zlacker

>>babelf+(OP)
So basically:

Come up with contrived BS that caters to younger audiences, micromanage anyone who is holding you up, and attempt to game a blackbox algorithm on a site you don't pay for (YouTube)

The whole modern social media / influencer sphere seems like a huge bubble that will pop eventually. Google has already started wiping inactive accounts[0] presumably because storage isn't truly infinite or cheap. I imagine YT will also take the same path eventually.

0: https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/12418290?hl=en

>>hypeat+s5
The guy has earned a net worth of maybe $700 million starting with YouTube. Saying it's all a bunch of contrived bullshit hides the fact the he is obviously brilliantly talented and dedicated at making a business from YouTube. If you or others blow off a document he wrote or an interview he gives because most of his videos are "just" gaming an algorithm then you must not be a very curious person.

I don't like coffee but I still might learn about the business since it's so big.

>>zulban+2a
I don’t even think he’s gaming an algorithm. He doesn’t have to.

He’s just making videos people will click on and then watch.

It’s almost like he’s trying to make something people want. I’ve heard that before somewhere…

>>mattma+Sv
If you read the full PDF it’s clear he is very carefully gaming the algorithm: he includes charts showing exactly when people drop off from watching videos, and explains how he has an exact set of rules for how the thumbnail, first minute, 2-3 minutes, 3-6 minutes and 6-end minutes of any video should work.

I find the lengths he has gone to in order to design his videos specifically for how YouTube works to be extremely impressive.

>>simonw+5x
>If you read the full PDF it’s clear he is very carefully gaming the algorithm: [...]

How is this different than any other technique to maximize engagement/readership, eg. inverted pyramid format for newspaper articles? It's probably designed to draw people in and sell copies. Is that also "gaming the algorithm"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_pyramid_(journalism)

>>gruez+vE
“How is this different than any other technique to maximize engagement/readership, eg. inverted pyramid format for newspaper articles?”

Because it’s extraordinarily effective?

He made it to the top of YouTube with it. If it’s the exact same thing as other existing techniques how come others haven’t been able to match his success with those classic formulas?

>>simonw+1F
Presumably because journalism is centuries old, and techniques like this eventually become "industry standard" and you don't notice it. Once people figure out what the strategy is, they're going to try replicating it to capitalize on his success. Afterwards I suspect he'll still have a first-mover advantage, but he's going to be nowhere near as popular (comparatively). It's not any different than say, the reality show "format" being eventually copied by other production companies/networks.

>>gruez+EF
Did you read my summary and not the full PDF?

If you’ve only read my summary then we are discussing this with completely different mental models of what he actually does.

>>simonw+NF
I skimmed the summary and it describes every aspect about his production company, whereas your "summary" only described one aspect (ie. figuring out how to keep engagement up), so I only responded to that. You can't treat the entire document as "gaming the algorithm". For instance, the document also mentions only hiring A players, which could hardly be described as "he is very carefully gaming the algorithm".

>>gruez+6G
Go and read pages 6 through 10 of the PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YaG9xpu-WQKBPUi8yQ4HaDYQLUS...

They do not describe the same process everyone else uses to make content. They are much more specific than that.

>>simonw+eG
So far as I can tell his "gaming the algorithm" is having a few short clips near the start to hook people in (ie. an summary/abstract), and periodic bursts of excitement to keep people engaged. The first is so banal that it's hardly worth discussing. Articles in scientific journals have abstracts/summaries. It's not anything nefarious. The rest seems like standard narrative/storytelling advice, eg. hero's journey[1], or how broadcast TV shows have cliffhangers/plot developments to get people to watch the next episode or ad break. Do you think 24[2] is "gaming the algorithm" by presenting 24 action packed episodes where there's always some new/unresolved plot point at the end of each episode?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero's_journey

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24_(TV_series)