The Atlantic: Nobody Knows What’s Happening Online Anymore. Why you’ve probably never heard of the most popular Netflix show in the world.::undefined

  • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    And plenty of poor low-subscriber channels that are actually really good and could blow up at some point.

    I’ve certainly watched some people from before they were big and from memory their content was more or less just as good in the “early” days. Which all up makes for a pile of stuff!

    • helenslunch@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      And plenty of poor low-subscriber channels that are actually really good and could blow up at some point.

      Probably doing stupid things like posting with useful titles and thumbnails without agape mouths…

      That seems to be the only kind of trash content that Google is interested in pushing these days.

      • drphungky@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        I can’t remember what channel, but somebody did an experiment with not doing the ridiculous thumbnails and got way fewer views. Which sort of gets at the point of this article: the are huge swaths of people that are clicking on them and that sounds super foreign to a lot of us.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          It was Veritaseum. I don’t argue that they’re not effective. I argue that Google has full control of them and Google could easily derate those types of videos to make a better experience for their users. But they do the opposite.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That seems to be the only kind of trash content that Google is interested in pushing these days.

        Youtube “pushes” whatever gets more views and longer watch time.

        If trashy crap is being suggested, that means other people are watching it in increased numbers.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Youtube “pushes” whatever gets more views and longer watch time.

          No YouTube pushes what people will click on. They don’t care about the quality of the content, whether the people who watch it actually enjoy it (dislike = “engagement”), or what kind of content people are actually subscribed to because the ads come first.

          • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Youtube “pushes” whatever gets more views and longer watch time.

            No YouTube pushes what people will click on.

            That’s pretty much what I said.

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              No it’s not what you said. You specifically mentioned “longer watch time” where clickbait titles and thumbnails result in the opposite, but also plenty of ad views.

      • Syntha@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Google pushes what you click. Stop watching this kind of content and it’ll probably stop being recommended to you

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Not true. I don’t watch it.

          And even if I did, it doesn’t mean that I liked it. None of these tech companies’ algorithms seem to account for that little fact, even when I directly express otherwise.

          • foxbat@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            they are not optimizing for your enjoyment, they’'re optimizing for your engagement. they don’t give a fuck if you hate what you’re watching as long as you watch it for longer.

            • helenslunch@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              they are not optimizing for your enjoyment, they’'re optimizing for your engagement.

              Yes that’s my point.

              they don’t give a fuck if you hate what you’re watching as long as you watch it for longer.

              Don’t know about you but I don’t spend my free time torturing myself.

          • Syntha@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Well I practically never see these kinds of thumbnails, it’s absolutely influenced by your behaviour whatever it may be.