> but the really important part of the puzzle is the advertiser network
If your main goal is "How can I make money?" then maybe. And that's one of the huge reasons that YouTube is the mess that it is.
For the rest of us, this is not important at all. In fact, I am happy that there is no advertiser network whatsoever. if I put something on the web, I do not do it because I expect compensation. I am not alone in this sentiment.
Most content creators need to be compensated to continue making content. Advertising isn't the only solution but it does allow viewers to watch without paying.
PeerTube needs content creators to get on board. Having options for monetizing content could encourage creators to use PeerTube.
> Most content creators need to be compensated to continue making content.
That's the problem right there. "Content creators". Protein factories churning out videos for money.
Not every platform needs "content creators" - sometimes people with interesting things to share are enough, and these tend to use side revenue to fund their sharing.
What other moniker would you give to people that create videos for others to consume regardless of financial incentive?
Many of the YouTube channels I consume didnt start for any other reason than making things for others. They found popularity and decided to make a go at doing it professionally. Making quality content cost money and time. Expecting everybody to make videos on their own dime for posterity is unrealistic.
That might have been a problem a few years ago, but by now many content creators are not solely relying on advertising money (which itself was prompted by YouTube fucking up).
> Most content creators need to be compensated to continue making content.
False. The continued growth of Vimeo and even YouTube show this as well.
> Advertising isn't the only solution but it does allow viewers to watch without paying.
False.
> PeerTube needs content creators to get on board.
If by "content creators" you mean Fuck Jerry Media or whoever, then no, it really doesn't. If by "content creators" you just mean "those who create content without the expectation of financial gain" then PeerTube is doing ok.
> Having options for monetizing content could encourage creators to use PeerTube.
Again, if "How do I monetize this?" is your primary reason for the content, maybe the content doesn't need to be there. That's the point that people are missing.
If your goal is "make money" instead of "share useful information" then you are part of this problem.
There's a possibility to add donation links and the icon is then visible on every video. Patreon is big for a reason: people actually use it.
I'd rather donate to the content creators I want to see thrive than be bombarded with ads for things I don't want anyway.
The peertube devs refuse to incorporate monetization beyond donations, but they DO have a plugin system. It's not beyond imagination for someone (person or group) to add something like "paid scrobbling" where people add e.g 5€ on their account and then it's divided depending on certain criteria. That criteria could be for example:
- always give 50% to my subscriptions
- give the rest to creators of videos that I have watched which:
* have these tags
* are longer than 5 minutes
* and that I have watched at least 50% or 5 minutes of, which ever comes first
All of these would be opt-in or course to reduce the likelihood of uploaders artificially lengthening or shortening their videos (those magic 10 minutes on youtube), or trying to discover common user settings and tailoring their videos to fit those settings.
Tada. No ads, user-defined distribution of resources, yada yada.
Patreon has its own issues. I wished it would be less dominant in the English-speaking donation 'market'.
I was hoping that Flattr would be able to provide a Chromium-free, 'Brave-like' experience, especially with their browser plugin, but if anything it has been losing popularity (despite being years older than Patreon!).
For a reason that escapes me, they even recently decided to officially remove their plugin, so now they can even hardly be differentiated from the other Patreon-likes.
Same. I was also hoping to find something that doesn't require me to have a credit card, only accepts USD, and *has* to go through a third party.
Flattr uses credit cards exclusively, Liberapay only uses Stripe, Patreon a host of third parties but no direct transfers, and I have checked out the rest.
Why can't I just transfer the amount I want, when I want, directly to another bank without an intermediary? I'm fine with the donation subscription service knowing how much and to whom I'm donating and taking out but why does it have to talk to so many other services I haven't picked or agreed to interact with?
The mere fact that you use the terms "content" and "content creators" stems from the fact that you're talking about a different category of creator, namely those whose role is to pull in eyes to see the ads which make money for the site owner. The parent poster wants people to see the videos he puts out and is not in it for the money. In the first case the video distribution system is a tool to make money, in the second it is a tool to distribute videos.
If your main goal is "How can I make money?" then maybe. And that's one of the huge reasons that YouTube is the mess that it is.
For the rest of us, this is not important at all. In fact, I am happy that there is no advertiser network whatsoever. if I put something on the web, I do not do it because I expect compensation. I am not alone in this sentiment.