if your family asks you, many people are ashamed. (such an example)
It is always the case that when governments do not fit, they block people and intimidate. We cannot be afraid!
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta