Is YouTube fair to creators ?

[Seo Captain]

I have seen stupid content like car reveal and then dozens of videos centred around that car driving thousands of views. While in dept videos explaining features of car or the pros and cons of car gets no views . Is YouTube fair to good content on YouTube ?

 

[johnbennett]

YouTube's system often promotes videos that grab attention quickly, like you mentioned flashy car reveals, because these keep viewers watching longer. This focus on watch time can overshadow more detailed videos that provide in-depth information but might not attract immediate clicks. As a result, YouTube's promotion system doesn't always favor videos with high-quality content.

 

[tompots]

I have seen stupid content like car reveal and then dozens of videos centred around that car driving thousands of views. While in dept videos explaining features of car or the pros and cons of car gets no views . Is YouTube fair to good content on YouTube ?

YouTube doesn’t always reward the best content it rewards what grabs attention first.

 

[sjmasku]

The Youtube algo is highly complex, and even with high-quality videos, there's no guarantee you'll get noticed or receive views. It's important to keep creating engaging content and interacting with your audience to see your channel grow.

 

[Seo Captain]

The Youtube algo is highly complex, and even with high-quality videos, there's no guarantee you'll get noticed or receive views. It's important to keep creating engaging content and interacting with your audience to see your channel grow.

There are enough channels with engaging content and also interact with audience but they get no views .

 

[MayhemBH]

I have seen stupid content like car reveal and then dozens of videos centred around that car driving thousands of views. While in dept videos explaining features of car or the pros and cons of car gets no views . Is YouTube fair to good content on YouTube ?

Watchtime is king. If the viewer isn't staying on your video, the algorithm won't favor it. If you can get a good CTR and actually get people to stay and watch the vid, gold -- which is exactly what the "car reveal" "driving a lambo" videos do.

 

[Seo Captain]

Watchtime is king. If the viewer isn't staying on your video, the algorithm won't favor it. If you can get a good CTR and actually get people to stay and watch the vid, gold -- which is exactly what the "car reveal" "driving a lambo" videos do.

So there is no future for useful and meaning ful content on YouTube?

 

[MayhemBH]

So there is no future for useful and meaning ful content on YouTube?

I believe there's future for any type of content on YouTube; people can make a living without being the next iShowSpeed or Paul brothers. But useful and meaningful content for sure won't go super viral -- except in a very specific cases. I also think useful and meaningful could be considered subjective

 

[imccafey]

Not so much about Youtube per se, more so what the audience want to see. I suppose you could also say that Youtube pushes that content as it's perceived to be what the people want but the algo isn't independent. Truth is, at times what the audience want will sway. Short attention spans demand immediate visual or auditory stimuli. That is to say the general audience is inclined to watch for the entertainment value and not to learn something.

 

[Illymoon]

I think they give priority to most-searched and most actively traded video content.

 

[Spicy Chromosomes]

It's fair enough, it's not YT fault if people like to watch shit
Those AI ''brain rot'' generated content only succeed because people like to watch this kind of garbage
Kudos for whoever creates this kind of content, they deserve to be well paid for that

 

[Jett CloakSphere]

I have seen stupid content like car reveal and then dozens of videos centred around that car driving thousands of views. While in dept videos explaining features of car or the pros and cons of car gets no views . Is YouTube fair to good content on YouTube ?

"Is YouTube fair" isn't really the question here I'd presume.

It's people that just wanna watch stupid videos.

YouTube is fair.
People prefer non instructive stuff. Not YT's fault.

 

[tubeboost]

YT is a platform and can't be fair. You need to promote your content.

 

[Zauyiot]

Attracting more users and capturing their attention is the key, as this is what generates revenue for YouTube. In-depth analytical videos often fail to attract the majority of viewers. Furthermore, these types of audiences tend to be more rational and don't typically generate good advertising revenue. The ability to attract and maintain viewership is what ultimately determines a creator's success on the platform

 

[PrivateRx]

I have seen stupid content like car reveal and then dozens of videos centred around that car driving thousands of views. While in dept videos explaining features of car or the pros and cons of car gets no views . Is YouTube fair to good content on YouTube ?

I think the question really isn't about "how fair youtube is" rather it's why do people like watching what you term "stupid content"

Or maybe it's also that the content creators have found ways to tap into people's psychology : to not only catch attention but also to keep people watching.

 

[RafaViQ]

Youtube is not fair. They want to you bring outside traffic when you first start off. Else you will have to really hook the first X viewers before your content gets tested against a larger audience. In one of their YouTube creator videos, the main algorithm guy ( can't recall his name) explained it.

 

[reviewFixer]

YouTube doesn’t always reward the best content it rewards what grabs attention first.

This guy is correct.

There is similiar things in SEO, which is more or less a google ecosystem, just like youtube is, you can bet that similar principles apply.

In SEO, if you check the content from the top listing competitors, youll usually see a H2 question replied within a "p" element, the ones who reply the questions with the least amount of chars and word, rank best.

For the visual products, we see this materializing by many folks youtube feed having sensationalist thumb images and video titles.

Your definition of better content might differ from the viewers definition, remember, 50% of the folks out there are dumber than average You might have deeper content, but people usually learn the gritty nitty parts of topic on a job or educational facility, Youtube caters mostly to low attention span, instant gratification clientele.

Journalist also have this pyramid or inversed pyramid principle on how to grab as many peoples attention as possible and then take it from there.

 

[Hubert0]

Anyone can create an account, post videos, and if the content is engaging enough, there's a chance it could go viral, whether you're a newbie or a big channel.

 

[PrivateRx]

This guy is correct.

There is similiar things in SEO, which is more or less a google ecosystem, just like youtube is, you can bet that similar principles apply.

In SEO, if you check the content from the top listing competitors, youll usually see a H2 question replied within a "p" element, the ones who reply the questions with the least amount of chars and word, rank best.

For the visual products, we see this materializing by many folks youtube feed having sensationalist thumb images and video titles.

Your definition of better content might differ from the viewers definition, remember, 50% of the folks out there are dumber than average You might have deeper content, but people usually learn the gritty nitty parts of topic on a job or educational facility, Youtube caters mostly to low attention span, instant gratification clientele.

Journalist also have this pyramid or inversed pyramid principle on how to grab as many peoples attention as possible and then take it from there.

Speaking of low attention span, a Microsoft study showed that attention span in 2000 was 12 seconds, and it decreased to 8 seconds in 2015. Who knows what it is now with the rise of short form content.

 

[reviewFixer]

Speaking of low attention span, a Microsoft study showed that attention span in 2000 was 12 seconds, and it decreased to 8 seconds in 2015. Who knows what it is now with the rise of short form content.

I am guilty of consuming shorts etc more and more myself, as many of the longer videos should not be that long, very few have top quality content and peoples time is a valuable asset these days. I think the creation of the shorts format was rather reactionairy than grass roots, your numbers(thanks for the info) indicate so.