
YouTube stars heading for burnout - cirrus-clouds
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/sep/08/youtube-stars-burnout-fun-bleak-stressed
======
mikekchar
As stupid as this is going to sound, I think about this quite a bit in terms
of writing a blog. I've wanted to do it for a long time and in the past people
have been very kind and supportive of my writing. However, when I think about
the reality of what it takes to make a successful blog, I get very nervous
about it.

I mean, it's dumb because the chances of writing a successful blog is next to
nil. And the way to exit the scene is easy: stop writing content. But it's the
path that worries me. You need to write a lot of relevant content -- almost
certainly more content than you can reasonably think about critically. You
will be judged on that content. If you make a mistake or change your mind,
then you can be treated very harshly. It seems that the masses have this
binary view of their celebrities: genius or moron. The more popular you get,
the more people have you in their sights aiming to plonk you firmly in the
latter category.

For a long time, I've spent ridiculous amounts of time writing in safe havens
like HN comment sections: because I truly love writing. I like thinking about
stuff and breaking it down. I like explaining the insights that I find. And
most of all, I like the fact that _somebody reads what I write_. I like
thinking that I've connected with somebody else who I don't even know.

I seem to remember a set of rules for writers by Stephen King (although my
recollection doesn't seem to match what Google returns to me). In one of them
he says to prepare yourself for an unbelievable amount of criticism. It's this
that worries me the most. I don't mind criticism, per se, but I don't want to
have to deal with a reputation based on ideas formed from my prose.

"He's the dufus who believes that unit tests shouldn't test requirements. What
a moron," is fine when I'm dealing with people who know me. It's down right
terrifying when dealing with people who are potentially going to interview me
for a job :-) A slight miscalculation in how you describe something, a popular
misconception arising from rumours of your writing, or even just having a
derpy day because you didn't think it through before you put pen to paper...
And suddenly, you are the moron in the eyes of millions.

Like I said, it's putting the cart before the horse by a long, long way, but
it still stops me from writing, which is a massive shame. Somehow I must
overcome it (advice is welcome, BTW!)

~~~
stone-monkey
Why not write under a pseudonym? If you don't want people to associate you
with every little detail of your writing, the easiest thing to do is to
disassociate your writing identity with your offline identity.

~~~
mikekchar
That's a good idea :-). It never even occurred to me...

~~~
pjc50
Although when you get successful the amount of effort devoted to breaking your
pseudonym increases. We lost several UK police bloggers to this and there was
a nasty campaign by the press against Brooke Magnanti.

~~~
pixl97
Yep, maintaining your secrecy is hard.

As an individual you have hundreds of different patters that define who you
are. Even the market you post to can geographically limit the location you are
in. Use an uncommon, but correct, spelling of a word?

------
vanilla-almond
The BBC made a brilliant spoof series on becoming a YouTube vlogger called
'Pls Like'. The whole thing is available on YouTube to watch (not geo-blocked
as far I know). It's 6 episodes of 15 mins each.

No matter which country you're from, you'll recognise all the vlogger types in
the series: the lifestyle vlogger, the fashion vlogger, the prankster etc. It
actually touches on a lot of the issues in the Guardian article: the need for
views, the pressure to make content 'viral', sponsored content, rivalry
between vloggers. It's all done with a lot of humour while highlighting these
issues.

I thoroughly recommend it (and in case you are wondering, the vloggers are all
actors, not real vloggers):

[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL64ScZt2I7wFF538Kn0TR...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL64ScZt2I7wFF538Kn0TRqDyv2TbNuemk)

~~~
chii
pretty damn well made series!

------
sidstling
I respect people who have the ability to entertain thousands of viewers, I
really do. At the same time I’m really happy that wasn’t even an option when I
was young. I’m sure I would have spent even more time playing video games if
esports, twitch and YouTube had been a thing in the 90ies.

I know, I know, not everyone is alike, but at age 35 I’m really happy that my
job involves serious adult challenges, and that my success in life isn’t
depending on thousands of teenagers pushing a like button.

~~~
wybiral
> my success in life isn’t depending on thousands of teenagers pushing a like
> button

In a certain sense, though, most serious adult business still boils down to
people seeing an ad, installing an app, buying a product, attracting
investors, or teenagers clicking a like button.

Edit: The YouTubers who go on to do it at a more serious capacity will also
learn valuable first-hand lessons in dealing with partnerships, sponsors,
public relations, release cycles, etc. All of which are useful depending on
what it is that you want to do in your career.

~~~
lsc
>In a certain sense, though, most serious adult business still boils down to
people seeing an ad, installing an app, buying a product, attracting
investors, or teenagers clicking a like button.

I mean, yes, I'm part of the machine, and the machine does sell advertising.
But I'm a little cog in a big machine, and there are a lot of other cogs
between me and the teenagers and their like buttons.

A long time ago, I wrote a technical book. One of the weirdest things to me
was just how much reading the amazon reviews hurt. Like, they were mostly
positive, but the negative ones, even negative reviews that as a buyer I would
dismiss as 'clearly nutso' really hurt in a deeply irrational way.

At my dayjob? not only is it someone else's job to worry about that sort of
thing, the volume involved would make it almost impossible for me to consume
the feedback in anything other than a statistically sampled sort of way, even
if it _was_ my job.

------
elvinyung
The neoliberal condition is in part characterized by the
entrepreneurialization of everything, the penetration of Michel Foucault's
_homo economicus_ (entrepreneur of the self) into more and more spheres of
production, consumption, and everyday life. Increasingly, you're an
"entrepreneur" no matter what, whether you're a food truck owner, a freelance
designer, an Uber driver, an Airbnb host, a YouTube star. Entrepreneur means a
blurring of boundaries, working from home, homing from work.

In my possibly-naive opinion, it wouldn't be such a problem, if only we didn't
tie value and self-worth so much on work, both culturally and politically.
This entrepreneurialization goes hand-in-hand with the condition of
_precarity_ , feeling like you _have_ to work your ass off, have to stay at
the top of your game, to keep making a living, because you have no other way
to live. It is incredibly dangerous, and it's increasingly defining us, the
millennial and post-millennial generations.

~~~
coldtea
> _This entrepreneurialization goes hand-in-hand with the condition of
> precarity, feeling like you have to work your ass off, have to stay at the
> top of your game, to keep making a living, because you have no other way to
> live._

It's more of a precarization than an entrepreneurialization.

An entrepreneur has bigger stakes but also a bigger payoff than being paid to
ride their car as an Uber for example.

~~~
elvinyung
I would really say that they're different sides of the same coin. I also
wouldn't say that an entrepreneur necessarily has noticeably bigger payoff. It
might be true in tech, but not necessarily for the majority of small
businesses.

I can't recall off the top of my head which one, but I remember seeing a study
that showed that a significant amount of small business owners in the US did
so _just_ to get to do what they want for a living. (Again, why the "for a
living"?)

Entrepreneurialism, in a lot of cases, is a new kind of wage slavery. The
precarity is the most easily exploited (by rideshare services, freelance
agencies, marketplace platforms, among others) to coax people into positions
without security or benefits.

~~~
pixl97
For a living probably means something else now than the past.

Past: For a living - so I don't starve to death.

Now: For a living - I want the perceived freedom in choice of work that fits
my lifestyle.

~~~
coldtea
Yeah, we're not happy to just have the fire, speak in languages, and live in
caves either.

We don't compare ourselves with the early humans before they discovered those
things and feel lucky.

And neither those that starved to death did.

What constitutes "a living" is always relative.

That said, you can very much still starve and get sick and homeless to death
in modern rich societies...

------
wybiral
In my experience the frustrating part about YouTube is when the crowd wants
content that you're not interested in making.

For instance, I've made a few videos about building clusters from Raspberry
Pi's, which I did just for kicks and to have something to play around with.
They get more attention than my (imo more interesting) videos about
programming or various other electronics topics, to the point that it dwarfs
my other views.

So I have to choose between disappointing the majority of my subscribers or
making content that I don't actually enjoy or stand by just for the views.

PS: I also learned very quickly that the YouTube comments section is chaotic
and is not a recommended place for someone looking for thoughtful critique on
their material.

~~~
pmoriarty
_" I also learned very quickly that the YouTube comments section is chaotic
and is not a recommended place for someone looking for thoughtful critique on
their material."_

YouTube's comments are some of the absolute worst I've seen on the web. It's
interesting that YouTube has made no effective efforts to improve their
quality.

You'd think the site as a whole could benefit tremendously from quality
comments, but apparently that is not a priority.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
> It's interesting that YouTube has made no effective efforts to improve their
> quality. //

You imply it, but it's worth noting that they have made efforts but
failed/stopped. Google can't/won't fix it. I suspect as someone else mentioned
they realised that fixing comment quality reduces "engagement"; like tabloid
news.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _fixing comment quality reduces "engagement"_

I’ll admit to occasionally scrolling through the comments looking for the
batshit crazy ones, if only because they tend to be funny and interesting in
the totally unexpected way they managed to get offended about something.

~~~
dec0dedab0de
It's like laughing at the badguys in pro wrestling

------
epx
I have an YouTube channel, mostly for personal stuff. I did some effort to
record some videos about several subjects, none had more than a hundred
viewers. Then, in a sudden, a very shaky and short video with a Mallet steam
locomotive punctured the Algorithm Wall and had thousands of views per day...
I was even making $20/mo off YouTube until the early 2018 changes took place.

And the fact is, divisive content is king these days. Nobody, humans or
algorithms, are interested in balanced opinions these days.

~~~
api
How many of the Nazis and other super divisive youtubers do you think are
faking it or hamming it up for clicks? I do sometimes wonder "do these people
actually believe this crap?" Same goes for totally outlandish conspiracy
theories.

Controversy has always sold, but never before has the feedback loop been so
tight.

~~~
fragsworth
Not believing what you speak is a huge enthusiasm killer, and enthusiasm is
most of what makes a good video. I'd guess almost all of the people with
growing channels believe what they speak, and anyone on the fence might even
subconsciously start believe what their audience wants.

~~~
madeuptempacct
Except I can fake enthusiasm easily. I don't because it's deceptive. I feel
like I am lying to someone when I fake enthusiasm. Doesn't go over all that
well in most settings, since most people do fake it.

~~~
y2bd
I think OP means more personal enthusiasm, as in being driven to make videos
at all. No benefit in being able to fake a smile if you never end up recording
yourself in the first place.

...at the same time though, a ton of money and attention might be enough to
get over making personally uninteresting content. I guess that's pretty much
how careers are for most people.

------
durzagott
I've unwittingly enjoyed Matt Lee's content on 'Shut Up and Sit Down', a board
game review channel. I've always found him, and his colleagues, really good at
what they do and find it professional.

I didn't know about Matt's background on Youtube, but a bit of Googling and I
found he's had a really rough ride. As well as the stress and health problems
others have mentioned, his wife also developed cancer a few years ago and was
very close to dying.

All the while he still manages to produce witty, engaging content for a fickle
audience. Honestly, the guy deserves a bit more respect for his craft than the
comments in this thread are giving.

------
Ricardus
I don't find this surprising. When I started podcasting in 2005, even doing a
weekly 'cast with my friend and co-host was a lot of work. We also had day
jobs. But the pressure to create content was still there. These full time
youtubers must feel in 100x more, particularly if they have Patreon people to
keep happy. We derived no income from our show, and in fact it cost us money
to produce.

In some ways I wish some of these monetizing platforms existed when we were
around. It would have been fun to see if we could have gone anywhere with it.
But then we might have succumb to these issues, as well.

I guess it all comes back to "Be careful what you wish for..."

~~~
always_good
> they have Patreon people to keep happy

Reminds me of when I briefly accepted donations from users of my forum.
Suddenly it was like my life was beholden to people that had once given me $5.
At least when they'd given me $0, it was pretty straightforward to dismiss
their complaints and they'd looked silly when they'd demanded more of my free
time. But once they gave >$0, the water got murky.

I ended up refunding everyone a few months later and I generally roll my eyes
when I see posts like "um why not just take donations?" on HN.

It's just not no-strings-attached money like people seem to think it is. It's
more akin to selling a service for peanuts, it rears the same issues.

~~~
AgentME
This makes me think of how moot (creator of 4chan) was against receiving
donations from 4chan users, presumably because of this type of issue. He later
started selling "4chan passes" which added certain specific features to the
site. I think that was a very clever way to go about it: the people who bought
them couldn't demand moot's attention. They got a very specific thing out of
their money and everyone knew that.

Considering these cases, I think it makes sense to make sure that whenever one
accepts donations, they make it very explicit what the donator can rightfully
expect. That could be as little as a token set of extra features, a badge on
their user profile, or just warm fuzzy feelings without extra attention.

~~~
noobermin
Perhaps a different mentality for donations helps too. People who solicit
donations should somehow communicate that you are not buying a service of some
kind, they are _donating_ to you, so you're free to take the money and do
whatever. It's a strange thing however when people donate a pittance (five
dollars or ten dollars or something) and then expect so much for it. When you
pay five dollars for a coffee, you are at least paying for something. But the
word "donation" never seemed to me like it carried any serious commitment on
the part of the recipient.

Perhaps the only thing the donor can expect is the recipient is to continue
whatever they were doing. Beyond that it's ridiculous.

------
jsonne
This article is really relatable. Personal story time. I recently had a mini
hit on Reddit where I started a community that's about 2800 people who come to
me for marketing tips every day. It's both exhilarating and terrifying. Having
a community, making content about my passion, and being able to perform is
really all I've ever wanted. On the other hand I'm insanely cognizant of
losing it at any time. There is no break and I know even a slight lull can
stop it before it ever really even gets close to its potential. God forbid I
give bad advice, or someone 1 ups me in the comments and I'm no longer the
expert. That combined with the fact that most marketing isn't all that
interesting has me increasingly searching for more and more all the time ever
cognizant I don't want to bore and lose my audience. I've been mitigating this
by filming 3 videos a day and embracing an intentionally raw style, but it
still requires daily upkeep in addition to my agency which demands 10 to 12
hours anyways. Don't get me wrong I love it and I'm insanely grateful, but
there is a lot of stress that surrounds this sort of thing.

~~~
coldtea
I think a lot of the concern for upkeep is simply overblown.

I follow several vloggers, bloggers, etc. Once they've built a basic
following, they can do whatever, even disappear for weeks or months, and still
have most or all of their followers intact and craving for more content.

I know, because me and tons of others, are waiting for new content from some
such people who took huge break times off, and when it appears views always
shoot through the roof. And I don't see Subscription counts fall of that much
either (e.g. to the point that it makes any difference, e.g. going from 200K
to 150K or so). It's easier to just ignore a channel that hasn't posted videos
for a while, than to actively unsubscribe (besides, not getting posts is no
reason to unsubscribe if you'd still like what they can possibly post in the
future).

------
judNell

      Ninja, makes an estimated $500,000 (£384,000) every 
      month via live broadcasts of him playing the video 
      game Fortnite on Twitch, a service for livestreaming 
      video games that is owned by Amazon. Most of Blevins’ 
      revenue comes from Twitch subscribers or viewers who 
      provide one-off donations (often in the hope that he 
      will thank them by name “on air”).
    

There is something _fantastically_ wrong about the way internet economies
operate. In the same way so many other sub-economies panhandle, in exchange
for absolutely nothing.

------
stephengillie
> _Like all YouTubers, Morton also feels the financial pressure of the system,
> which typically pays between £1.50 and £3 for every 1,000 views._

Based on this, creators have to be close to the 1 million views per month mark
to be making over $24,000 per year.

It's no secret that YouTube is wildly unprofitable, from every angle. In a
way, it's a transfer of wealth from AdWords, so our society is paying for
YouTube through ads; just mostly not through the ads on YouTube.

~~~
dogma1138
YouTube is unprofitable if you look at direct compensation alone, if you have
even 1M views per year not to mention a month you can find partnerships and
sponsorships.

I don't understand why people think YouTube should pay more, the vast majority
of YT content doesn't cost anything to create nor does it generate any revenue
for YT.

Besides the really large channels the best thing one can do is to run a
channel is parallel to their business and in support of it which is what many
of the smaller DYI/Maker/Professional/Vocational channels do you run a machine
shop you make a few videos per month and you draw more business rather than
rely on ad revenue.

~~~
stephengillie
> _the vast majority of YT content doesn 't cost anything to create_

And does that painfully show. You basically have to build a small TV studio,
or invest in computer graphics software and skills, to produce good content on
a regular basis. And good writing also. None of these things are free.

And this devalues the time of these independent video producers, They could be
producing high value for another business, with appropriate compensation.

------
menacingly
This is an interesting story, definitely worth a click, but isn't it sort of
also just the fundamental issues humans face in all pursuits that are based on
interest?

I feel like you'd get the same spirit of complaint from a disenchanted
musician, actor, chef, or even entrepreneur.

"It's a lot harder than I thought. The market's tastes are fickle, I've got to
make stuff to please them instead of things that creatively satisfy me. If I
stop relentlessly competing I can't pay my bills"

I'm older than the average youtube star, but I don't begrudge their success or
view them as trivial people like a lot of my peers. That said, perhaps it's
the _initial_ grand slam success and money that is the aberration (like app
store hits at their peak), and the "bad side" is simply a sort of market
correction where you've got to do unenjoyable things roughly commensurate with
the payoff.

~~~
pdimitar
Over the last several years I gradually changed from being very salty and
grumpy -- "FFS, these goofy kids get to squeal on air and get rich and buy a
house I won't likely have at 50, WTF is that!!!" \-- to basically accepting
how most of our current world's economy works and I moved to the milder
attitude of "hey, if you can make it work then more power to you, and good
job!".

I think the only bad thing in this picture is their initial huge success, like
you seem to believe as well. This produces very unrealistic future
expectations and the cognitive dissonance becomes nigh-impossible to face in
the aftermath.

This leads to articles such as this one.

In my eyes everybody should learn to work hard and the value of money but some
are skipping these steps with a big initial success and when reality finally
kicks in, they are much less prepared to face it.

Sad, but it's part of one's own personal development. Can't be avoided.

~~~
projektir
But what is reality, for whom? For what amount of people? What of those who
never hit this "reality" at all? They exist, and a comment like yours is
mysteriously never addressed to them, and it's not clear where this personal
development would occur or why.

I see this as a good thing. It makes people expect more, demand more, raise
issues. Because the issue in the blog is worth raising. Otherwise, they'll
just settle for what is. And the is has never been very good.

The cognitive dissonance was from assuming that the world was fair, but you
make this mistake as well.

Reality is malleable and changes constantly, one day your core skill is
learning how to throw a spear the next it's how to manage computers; it's all
rather unreliable and it differs very strongly depending on where you ended
up...

~~~
pdimitar
By "reality" I mostly meant "what is statistically often found almost
everywhere" \-- sorry for not clarifying. By saying "when reality sets in" I
mean to say "when one day nobody can carry you through life anymore, including
your luck from previous phases, and you actually have to work really hard for
a fraction of what you barely worked for before".

And yes, reality is maleable. That's both very good and very bad.

As for me assuming the world is fair, definitely not! The world is anything
but fair...

------
biql
I guess any activity that requires repetition becomes bleak sooner or later
because brain craves variety. I guess it can be the inner voice telling that
by getting obsessed over only one thing, you can miss out the chance to
explore other aspects of life. But as it has been said, everything sucks, most
of the time we're simply choosing what sucks less.

~~~
pdimitar
> _I guess any activity that requires repetition becomes bleak sooner or later
> because brain craves variety._

You nailed it.

And that's a huge problem for the current economical state of affairs; people
start enthusiastically but eventually want to move on. By that time however,
they have a family to care for, mortgage where they cannot miss a single
installment, are generally tired, and cannot afford to make a decisive U-turn
in their lives.

It's extremely saddening, I watched many bright and smiley people turn into
grumpy drones because of that tendency. One of the worst things you could see
in life. :(

------
pavanlimo
As with everything else there is always a spectrum and this represents the
dark end of the spectrum. I follow a bunch of tech youtubers (like MKBHD) who
represent the happy side of the spectrum.

~~~
darkmighty
The main problem is it's self-managed work. Given lack of advisory and
guidance, or the structure of conventional workplaces and school, many people
will mismanage their work-life balance. Even with structure I have problems
sometimes managing my overall workload and side projects.

It's certainly not Youtube at fault here, but it's definitely a valid issue
every independent worker has to face. Discussion and exchanging solutions is a
good thing.

------
jarjoura
How is this different than any other prestigious high performance job? Okay
great, you busted your ass and you made it to the top, and now you have to
bust your ass to stay there. I also don’t really think it’s fair to attach
YouTube to the title. This article can be applied to all social media
celebrities in all their various platforms.

------
kragormonkey
I wonder if this is specific to YouTube in any way. E.g., I'd stop visiting
xkcd if Randall didn't keep uploading regularly. Most open source projects
(including mine) turn into GitHub graveyard because we can't provide even the
most basic maintenance and support. Lots of traditional-media pop stars have
also famously burnt out.

In general, it is hard work to cultivate a proper institution that spreads out
the load and makes this sustainable. And the skill for managing that is never
really taught anywhere. Most "lone artists" don't even realize it's needed
until it's too late. And that's where most of this frustration stems from.
Culturally we focus too much on that one "big break", or the "eureka moment".

------
amarand
I'd watched a few videos talking about the old-time YouTube content generators
in the "Wild West" of the site, compared with the current grind. They tweaked
things so it only seems to make sense - monetization-wise - to be a content
generator if you're able to keep up with posting high-quality content daily.
Myself, I'd want to post great videos that people enjoy, and if the following
grows, great! If not, I would just do what I want to do. If something else is
more fun, I'll do that. But I'm not sure it's a good idea to try to make
YouTube videos a work-from-home paying gig unless you really enjoy whatever
content you're generating. And making regular, high-quality videos is a lot of
work, not to mention regular, meaningful content that people with engage with.
Otherwise, you're just screaming into the void.

~~~
elboru
I don't like how youtubers feel obligated to produce a certain amount of
videos per week. I would prefer one or two videos per month with good quality
than three or four per week with clickbait titles.

------
dogma1138
Who knew hard work can be hard, this reads less like an actual deep analysis
and more like people complaining they need to actually put in work to get
paid.

>‘invisible’ labour such as interacting with fans is ‘a major contributor to
occupational stress. In many cases it can contribute to PTSD’.

Are you kidding me? they are not fans they are your "customers" or at least
your "consumers" public and customer relations are a key part of nearly every
business out there that doesn't rely on accidental walk-ins for the majority
of their business.

If you can't handle it then hire someone who can or find another business,
PTSD? from what? reading fan mail? even if it contains death threats you can't
get PTSD from that there is no trauma, what you have here it just a lazy
person that realized that omg running a business that serves tens of thousands
of people daily is hard.

~~~
CamperBob2
To be fair to the Youtube stars, this is exactly why famous authors and actors
have publicity agents. The notion of celebrities interacting with the hoi
polloi on a daily basis is a brand-new artifact of the Internet age.

What's happening is that today's celebrities are learning why their
predecessors locked themselves away in secluded Hollywood mansions and rode
around wearing sunglasses in heavily-tinted limousines.

~~~
dogma1138
So do "YouTube stars" most of the large channels are run by media companies
either established one or ones that was set up to support the channel.

All the people they interviewed are relatively no-body they are small fish if
anything their "mistake" wasn't taking it as a business they thought they can
record a few videos on their phone edit them in FCP and make a metric ton of
money hence the "winning the lottery" analogy that went through the article.

There aren't shortcuts in life people shouldn't expect to get paid for little
to no effort put in, and yes if you are reaching 50,000 people by selling
yourself you need to be willing to well whore yourself out because you are the
product, if you are running a tech channel or something similar then you often
run it closer to say how a TV channel would be run with different
shows/segments, you can and do hire additional hosts/anchors and eventually
build a whole media production group.

But even the "vlog" channels aren't a solo gig all the large ones did a behind
the scenes videos which they showed just how many people are involved in
producing those videos, if you have a revenue of say $500,000 you can't expect
to be able to do on your own, even on half of that you can easily hire
multiple people and still make a more than enough money.

Cameramen/crew, editors people to handle PR and out reach can be hired for
$50K even with experience and in reality much less especially considering that
given the production scope you can afford to hire people straight out of
college or even high school.

------
0xBA5ED
Surprise. It's just a new face on an ancient profession: Entertainment. And it
comes with similar challenges.

------
umvi
I've noticed a few big YouTubers talking about burnout. Smooth McGroove most
recently comes to mind.

------
village-idiot
Sometimes the most bitter poison is everything you’d ever asked for.

Humans really are terrible at estimating what will make them happy.

~~~
pdimitar
Well it's all phases, is it not? Who says you will have a perfect idea at 16
about what will make you happy until you die? That's definitely not how humans
work.

All of us know people who did U-turns in their lives at 30+. Some even at 50
or 60.

~~~
village-idiot
There’s that, but some of the research I’ve read says that humans are really
bad at predicting how future events will affect their emotional state,
regardless of age.

------
ravenstine
> Divisive content is the king of online media today, and YouTube heavily
> boosts anything that riles people up [...]

I look upon this idea skeptically. In my experience, the content delivered to
me is as divisive as the videos I've already watched. If someone is getting
divisive content, that's probably the content that they _want_ to watch. Is it
really up to YouTube to determine if a person has been watching content that's
too divisive, like a bartender who cuts off a someone who's had too many
drinks?

When I log out of my YouTube account or open YouTube in incognito mode, all I
see are viral videos and nothing that's "divisive". For example, the YouTube
homepage without being logged in shows prank videos, Rube Goldberg type
fascination videos, educational videos, Mexican music, daytime TV crap, SNL
skits, and pop music.

So basically, in order to get to the divisive stuff, you have to already be
using search queries that will bring one to political commentators.

But then what should be done? If someone is watching a lot of videos by the
far left, should the recommended videos proportionally include more videos by
right wing commentators? Is this really what people want?

Sorry that this is tangental from the actual point of the article, but I've
read of this idea multiple times before and it's always asserted as if it's a
matter of fact, but I'm not sure I buy it.

~~~
pjc50
I have a saved screenshot of when I was watching gaming videos (XCOM2) and all
the recommendations were also XCOM2 videos .. and a live stream of UK far-
right rabble-rouser Tommy Robinson.

I suspect (but of course can't prove without secret youtube data) that there's
enough of a crossover between gaming and the far right that any gamer will
eventually see far right videos, far more likely than they will be shown "far
left" videos (these must exist, but I've no idea who they might be?)

~~~
annabellish
The YouTube far-right community is much bigger than one might expect. There's
a lot of actual fascists on youtube who get a lot of algorithmic promotion,
but leftist youtube tends to be smaller and much less extreme - no "far left"
by most definitions.

The same tends to be true in most spaces in my experience. Whatever the "far
left" is tends to be a poorly defined boogieman, not a cohesive group--almost
as if it were the eternal enemy of standard far-right ur-fascist theory!

------
mancerayder
_The anxieties are tied up with the relentless nature of their work. Tyler
Blevins, AKA Ninja, makes an estimated $500,000 (£384,000) every month via
live broadcasts of him playing the video game Fortnite on Twitch, a service
for livestreaming video games that is owned by Amazon. Most of Blevins’
revenue comes from Twitch subscribers or viewers who provide one-off donations
(often in the hope that he will thank them by name “on air”). Blevins recently
took to Twitter to complain that he didn’t feel he could stop streaming.
“Wanna know the struggles of streaming over other jobs?” he wrote, perhaps
ill-advisedly for someone with such a stratospheric income. “I left for less
than 48 hours and lost 40,000 subscribers on Twitch. I’ll be back today…
grinding again.”_

This fits into the stereotype of Millennials as entitled. He makes 500k a
month, but can't get off the hamster wheel? Poor soul.

~~~
da02
Is that after or before taxes?

~~~
TrainedMonkey
Before taxes, he has about 100k subs who contribute around $5 each.

Loosing 40k subs is pretty significant, however I am not sure how that is
possible in just 2 days. While there is an option to auto renew most twitch
subscribers are not automatic, a person is usually watching the stream and
chooses to subscribe. When subscription expires they can do so again. Assuming
140k subs are evenly distributed throughout the month the loss from not
streaming for 48 hours should be 2/30 * 140k, this comes down to slightly less
than 10k. Moreover most of these subs should rejoin once he starts streaming
again.

You can see detailed breakdown here:
[https://twitchstats.net/subs/ninja](https://twitchstats.net/subs/ninja)

~~~
teraflop
> who contribute around $5 each.

Doesn't Twitch take roughly 50% of that?

~~~
LanceH
That's the most they take. Higher level partners get a better cut.

If he lost 40k subscribers, that's most likely 40k renewals that didn't happen
-- and they're not going to happen until he broadcasts again. It's almost a
certainty he didn't lose 40k, many will have renewed once he was on again.

And if 40k subscriptions lapse over 2 days that would seem to imply that he
has 600k subscribers. He doesn't. The 40k loss is just sensationalist. He
didn't log in the first of the month and probably had a ton of people re-sub
on the 3rd when he was back on.

~~~
da02
After a while, it all starts to sound like sports & business. Are you also a
star on Youtube or Twitch? Or do you work in the industry?

------
profosaur
Stay strong, the Tech Lead, if you are out there.

~~~
oceanman888
Are you talking about youtube channel thetechlead?

------
sigi45
"most fun job"? There are many reasons why I don't work as a YouTuber. And I
do not wanna be a "star"

~~~
craftyguy
I'm sure there are tons of people who would say the same thing about whatever
it is you do. Different strokes for different folks.

~~~
sigi45
Exactly but i don't say: "Software engineering is the most fun job".

------
anonymous5133
If they feel burnout then they should just stop making videos for awhile or
move on to doing something else.

~~~
wgerard
> stop making videos for awhile

It has a huge detrimental effect. Each day you take a break can set you back
by several. From the article:

>> “I left for less than 48 hours and lost 40,000 subscribers on Twitch. I’ll
be back today… grinding again.”

> move on to doing something else

There's not a clear career path to anything else. Many of them have spent
their formative adult years streaming, and transitioning to another career
would be incredibly difficult and likely pay significantly less.

Sure, there are the mega-streamers who have (hopefully) saved enough money
that they could absorb that gigantic setback, or have enough celebrity that
they can transition to something else, but I doubt the majority of them have
earned enough to support a major life transition - like, say, going back to
school full-time.

This is also one of the problems former professional athletes face, and there
are actually a lot of interesting parallels between the two groups. "Broke" is
a really interesting watch if you haven't seen it already that is quite eye-
opening:
[http://www.espn.com/30for30/film?page=broke](http://www.espn.com/30for30/film?page=broke)

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _There 's not a clear career path to anything else_

If you’re making $6 million / year, you have the resources with which to take
time off and reconsider your choices.

~~~
TimothyBJacobs
It's a shame that that is the quote they decided to use in the article. But
you can ask any Twitch streamer, if you take a vacation expect to lose large
amounts of your subscribers.

On YouTube, if you stop posting videos for a while, YouTube will severely
punish you in the algorithm. It'll take weeks before your videos start showing
back up in user's subscription boxes.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _if you take a vacation expect to lose large amounts of your subscribers_

And if a freelancer takes a vacation, they can expect to lose contract
volumes. This is why people form teams, so one person can take a break while
other people pick up the slack. If you're making a lot of money, you should be
able to take the hit and re-organise in a more sustainable way.

