When Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, wanted to advertise Blue Origin, his rocket company, he didn’t go to a television station or a newspaper, as he might have done years ago. is ten years old. He offered Tim Dodd, who runs a YouTube channel called “The Everyday Astronaut,” an exclusive tour of the factory. The resulting video, in which the two men spend an hour admiring hydrogen tanks and discussing the minute details of rocket engine turbopumps, may not be considered a television show by everyone captivating. It has nevertheless been viewed 1.6 million times.
This example also perfectly illustrates the transformation of the media sector. As the Internet has cut out middlemen and given enterprising people the means to produce content themselves, an enthusiastic crowd of “do-it-yourselfers” is taking on the mass market incumbents. Long, in-depth podcasts have revolutionized radio. Music from independent artists, not subject to major labels, is gaining popularity on Spotify.
High quality cheap thanks to technology
But it is on television that the change is most spectacular. YouTube, which is owned by Google, has quietly built a streaming business that rivals those of Netflix, Disney or NBCUniversal. Its legions of self-taught filmmakers broadcast shows to 2.5 billion viewers each month. YouTube accounts for a tenth of all television watched by Americans – more than any other broadcaster or channel. And much of that audience is young, building viewing habits that can last for decades.
YouTube, which is owned by Google, has quietly built a streaming business that rivals those of Netflix, Disney or NBCUniversal. Its self-taught filmmakers broadcast shows to 2.5 billion viewers each month.
YouTube is what techies call a platform, while its rivals are run like traditional studios. Getting a green light for a series on Disney or Netflix requires negotiating with agents and problem-solvers before convincing a commissioning executive to shell out a large sum of money. Filming requires hundreds of people, all specialized. With YouTube, all this no longer applies. Everyone can download more or less whatever they want. Most videos are free. YouTube’s job is to insert advertisements and share the revenue with the director. The model seems to promise a lot of waste – and it often does. But what’s most striking is how much really interesting stuff comes up.
Technology has contributed to this. High quality cameras are cheap. Powerful video editing software runs on inexpensive laptops. And drones make it possible to take spectacular aerial shots. The result is that a handful of people can make relatively high production value videos for a tiny fraction of the cost of traditional television. And the quality gap will only narrow in the future. By automating much of the tedious tasks, artificial intelligence seems likely to make video production even easier than it already is.
Niche vs mainstream
YouTube has spawned its own megastars, like MrBeast, with his 317 million followers (and a growing number of detractors). But its most interesting effects will be felt on a smaller scale. Because content creation is cheap, YouTubers can make a living serving niches that are too small to be profitable for other streaming companies. From Mr. Dodd’s rocket science to rock climbing to knitting to ancient history: think of an interest, and at least one YouTube channel is probably devoted to it.
Because content creation is cheap, YouTubers can make a living serving niches that are too small to be profitable for other streaming companies.
This means that, as with the rest of media, the future of television is likely to become increasingly focused and specialized. It remains to be seen how high the tide of user-generated content can rise. Some YouTubers are experimenting with formats like game shows or feature films, with mixed results. It’s hard to see YouTube videos replacing big-budget series like ‘Game of Thrones’ or ‘Stranger Things,’ which require upfront funding that YouTube’s business model doesn’t offer. In a world where content is tailored to audiences with ever greater finesse, the rare television shows that have genuine mass market appeal will be even more valuable. But only because they will become even rarer.
The Economist
