Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "I No Longer Expect Growth on Youtube: Alt Tech It Is!" video.

  1. Yes. Many of us are still on YouTube. It's because we're lazy fucks, and it's easier than learning a new platform. There's a limit. If they hadn't backed off on Black Pigeon Speaks, they'd've lost me, forever. And I DO notice how they've demoted BPS in the feed. And others. They're trying to do it just beneath the level of perception of most of us. But the accumulation of bullshit has us very unhappy. Somebody needs to work up a better platform than the competition has, to date. I'm amazed that no one has. YouTube's asynchronous chat is pretty lame, but it's better than the other competing platforms are doing. Muh Free Speech is a good thing, but not if the user has to fuck around with a 2nd-rate platform, for usability. One thing I'll say about independents is that it's likely that a lot of you guys who THINK you're being de-platformed have actually saturated your natural niche. "I've got 10,000 subscribers but only 400 views! Somebody's cheating me!" When actually, maybe a lot of people are subscribed and skip right past your headline for whatever reason. If you're commenting on a big story, I've only got time for Tim Pool, maybe, or Anthony Brian Logan, maybe. I know I pass up on a lot of THEIR content, because it came in after I already knew the story, and didn't need or want to sit through THEIR version of it, because I'm on to other things that day. I think that's why there is/was so much click-bait out there. I say "was," because I think that the audience has grown to distrust the click bait. I think people just struggle to come to grips with the fact that there's an audience for just about everybody, but maybe NObody is going to EVER be as big as, say, NBC or CBS were, back in the day, when the audience was basically all captured. Maybe 400,000 is your ceiling, styx. Yeah, you've got draw in MY generation, because you look, talk and think like a pot dealer from the 1980s. But you're not going to pull in many grandmothers. And where you're deepest (occult literature?), you're looking at a very niche audience. And that's OK. You're wildly successful for what you do. But maybe 400 K is just your ceiling for what you provide and how you present. And that's OK. With 400 K subscribers, you don't have to do MUCH to monetize at least several thousand. And if you've got several thousand kicking in a buck a month, you're financially independent. Maybe you'll never be Jerry Lewis. Maybe you're just gonna be his dad, making a good, middle-class income playing hotels in the Catskills! LOL! For independents to REALLY take the next step, they need to provide more than just commentary on news reported by others. The originators of the reporting deserve and demand their slice of the pie, and independents have been very disrespectful towards the original creators. If you spend an entire video criticizing Brian Stelter, with copious clips of his stupidity and disingenuousness, you should give CNN a percentage! Nobody does. Everybody just takes. Then they act all self-righteous when the people they've been stealing from get some of theirs back. Tim Pool TALKS about on-the-ground reporting, but he hasn't provided a SINGLE original-reporting story in ANY of his videos. It's all stuff he's GOING to do in the future, like he's WeWork or something. Lots of hat, but no cattle. Until you guys figure out some sort of co-op and actually do some real reporting, you'll always be sucking some other outlet's tit.
    1