I believe the thinking is(someone else please chime in if this is incorrect):
When the deep value creators are fighting for attention/views against "view efficiency optimizers", the deep value loses out, making it harder for them to make a living.
Same reason quality journalism is on decline. It's a hard problem to solve as it occurs naturally in a competitive environment.
When the deep value creators are fighting for attention/views against "view efficiency optimizers", the deep value loses out, making it harder for them to make a living.
I understand that, and like you said, it's a hard problem to solve - and it's not a new problem. TV networks experienced the same thing, and that's why part of their models are successfully replicated by Youtubers.
Edutainment is a good example of it, where you could engage the audience into learning while they have fun. So it seems like there's a mid term where education and entertainment feed off each other and pleases a wider audience - and back then the only algorithm was zapping.
Because for the vast majority, probably, deep value is "boring", and that might even be amplified by the motivation behind using Youtube (which I dare to say is mostly for entertainment).
Even for those who find entertainment and extreme value from "deep value creators", they might need to set a bit of time to be engaged to consume that content, and in the end if their "CPM" is not as valuable as other audiences "CPM" (because they engage less with ads, use adblockers, spend less money after engaging with ads, etc), the creator will get less value from those views... and that's just one of those things: it is what it is.
You can't "blame" the audience, or the content creator, or even Youtube.
In the end this revolves around value transactions. Maybe a solution is for the content creator to try to harvest the value from his "deep value created" directly from the audience since Youtube might not be getting that value out of them.
Comments
I believe the thinking is(someone else please chime in if this is incorrect):
When the deep value creators are fighting for attention/views against "view efficiency optimizers", the deep value loses out, making it harder for them to make a living.
Same reason quality journalism is on decline. It's a hard problem to solve as it occurs naturally in a competitive environment.
I understand that, and like you said, it's a hard problem to solve - and it's not a new problem. TV networks experienced the same thing, and that's why part of their models are successfully replicated by Youtubers.
Edutainment is a good example of it, where you could engage the audience into learning while they have fun. So it seems like there's a mid term where education and entertainment feed off each other and pleases a wider audience - and back then the only algorithm was zapping.
Because for the vast majority, probably, deep value is "boring", and that might even be amplified by the motivation behind using Youtube (which I dare to say is mostly for entertainment).
Even for those who find entertainment and extreme value from "deep value creators", they might need to set a bit of time to be engaged to consume that content, and in the end if their "CPM" is not as valuable as other audiences "CPM" (because they engage less with ads, use adblockers, spend less money after engaging with ads, etc), the creator will get less value from those views... and that's just one of those things: it is what it is.
You can't "blame" the audience, or the content creator, or even Youtube.
In the end this revolves around value transactions. Maybe a solution is for the content creator to try to harvest the value from his "deep value created" directly from the audience since Youtube might not be getting that value out of them.