- cross-posted to:
- google@lemdro.id
- cross-posted to:
- google@lemdro.id
You must log in or register to comment.
Views not high enough? Change the definition of your metrics so it looks like you’re getting better results! It’s not technically lying to investors.
This is because they just fucked everyone by doubling the minimum amount to get paid.
I assumed they were already doing that. They’ve never been forthcoming in regards to what actually counts as a view.
-
Especially weird if I view videos from my own channel, on my end it seems to tally each time I watch my own videos, which isn’t supposed to happen.
-
And videos I never chose or clicked on automatically start playing as soon as I open the app or switch from “Me” to “Home.”
-
Or if one person watches a video multiple times, does youtube count each of those views? Because for YouTubers whose livelihood depends on likes & views & subscribers, YouTube needs to make sure a creator isn’t manipulating the system with bot farms or friends/family/paid losers to repeatedly watch the videos.
Now my brain hurts & I’m grumpy. Bye.
-
So after butchering the like/dislike ratio, the view-count will also become utterly useless… What’s next, automatically subscribing users to inflate subscriber-count too? All these universally liked videos (no dislikes), views/exposure (zero engagement), advertiser-friendly content (threatened (shadow)banning or demonetization)! Now the only red flag to any malinformed advertiser might be a low subscriber-count; so just do it already. Well, alongside the lackluster performance of the ads themselves of course (which can only be measured after the transaction: poorly at that). And the best part: non of the ad-revenue will be shared with the propped up channels: as the recently heightened threshold, requires additional engaged viewers; as opposed to the TikTok-level, worthless kind.
Here is my take - They are adding a new metric called “Engaged Views”, this is the same metric that a “View” was previously, something like - the person stayed after 30 seconds so they are “engaged”. Then they are going to sell ads based on the now inflated view number and use the “Engaged view” metric against creators so they can cut the amount they are paying for monetization.
Ding ding! Nailed it.
Inflate apparent views across the board while simultaneously making it harder for creators to get paid.
Who cares? I’m not even sure my NewPipe displays these numbers.
Minus the accounts that have autoplay enabled.
Sounds like a desperate attempt to convince investors that there is growing user engagement by decreasing the amount of time needed for a video to be considered engaging. Must be that people are moving through shorts at breakneck speeds. I haven’t touched YouTube in many years as the platform turned into one giant ad service (even if you pay for to remove ads). I guess that is what Google is primarily anyway, a company aiming to serve personalized (maybe also behavioral) ad to people.
Ok. Who cares?
Man I miss the early days of the Internet with the bullshit hit counters that were completely inconsequential when wrong and anyone could game.
Now somehow cuz it’s big business, those same bullshit hit counters can be used to move big mountains of money.
Right after they announced they’re doubling the required watch time to turn on monetisation, it’s clear what they want - more volume, less quality. Slop, slop, slop.
100%
These changes will cause smaller creators to take more shortcuts, which will mean more use of AI, even if they’re not using it to generate the video itself.
As a creator myself, I don’t know what purpose this metric really serves in the end. I guess a one-second view tells me if a thumbnail image was effective, but apart from that, it’s just useless.
I’m hoping this actually leads to less AI slop.
I’ve clicked off of so many videos after a second or two once I realized they were just AI narrated garbage.
I now use the right click “open in new tab” on any video so if it is AI, I can close the tab then hit the list where the video was and then go to the action dots to the right of it and “do not recommend” the channel. Have managed to give most of the godawful HFY videos the slip (…though recently new AI channels have popped up in my feed… Urgh…)
Fun fact, that’s one of my suggestions in my AI Slop avoidance video; That said, the new meta seems to be Right Click > Not Interested > Tell Us Why > I Don’t Like The Video.
Same, but I don’t think it will. Luckily YT is demonetizing AI slop channels, so people running those at least have to do more legwork now in order to make it worth it. Overall, it’s good that all indicators suggest YT is recognizing AI slop as a problem for their platform.
I made a video about training your personal version of the algo to suggest less of it, in fact, but since you can’t outright turn it off, there’s no magic bullet.
These changes, awful as they seem, are effecting me less and less as I use the platform less and less. It’s like, “oh you’re getting worse? Carry on then”, then I go back to my Plex server.
s/Plex/Jellyfin/
Well that’s a great incentive for clickbait content - cause now it won’t matter if you can keep people watching after you’ve reeled them in.
You’d think this would be against YouTube’s own best interest, considering they want to keep you watching, and people don’t often like watching that kind of clickbait-farm slop.
I think it just means that the raw view count was never very important to YouTube. That’s why they will have “engaged views” and “qualified watch hours” etc.
this is definitely against their interests, unless they just plan on having people watch ads everytime they open a video, watch that video for like 1 second and go to next and watch more ads. There is no depth of depravity i wont put past corporation executives, so that feels very plausible how they think and how detached they are from humans.
It could even be prelude to some other even more horrible, like they start gatekeeping actually decent stuff with premium aggressively.
We should really start archiving the good content of youtube more, just in case… I would too, but i dont have that much extra harddrive space and i dont have energy enough to start learning to build a personal storage system that is secure and fault resistant.
I mostly watch videos from channels I’m already subscribed to, but recently a few shows I watch have dropped new seasons and I was looking for recaps on YouTube. It was nothing but AI slop channel after AI slop channel. I would click off as fast as possible to not give them the view, but I guess they will all count going forward. It really sucks because we can’t opt out of these channels and many of them don’t even admit to being AI anyway.
I have no idea how this change is good for them. I totally agree that it seems like it’ll encourage low quality content. After a few of those videos I can’t imagine most people sticking around for another, but what do I know. I’m sure they have more accurate stats than I do.
Didn’t see it in the article, but I wonder if on desktop at least will it count if you hover and “preview” the video before clicking on it? Hopefully not, then we can see if it is slop or not, though that will be 1 more annoying thing to do
I’m not super well versed, but my understanding was that watching the preview for more than X seconds already counted as a view. At least it was like that a while back after they were introduced.
Also be careful because these ai channels are sneaky and will use generic pictures or stills but the script and voice are all AI.
Dammit!!! At least they don’t get the ad revenue from me. Yeah, that asian guy with glasses hasn’t been in the thumb for a while now, but soon as I click on the vid, BOOM!, there he is
When a view counts as a view and as an ad impression were always separate things at youtube. Videos under 10 minutes can’t be monetised, I’m guessing they’re keeping that bit.
Videos under 10 minutes can’t be monetised, I’m guessing they’re keeping that bit.
Videos under 8 minutes can’t have mid-roll adverts, but a 2-3 minute video can be monetized and serve front and end roll adverts. Even a 30 second idiot video (IE Shorts) can be monetized but if it’s in the slack-jaw brainslop category (IE Shorts) you need a crap ton of views on it to make money.
About 2 months ago I did an experiment on my youtube page where I made a stupid 40 second video and then formatted it for regular format and idiot format. Regular format got 1400 views and made $5.86. The shorts video got 2293 views and made .54 cents.
Most of the shorts views were in the first 4 days and then the algorithm dumped the video. That’s one is done. It won’t been seen again. The long form format got most of it’s views in the first 10 days but it continues to get views every week.
For those of us born before YouTube, we can just leave it.
For those born in the last couple decades, legacy tv and movies are difficult to watch and are only consumed occasionally. It will never, ever occur to YouTube’s primary audience to stop watching.
That’s it, I’m in my grandpa era, books (published pre-2022) and retro games only
If I could browse the internet at large with the same filter (that is to say only content pre-2022) I might consider still using it but as of right now it ain’t worth it. Might just build a zeronet with my friends at this point.
Did you just have a stroke?
What’s tripping you up friend?
💦 I finished when I read zeronet. 💦
I know everybody’s pissed at YouTube for this news and the inordinate amount of Artificial Incompetence they host and serve, but FYI add “before:2022” (or whatever year) to filter out recent years. There may be ways to do this with other sites, please let me know if you know.
SEO pivotting to video i see
When I was a kid I would refresh my video to increase the view count. I thought this was implemented to prevent that.
