Yes, I get it and my comment was intended tongue-in-cheek. But still... not everyone goes to YT for monetization in which case I really think it's just better not to use it. I'm probably too old but I remember a time when we had plenty of visibility on the web without platforms dictating the content.

You mean your Geocities homepage which got a fabulous 121 hits in 1997? ;)

Why would you assume that videos have to be shared to YouTube to get views? I really hope that the majority of adults know how to click on or share a hyperlink. If not, there is a big problem.

Because while i don't have numbers, i'd bet a weeks pay that the vast majority of youtube views (especially after exluding viral content) come through the youtube recommendation system and not external hyperlinks.

>i'd bet a weeks pay that the vast majority of youtube views (especially after exluding viral content) come through the youtube recommendation system and not external hyperlinks.

I'd take that bet. There's a lot the agorithm does, but there's also a lot of companies and people sharing links to the videos. Any new movie trailer or album drop would definitely be linked from twitter or some company homepage. And I wager those are what make up the most views.

But I wouldn't be surprised to be right or wrong on this. the recommendations certainly aren't a tiny portion.

She mentioned that she's not making much money from it. People are migrating from this model into sponsorship such as patreon, with followers chipping in for their favourite creators.

Patreon is also problematic due to centralization.

soon there will be a killer app for that in blockchain that will replace patreon