Shocked expressions, big red arrows pointing to nothing, titles based on shock, surprise or open-ended questions are videos I tend to avoid. I don’t particularly care to watch a video where the first emotion had is sympathy for desperation. (It makes you almost question the emotional state of most of the users that “the algorithm” tuned itself for, TBH. I say that only as an observation of scale when looking at the sheer numbers of viewers that YouTube has.)
Sticking with the subtle stuff is just fine. A picture of the host smiling with an informative title and thumbnail is OK, and not very gag evoking.
Blaming “the algorithm” for having to do that shit is likely a very real thing. However, I will religiously watch channels that produce good content first.
Either way, I have conflicting views: A person has to earn a living, but when emotional exploitation is used in this way, I don’t know what to think. Is it really harmless? Not sure about that yet.
Standup comedians in r/StandupComedy report that following some trends unfortunately does increase views. E.g. censoring ‘obscene’ or ‘violent’ words. Although that’s not as prevalent on YouTube, but they can’t really produce separate videos for various platforms.
I agree. It doesn’t feel harmless because mirroring validates the behavior and perpetuates the cycle. It’s not how I earn a living so I’m lacking the perspective and motivation of the account holder(s). Seeing thumbnails in that style has always made me cringe. Maybe I’m feeling embarrassed for the person?
Generally I found that people that rely on these types of thumbnails don’t often have very good content. I like Josh the intern but he’s started doing this as well.
Shocked expressions, big red arrows pointing to nothing, titles based on shock, surprise or open-ended questions are videos I tend to avoid. I don’t particularly care to watch a video where the first emotion had is sympathy for desperation. (It makes you almost question the emotional state of most of the users that “the algorithm” tuned itself for, TBH. I say that only as an observation of scale when looking at the sheer numbers of viewers that YouTube has.)
Sticking with the subtle stuff is just fine. A picture of the host smiling with an informative title and thumbnail is OK, and not very gag evoking.
Blaming “the algorithm” for having to do that shit is likely a very real thing. However, I will religiously watch channels that produce good content first.
Either way, I have conflicting views: A person has to earn a living, but when emotional exploitation is used in this way, I don’t know what to think. Is it really harmless? Not sure about that yet.
Also anything with DESTROYS in the title
3 ukrainian soldeirs OBLITERATE 3 russian soldiers. Russia is BANKRUPT (added 4 years ago)
I was erect for too long, it’s coming any day now!
Standup comedians in r/StandupComedy report that following some trends unfortunately does increase views. E.g. censoring ‘obscene’ or ‘violent’ words. Although that’s not as prevalent on YouTube, but they can’t really produce separate videos for various platforms.
I feel you. DeArrow solves this.
It superficially solves the problem. I want to know who is humiliating themselves to satisfy the algorithm so I can avoid their videos.
I agree. It doesn’t feel harmless because mirroring validates the behavior and perpetuates the cycle. It’s not how I earn a living so I’m lacking the perspective and motivation of the account holder(s). Seeing thumbnails in that style has always made me cringe. Maybe I’m feeling embarrassed for the person?
Generally I found that people that rely on these types of thumbnails don’t often have very good content. I like Josh the intern but he’s started doing this as well.