
The depressing truth about web stardom - Anon84
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/23319/
======
mechanical_fish
_And in fact video producers receive higher ratings for their later videos,
even as their success rate declines._

Ah, so people are less successful over time _if_ we define "success" as "sheer
number of hits".

Just because they're not reaching the widest audience doesn't mean that these
people aren't reaching _their_ audience.

Isn't this how you _want_ it to work? The point of publicity is to get
_everyone_ to look at your work _once_. But there's no way that all of those
people are going to stick, unless your product is heroin. (Even then, some
people are smart enough to say "no, thanks" to your first offer.)

If nearly 100% of the people who first see your product stick around, the most
likely explanation is _not_ that you have invented heroin. More likely, _you
have not reached enough people yet_ : Your product is still spreading solely
via word of mouth, and there are potential fans among the general population
who you would pick up if you cast a wider net. (Though, obviously, casting
such a net has a cost. Your true fans may accuse you of "selling out" once
your ads start appearing on daytime television.)

The important thing about a viewership curve is not that it declines over
time. The important question is: What's the asymptotic value, and is that
equilibrium number of fans large enough to keep you happy in perpetuity? If it
isn't... what's the rate of decline, and is there enough area under the curve
to keep you happy while you work out the next thing you want to do? The first
scenario is _The Simpsons_. The second is just about every other successful TV
series in history.

------
dxjones
If you look at Figure 4 in the actual article, you see that persistence _DOES_
pay off on YouTube. Although the probability of a particular video becoming
insanely popular declines, the overall probability that at least one video
from your collection becomes popular continues to rise as you keep uploading
them.

If your first lottery ticket has a 0.01 chance of winning, but your next
lottery tickets have a declining chance of winning, the overall chance of
winning the lottery can continue to rise. In their example, it rises from 0.01
to approaching 0.20. Doesn't sound all that irrational, does it? Persistence
increases your chance of becoming popular by a factor of 20X. It just takes
many more than 20 uploads to accomplish that increase.

In fact, ... when you think about it, ... it could not turn out any other way.
If the probability of your next video getting you in the "top 1%" on YouTube
stayed fixed, ... then EVERYONE could be in the "top 1%". ... sounds like
everyone wanting their kids to be "above average" in school. It's just not
possible.

\-- dxjones

------
CalmQuiet
"A more puzzling question is why the producers persist in the face of
declining audience figures. "

i.e., why don't "one-shot wonders" recognize themselves as such and... give
up?

It's a basic principle of the psychology of learned behavior: intermittent
reinforcement: Having _occasionally_ been rewarded, s/he persists in trying to
be rewarded (cf: win the big one in the lottery).

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
That aspect of human behavior is also mentioned here:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=485797>

------
jgrahamc
Any chance that the if you upload a lot of content to YouTube that you are
uploading ripped off content, or minor modifications, whereas if you upload a
few videos you may actually be uploading stuff you produced?

------
Batsu
Doesn't this fall into the category of correlation and not causation?

In either case, it's not the destination, it's the journey :) Being a 'star'
might be important to some people, but I would argue that most will not waste
their time if they didn't enjoy doing it.

~~~
sscheper
I completely agree with you. The only thing that keeps me blogging every other
day is that it sharpens my mind. It requires me to think, create and get
thoughts onto paper. It's almost like a daily meditation.

My wife does the same thing with politics :)

~~~
josefresco
I hope she's debating/participating and not simply watching cable news
politics.

------
Encosia
It seems like a mistake to directly equate persistence and quantity.

~~~
josefresco
The former suggest you weigh the results of your previous attempts and make
improvements in order to increase your odds of success. The latter suggest
simply applying the same approach over and over without major reconsideration.

------
Gibbon
I posted essentially the same article by Kevin Kelly, a week ago :
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=541394>

It includes a link to the original paper.

------
diN0bot
reference: <http://arxiv.org/abs/0904.0489>

------
stcredzero
Didn't Warhol say something about this once? (15 minutes...)

