I finally understand why so many youtubers seem like they never grow up, like they freeze in time back when they were like 12 years old when they first published their first video. I was always thinking, is there is something fundamentally wrong with these people? And then it clicked. No. Not at all. They just reacted to a certain stimuli like any of us would. That reaction tho would change their lives forever tho.
Most youtubers start out by experimenting, publishing videos left and right with no purpose or subject, purely out of enjoyment for the work, and then the unexpected happens, one of their videos gets randomly blessed by the algorithm and they get to taste for the first time what is like being famous.
Now this is crucial, this is really important. How they choose to react to this will change their lives forever, and they most always react the exact same way: they make similar videos to the one that blew, ultimately cementing their identity. You know, like humans do, they pay attention to the thing that works and make more of it.
If the video they made was a cringy prank, they will start pumping out cringy pranks every other day.
If the video was a political one, they will develop into a pundit
If they twerked they asses on camera...you get the idea.
These people are now tied to their work, they cannot "smarten up" or "mature" because their subscribers control them. Believe it or not, you in fact, cannot make significant changes to the product you sell since all the previous buyers you spend years of blood and sweat trying to attract will lose interest. That was not what they signed up for. And they will. With a change of content, expect a lot of people unsubscribing. And that's why Logan Paul and Jake behave like overgrown tumors what should face the wall. They were 16 years old when their first vine video went viral.
To think that a humans whole identity and behavior would be dictated by that one video they made when they were 16 years old..
I mean that's what the working world is ... your life might end up revolving around that first gig you get
total context switching is hard
Liam Lee
>Logan Paul and Jake I always felt like these faggots were "industry plants". They seem totally synthetic.
Austin Ramirez
Now ask yourself, Who controls the algorithm that randomly "blessed" their video?
Nicholas Adams
based 2pbp
Ryder Flores
I like the analysis and I think for the most part you're right. But I don't think you're considering that the people who are cringe-overgrown-children are also reaping massive $ from the views. They are cringe-overgrown-children because of the money, not necessarily that they are doing it for the money, but the money allows them to be more of who they are. Yes, an aspect of them happened to be selected by the YT Algo., but you're simply seeing that aspect magnified while the rest of them is also being magnified off camera. Their experiences now as someone "rich" and "famous" isn't just on that YT Algo selected element. The fact that a specific video/sort of content fed their initial blowup, I think has little to do with the fact that they are simply who they are.
Seems like you're really thinking about this, just some genuine input.
Camden Bennett
Based, bump for the leaf-ariinou
Blake Clark
Are you saying it was cApItAliSm all along?
Cameron Hall
Who are these people you’re talking about? Seems like you’re cherrypicking. I know many youtubers that just do their thing without any influence from their subscriber count. If anything, their content evolves for better or worse over the years because they get bored doing the same thing.
Jaxson Wood
on point, same goes for celebrities who became famous when they were children, they never grow up
Caleb Bennett
REDDIT SPACING IS THE ONE SUPERIOR THING ABOUT REDDIT AND I WILL DIE ON HIS HILL
This exactly, and the fact that the majority of the viewer base are 14-21 (assuming) makes sense why these YouTube "stars" never grow up or need to.
That one quote from Matthew McConaughey -about high school girls- It's pretty much that. But with a much more rewarding output than pussy.
Basically, the market's selection has been magnified by an AI, that selection is simply a perspective of a person on a subject. Or more broadly like the Pauls as mentioned by OP a personality.
Josiah Turner
Please show me examples of youtubers that aren't at least somewhat specialized
Nolan Roberts
user., I and you have mentioned the Pauls. I don't watch much of them, but I have spent a few hours randomly checking out their content. It just seems like they are YT stars because of their personality, which is a general trait. Danny Duncan also comes to mind.
You have to consider specialized with in the environment you're considering. At some point, you'd have to assume speaking English is a specialization.
Brayden Baker
Slacking and didn't read the first post.
This. An aggregation of data directed by an AI that makes someone who initially is just interested into a fan of something that is probably absolutely good for nothing and doesn't have the capacity to avoid the "agenda" is pure cancer.
Nolan Allen
I like watching Danny Duncan put government wagies in their place.
Ian Hernandez
Lol >My Dad owns this
Seems like a legit cool guy. In regard to OP's post, why do all the people who are "general" content producers also have their name as the name of their channel?
Liam Walker
>le paragraphs le bad
Ayden Moore
Every channel has a niche. That’s the whole point of youtube. Paul was a goofball, made stupid videos until one went viral and then continued making shitty videos. Doesn’t mean he based his identity around one video, he based his video around his identity.
