Are you willing to sacrifice your integrity for YouTube stardom?

[TYTD]

it depends but i'd be inclined to say no...as a critic I cant in good conscience compromise my integrity (The entire point of reviewing and critiquing is to be honest about what you think of something even if it can become detrimental) at the same time I think I would only do sponsored advertising on my channel if it was something I genuinely thought was worth advertising (And I'd really try to keep it as discreet as possible...because noone really wants ads opening a video or pop ups dotted throughout...) I might be tempted to do something stupid or silly for charity because hey! why not! its for a good cause but again it would have to be something that was "good" for a good cause I wouldnt want to put my name to just anything... other than my own personal amusement I'd be inclined to say integrity is crucial to my channel really...so yeh...though I dont envy anyone who is willing to do anything...those guys seem to do quite well really...

 

[Andrewcu]

Once you make it, I don't think most people really care that much what you did to get there.
Examples:
Markiplier had to start a new account because he was banned on adsense.
jacksepticeye went around to lots of channels asking them to check out his channel (essentially spam).
Not to mention the countless stars who clickbaited in dubious and big way and are now stars.

People may be annoyed at the time that they were dodgy. But if they're entertaining enough and keep their audience, most people soon forget this and only care that they're popular and entertaining.

I worked the system (so to speak) a bit on my variety channel when I actually uploaded to it (I make videos for kids now). I don't feel bad about it, because my competition did it to a larger degree. When so many big channels do dodgy things, I don't see why we should feel bad for doing the same.

 

[TYTD]

Once you make it, I don't think most people really care that much what you did to get there.
Examples:
Markiplier had to start a new account because he was banned on adsense.
jacksepticeye went around to lots of channels asking them to check out his channel (essentially spam).

I worked the system (so to speak) a bit on my variety channel when I actually uploaded to it (I make videos for kids now). I don't feel bad about it, because my competition did it to a larger degree. When so many big channels do dodgy things, I don't see why we should feel bad for doing the same.

I wouldnt say the two examples you listed up top were necessarily examples of someone sacrificing there integrity really though...starting a new channel because of previously getting banned is just a fact of life really on youtube; especially when the automated system decides to throw a wobbly and theres noone to talk to about it to try and get it fixed...

Also; I would say there are ways to ask people to check your channel in the comments without just saying "Good vid. Check ma channel out tho..." as well...I mean; I'll hold my hands up and say that I've visited channels that have uploaded film trailers of films I've covered and I'll put out a comment that says something like "Hey!, this film was pretty great/awful!, I really liked/hated this bit. though ultimately/sadly it had this bit which makes it good/awful...though I made a video talking about it recently in more detail which is here: ... ... ... what were your thoughts on it?" I do it in part because I'd genuinely love the conversation...but at the same time it doesnt necessarily hurt to try and get a little extra traffic...I'd never do it off original content (Unless the creator specifically asks for my opinion) but yeh... xD Bill Hicks said something similar about advertising years ago "If your young and your at the start of your career and you need to hock doritos to make it paycheck to paycheck...alright...I'll look the other way...but if your an established celebrity and you do that. your off the artistic roll call...end of story. and that goes for everyone...except Willie nelson." xD

 

[MentallyGames]

Comment: "I don't even think about terms like ''quality entertainment'' and ''shady practices'' anymore. It's all so subjective that it is just a waste of your time to even think about it." - MentallyGames

Response: I disagree. Think about it, even you as a content creator have consider quality at some point, whether it be with a video, logo, thumbnail, etc. And if you didn't care about quality entertainment then why bother uploading 4K 60FPS videos?

That said, even you, whether you're willing to admit it or not, care about "'shady practices". For if someone were to take advantage of you, then you too would care. And there's nothing subjective about that.

Now in regards to bias subjective preference, well, that's another issue. You see, not everyone can distinguish personal preference from irrefutable fact, and that's the problem. Just because we don't like a particular video doesn't make it bad. Some will like it, while others will dislike it, and that's all subjective. But at the end of the day an objective individual can determine what is undeniably good, undeniably bad, and anything in-between, regardless of their personal preferences. Simply put, we all have opinions, but they are not an accurate determination of how good or bad anything actually is.

But what do I know, I'm just a realist. : )

It's fine that you disagree. Would be boring talking about it if we were all on the same page right? I was not trying to tell you that you were wrong, hopefully it didn't come across like that!

Concerning your first response:
Sure, but that's the technical side of things, which (imo) is the less important part of the term quality entertainment. I always consider quality, because I personally care about how my stuff looks. If my channel looks good and my videos are recorded in 4k 60 FPS, that makes me happy. It gives me just a tad bit more pride in my videos. Do other people give a damn about it? Not if it's not an entertaining video. So for those people it's not quality entertainment. It's just a high resolution video.

Concerning your shady practices response:
I care about shady practices if they hurt me yes. You are absolutely right about that. If somebody took advantage of me, I would care. Here's the thing though: maybe I don't feel taken advantage of as quickly as somebody else. That makes shady practices a pretty subjective term again. In your openingpost you mention begging for likes and subs, misleading thumbnails, simplistic titles and women using their sex appeal. I honestly could not care less about those practices. Somebody else could feel taken advantage off in that same scenario though. For that person it's a hardcore unforgivable shady practice. For me it's more forgivable because I don't give it the same emotional value.

Concerning the last part of your response.
I agree fully up to the objective individual part. People can judge a video and say ''it's well put together'' or ''You can tell that there is production quality there''. So sure, people can tell the difference between good and bad in that sense. But again: if they are not interested in the video itself, the actual 10 minutes of content that you are showing, it will not be quality entertainment for them and therefore they will value it less than that weird cat video that was recorded with a phone at 420p, but made them laugh for 10 minutes straight. Pretty subjective in my book.

I'm quite the realist too if I say so myself. Does not stop us from having different opinions! Interesting topic though. Thanks for starting it!

 

[Malousak]

The name is Strategist. Born Strategist. and as a gamer, incorruptible content creator and advocate of high quality entertainment I have often wondered how far some will go for YouTube stardom? Not just for the attention, but for the monetary gains that go along with it. For whether we believe it or not, there are a great deal of people that are all to willing to renounce their moral values for financial gain. Don't believe me? Just go to YouTube and I'm sure you'll find something that'll prove my point, if you haven't already.

That said, many don't mind doing less than questionable things to become a YouTube success. Think about it. How many YouTubers have you seen begging for likes and subscriptions? How many times have you seen misleading thumbnails and simplistic titles to entice potential viewers? Or scantily clad women attempting to utilize sex appeal to garner attention? Trust me, the list of shameless practices are numerous.

But, just because I don't agree with it, doesn't mean it's an ineffective strategy. In fact, it's a very effective strategy, and that's why they use it. And as a result, YouTube is overpopulated by dull, unimaginative, drivel. And that's the problem. For the majority of people have become content with crap. Simply put, low standards lead to low quality content.

And make no mistake, this isn't sour grapes. For I too have had many opportunities to do the same questionable things, but I didn't. Why? Because I hate hypocrites.

With that said, what are your thoughts? What are your opinions? Are you willing to sacrifice your integrity for YouTube stardom? Let us know below.

Lol I sometimes get creeps coming to my gaming videos and saying nasty stuff, even though my videos are nothing like that. I have seen people who use cheap stunts to get views and subs, but in the end that only works for the short term and not in the long run. I intend on building an audience that is not toxic, because like it or not the audience who come to (for example) sexual videos, they are most likely toxic and WILL say stuff that will hurt you. I don't want toxicity for my channel. I want people who like watching my content for ME and not the stuff that already exist on other channels. Even if the numbers will not be as high, but I know that the quality of my community will stay high and that is my priority. Quality over quantity. I have seen the nasty comments that people post on Zoe Burgher, Azziland, and Sniperworlf's videos and it totally disgusts me. I'm not saying that I should be boring and prude (that's no fun at all lol) but I have had every opportunity to do stuff that would give me a lot of views and yet I didn't.

 

[Born Strategist]

It's fine that you disagree. Would be boring talking about it if we were all on the same page right? I was not trying to tell you that you were wrong, hopefully it didn't come across like that!

Concerning your first response:
Sure, but that's the technical side of things, which (imo) is the less important part of the term quality entertainment. I always consider quality, because I personally care about how my stuff looks. If my channel looks good and my videos are recorded in 4k 60 FPS, that makes me happy. It gives me just a tad bit more pride in my videos. Do other people give a damn about it? Not if it's not an entertaining video. So for those people it's not quality entertainment. It's just a high resolution video.

Concerning your shady practices response:
I care about shady practices if they hurt me yes. You are absolutely right about that. If somebody took advantage of me, I would care. Here's the thing though: maybe I don't feel taken advantage of as quickly as somebody else. That makes shady practices a pretty subjective term again. In your openingpost you mention begging for likes and subs, misleading thumbnails, simplistic titles and women using their sex appeal. I honestly could not care less about those practices. Somebody else could feel taken advantage off in that same scenario though. For that person it's a hardcore unforgivable shady practice. For me it's more forgivable because I don't give it the same emotional value.

Concerning the last part of your response.
I agree fully up to the objective individual part. People can judge a video and say ''it's well put together'' or ''You can tell that there is production quality there''. So sure, people can tell the difference between good and bad in that sense. But again: if they are not interested in the video itself, the actual 10 minutes of content that you are showing, it will not be quality entertainment for them and therefore they will value it less than that weird cat video that was recorded with a phone at 420p, but made them laugh for 10 minutes straight. Pretty subjective in my book.

I'm quite the realist too if I say so myself. Does not stop us from having different opinions! Interesting topic though. Thanks for starting it!

Comment: "I agree fully up to the objective individual part. People can judge a video and say ''it's well put together'' or ''You can tell that there is production quality there''. So sure, people can tell the difference between good and bad in that sense." - MetallyGames

Response: Unfortunately, not everyone can determine the difference between what is good, and what is bad. If so, then we would have a lot less problems as a society. And don't forget, I already covered this in my initial response. But to make sure there's no confusion, take a look at my previous response.

Initial Response: Now in regards to bias subjective preference, well, that's another issue. You see, not everyone can distinguish personal preference from irrefutable fact, and that's the problem. Just because we don't like a particular video doesn't make it bad. Some will like it, while others will dislike it, and that's all subjective. But at the end of the day an objective individual can determine what is undeniably good, undeniably bad, and anything in-between, regardless of their personal preferences. Simply put, we all have opinions, but they are not an accurate determination of how good or bad anything actually is.

Comment: "But again: if they are not interested in the video itself, the actual 10 minutes of content that you are showing, it will not be quality entertainment for them and therefore they will value it less than that weird cat video that was recorded with a phone at 420p, but made them laugh for 10 minutes straight. Pretty subjective in my book" - MetallyGames

Response: Once again, we all have opinions. We all have preferences. We all have likes and dislikes. But they are not an accurate determination of how good or bad anything actually is. For in order to objectively analyze anything, we must first understand what we're analyzing on a fundamental level. And if we can't do that, then we can't objectively analyze anything. Simply put, objectivity is an unbiased perspective. Meaning, fair, impartial. Which is the exact opposite of a subjective opinion or preference.

 

[MentallyGames]

Comment: "I agree fully up to the objective individual part. People can judge a video and say ''it's well put together'' or ''You can tell that there is production quality there''. So sure, people can tell the difference between good and bad in that sense." - MetallyGames

Response: Unfortunately, not everyone can determine the difference between what is good, and what is bad. If so, then we would have a lot less problems as a society. And don't forget, I already covered this in my initial response. But to make sure there's no confusion, take a look at my previous response.

Initial Response: Now in regards to bias subjective preference, well, that's another issue. You see, not everyone can distinguish personal preference from irrefutable fact, and that's the problem. Just because we don't like a particular video doesn't make it bad. Some will like it, while others will dislike it, and that's all subjective. But at the end of the day an objective individual can determine what is undeniably good, undeniably bad, and anything in-between, regardless of their personal preferences. Simply put, we all have opinions, but they are not an accurate determination of how good or bad anything actually is.

Comment: "But again: if they are not interested in the video itself, the actual 10 minutes of content that you are showing, it will not be quality entertainment for them and therefore they will value it less than that weird cat video that was recorded with a phone at 420p, but made them laugh for 10 minutes straight. Pretty subjective in my book" - MetallyGames

Response: Once again, we all have opinions. We all have preferences. We all have likes and dislikes. But they are not an accurate determination of how good or bad anything actually is. For in order to objectively analyze anything, we must first understand what we're analyzing on a fundamental level. And if we can't do that, then we can't objectively analyze anything. Simply put, objectivity is an unbiased perspective. Meaning, fair, impartial. Which is the exact opposite of a subjective opinion or preference.

I don't think you understood what I was saying in my response, so let me explain it more clearly: the terms good and bad are per definition subjective. There is no objective checklist for those 2 words, which is why you will never see them in any research that has any credibility at all. You can only look at technical aspects, because those are measurable. It is a fact that 1080p is a higher resolution than 720p for instance. So from a technical perspective you can judge quality of any content made on YT. Wether it is good or bad and thus entertaining is 100% personal preference.

 

[XenithDragon]

How ever much I would love to reach a high place on you tube, I don't think I could sacrifice my morals and values to do it. On the other hand, they aren't exactly amazing values, but they are enough to warrant me straying away from some scummy activities. I would be satisfied with just making it by on youtube if i was able to keep my integrity.

 

[Born Strategist]

I don't think you understood what I was saying in my response, so let me explain it more clearly: the terms good and bad are per definition subjective. There is no objective checklist for those 2 words, which is why you will never see them in any research that has any credibility at all. You can only look at technical aspects, because those are measurable. It is a fact that 1080p is a higher resolution than 720p for instance. So from a technical perspective you can judge quality of any content made on YT. Wether it is good or bad and thus entertaining is 100% personal preference.

Comment: "I don't think you understood what I was saying in my response, so let me explain it more clearly: the terms good and bad are per definition subjective." - MentallyGames

Response: To an extent, we agree on this. For good and bad is subjective to a bias party. However, an objective perspective is devoid of such bias.

Bias: mental tendency or inclination, esp an irrational preference or prejudice

Objective: not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased

That said, in our society we have standards. And it is by those standards that we measure what is good, bad or anything in-between.

Example: if someone were to intentionally kill an innocent person, then that is undeniably bad. However, if someone were to kill in self-defense, then that is undeniably good.

Simply put, good or bad to a bias party is subjective, but an unbiased party is free from such irrational preference or prejudice. And whether you acknowledge this or not is irrelevant, because objectivity is not limited to statistics, numerical facts. And if that is what you believe, then that is, by definition, a bias belief, a feeling, an opinion.

Note: An objective perspective is one that is not influenced by emotions, opinions, or personal feelings - it is a perspective based in fact, in things quantifiable and measurable. And society standards are measurable.

With that said, I don't want to come back and reiterate the same thing again, so look into "societal standards", if you want more information.

P.S. The Walking Dead TV series is a good example of societal collapse, the reformation of it's standards and how they are defined.

 

[MentallyGames]

Comment: "I don't think you understood what I was saying in my response, so let me explain it more clearly: the terms good and bad are per definition subjective." - MentallyGames

Response: To an extent, we agree on this. For good and bad is subjective to a bias party. However, an objective perspective is devoid of such bias.

Bias: mental tendency or inclination, esp an irrational preference or prejudice

Objective: not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased

That said, in our society we have standards. And it is by those standards that we measure what is good, bad or anything in-between.

Example: if someone were to intentionally kill an innocent person, then that is undeniably bad. However, if someone were to kill in self-defense, then that is undeniably good.

Simply put, good or bad to a bias party is subjective, but an unbiased party is free from such irrational preference or prejudice. And whether you acknowledge this or not is irrelevant, because objectivity is not limited to statistics, numerical facts. And if that is what you believe, then that is, by definition, a bias belief, a feeling, an opinion.

Note: An objective perspective is one that is not influenced by emotions, opinions, or personal feelings - it is a perspective based in fact, in things quantifiable and measurable. And society standards are measurable.

With that said, I don't want to come back and reiterate the same thing again, so look into "societal standards", if you want more information.

P.S. The Walking Dead TV series is a good example of societal collapse, the reformation of it's standards and how they are defined.

Again: I don't think you understand. Good and bad are ALWAYS subjective terms in the grand scheme of things. You pretty much say it yourself. A society has standards. Are your standards the same as those of an African tribe or an Arabian country? No, because other people with other cultures and other believes and other experiences decide those standards. Therefore standards in a society and the measurements on which good and bad are decided upon, are by default subjective. They only apply within that circle of people and even at that point, there are debates about whether the standards are good or bad.

I can go on and on. Do we still have all the rituals from the middle ages? No, because standards have changed and they continue to do so as time goes on. Why did they change? because people changed their minds. That is not something that is possible with facts. You can't change facts like you can change standards. Why don't people agree about the death penalty? About gun laws? Immigration? You state that standards in society are measurable, but if that was truly the case, these topics would not be issues at all. Why do the democrats and republicans always change each others laws and with that the standards of society? Because standards are based on laws, that are based on ideas from groups that have their own experiences, believes, culture and so on.

I appreciate you trying to explain certain terms to me and giving me more information, but I graduated in sociology, psychology and philosophy, so I have a pretty solid understanding of these terms and how all of this stuff works. So there is no real need for any of it. Thanks for going trying to go in depth on it though! I enjoyed it, even though it kinda flew away from the topic you originally wanted to discuss. Have a good one!