
The high costs of running YouTube - nreece
http://www.slate.com/id/2216162/
======
tokenadult
This article makes the important point that user-generated content is less
advertiser-appealing than professionally produced content, because so much of
user-generated content is schlocky and likely to degrade any brand advertised
on the same screen view.

~~~
moe
I'd argue that many bits of user generated content do a better job at
establishing an emotional relationship. Take this article for example, which
is obviously "professional journalism" at work. It has the typical, sterile,
non-authentic smell to it - nobody in the real world says "30 million
Megabits".

I have no idea whether I'd be more likely to click on an ad next to this
article or next to a youtube clip that made me laugh. But I _think_ the
latter...

------
Gibbon
if the numbers are anywhere close to accurate, that's a hell of a deficit to
make up before turning ramen profitable.

The coming youtube redesign will likely relegate user-generated content to the
backburner in favour of premium offerings. UG content is a nightmare for risk
adverse advertisters. Uknown creators and potential copyright infringing
content don't make for a great recipe. Not to mention, the bulk of youtube's
videos don't exactly have the kind of high production values you'd want to
hang your shingles on.

