Sudden revenue drop lately ? (all discussion here ONLY)

[TheSwedishTraveler]

Haven´t you heard about the ad boycott that has happened these couple of weeks? A lot of people has talked about it lately!
You are not alone of losing money on youtube! The revenue has gone down significantly because of the said boycott!

 

[DoggoMC]

Hello,
You are losing money due to advertisers not displaying nearly as many ads on videos.
This is because The Wall Street Journal and other mainstream news providers have published how Youtubers are 'racist' and the majority of content on the
website is hateful. Because of this, advertisers have pulled out of advertising on almost all channels, leaving Youtubers with little to no revenue.

Recently, Google added a feature for advertisers to stop advertisements from appearing on hateful videos. However, this is so vague that channels who do nothing wrong are losing tons of revenue. If Google doesn't do something now, there might not be a Youtube website in the next few years.

 

[Goran Matanovic]

I did read about Ad Boycott but i did not expect that every channel will take this negative effect -_- if i change Parter and go to Curse will it be the same or Curse is now better option?

 

[Cvolton]

I did read about Ad Boycott but i did not expect that every channel will take this negative effect -_- if i change Parter and go to Curse will it be the same or Curse is now better option?

it will be the same, MCNs can't affect what ads are being shown to people

 

[Uncivilized Elk]

This is because The Wall Street Journal and other mainstream news providers have published how Youtubers are 'racist' and the majority of content on the website is hateful.

Maybe you should actually read what they published.

If Google doesn't do something now, there might not be a Youtube website in the next few years.

LOL.



Also, people, IT'S APRIL. It's the start of a new quarter and this time of the season is always bad for ad revenue. It's not as bad as the new year drop, but it's still a pretty weighty drop nonetheless. I know it's easy to use a singular thing as the sole scapegoat for all problems but life isn't that simple.

 

[Uncivilized Elk]

RPM has recently been back to the "standard" $1 / 1k views for me. In-line with April being a bad month for revenue. Really things haven't been too out of the ordinary with the ad revenue, the typical new quarter fluctuations did what they always do, and people jumping at the whole "boycott" thing are really overplaying the severity of its effect.

 

[KatyAdelson]

Hi @Goran Matanovic - I've merged your thread to this one that discusses the same topic. ^^

 

[Jungle Explorer]

I have a question. There has been a lot of talk about, "Potentially Offensive" content. I would just like to know, Who Decides what Potentially Offensive is? I mean, there are tons of things that offend me on a daily basis on network TV, so much so, that I don't watch it anymore. The term "Potentially Offensive" is a very broad and ambiguous term and could apply to almost anything.

In a free market society, it should be the "Consumer" who decides, not the government or the advertisers. Don't you think?

 

[The NotARubicon!]

In a free market society, it should be the "Consumer" who decides, not the government or the advertisers. Don't you think?

Your statement/question is half right. The government should not decide what is or is not 'offensive'.
The advertisers are part of the free-market, and are the ones paying for your privilege of using Youtube, so they have every right to decide. However it is also YouTube's responsibility to make the final, and hopefully fair, decision.

 

[Jungle Explorer]

Your statement/question is half right. The government should not decide what is or is not 'offensive'.
The advertisers are part of the free-market, and are the ones paying for your privilege of using Youtube, so they have every right to decide. However it is also YouTube's responsibility to make the final, and hopefully fair, decision.

I agree that advertisers have the right to decide where they want there ads to appear, but that is different then them joining together to use their power and money to BULLY the market into doing what they want. That is not free market. That is tyranny of the rich and powerful.


The question is, who gets to decide what is Potentially Offensive . What does that term even mean? Where is the definition written down that we can all look to to find solid clear guidlines?