so you see the spam ads about people making thousands of dollars every month in their pajamas at home on the internets, and you think that's so ridiculous who falls for this stuff. but then youtube content creators fall for this same trap. its a winner takes all model, where maybe .01% of the people actually make millions, but the rest fight for scraps in a desperate bid to rise above the noise. maybe if you're lucky you can become the double rainbow guy and become a one hit wonder, an ephemeral phenom that lasts as long as the double rainbows did.
i slowly began making gaming videos of 7 days to die, which is a zombie minecraft game. it was mostly to document the bases that my friends and i had built, and share with some friends for the lulz. predictably i got a dozen views at best. yesterday i made a video of a glitched area in the game on the server, my friend shared on reddit, and it got 600 views. in the grand scheme of things, 600 views is nothing, but to me it exceeded my wildest expectations. now just 999400 more views to go and i can be those people sharing about how i make thousands per week in my pajamas at home on the interwebs!
I guess youtube is kind of ruined for content makers because most viewers now have adblock of some sort, even on phones, even some browsers come with preinstalled adblock. This results in a situation where a video can have high amount of views yet no ads are clicked from it or even shown so the creator gets no money from the video. I myself would never discourage people to stop using adblock. It's their phones so they have all the right. This is why some creators make Patreon accounts and try to earn money from there. It's a preferable option for me as well. I am thinking of making some animations with countryballs in Adobe Animate and I will publish them in youtube but I don't trust I will get money from youtube so I would want to make a small community of patreons.
And what exactly is wrong here? If you are making random videos like this, you really shouldn't even have any kind of money in mind, because, frankly, why would you even expect being paid for anything like that? Yes, there are people making money from YouTube, but those are mostly people who are talented entertainers or who put extensive effort into researching, preparing and shooting the videos. Sure, there also also examples of people who shoot seemingly mundane things and get a huge following, but, well, if that is the taste of the viewers ...
Can't imagine ever being a youtube personality, even if I had something interesting to offer. Too thin skinned. It's a weird phenomena for sure.. can't think of anything comparable from when I was growing up pre-internet. Maybe people trying to get on MTV or something..
Counting views will never give you the energy to continue, You can't just say oh 1 million views and I'm there. You really aren't. Even if you do get there, you need to have a steady amount of viewers to come back instead of just watching one video and leaving. The ad revenue on 1 million viewers would at most generate $500 in total which could very well be less cause you're posting videos to a community that uses adblock way more then other communities. To make a wage close to minimum wage here, you'd need 1 million viewers a week if you're lucky with ads. If you aren't, you may need 2 million each week.
A content creator once broke down a million viewers, but it was awhile ago so things probably changed. Around 50% of people use adblock, but I think the gaming community is probably a bit on the higher side. Back then every 1000 or 2000 ad views was around $2-3 with holidays bringing in more. I know since then google has been screwing people over on the amount and demonetising a lot more videos. Ask yourself how much you want a month and see how many viewers you'd need each month at 1000 views for $2. It's not easy.
As brutal as it is, and even though it's not really a meritocracy, it is kind of nice to know that someone with a really good idea and a bit of business sense can throw their hat in the ring and give it a try. If YouTube and Twitch and services like it don't exist, you would have a hard enough time even hosting your videos, let alone setting up a mode of revenue. It's quite a sight better than the PayPal Donate link buttons you used to see on the webpages of writers and web comics, and certainly more pleasant than trying to get published in any sort of print media, mailing your work to publisher after publisher hoping what you've made gets seen by anyone. As a creator, even if you can't make money off your work, it's a beautiful thing how the internet has enabled us to share it. It's much more depressing to spend a lot of time making something only to have no one see it.
And considering the number of LPers I liked a decade ago are still doing it, because they were able to turn it from hobby into real income, it's done a very good job of supporting people who want to keep creating, and it's provided people with a great way to support niche forms of entertainment that they like. Kind of the ultimate try-before-you-buy. Our download-for-free-happy generation kind of shaping the world.
On the flipside, I kind of hate living in an ad-filled world, particularly because of how far psychology has advanced in manipulating people.
People that are successful on YouTube started out making videos for fun. People that start channels to make money fail. It's not a get rich quick scheme. Growing a channel takes a somewhat regular schedule of producing videos and being entertaining, as well as passionate about whatever it is you make videos about. It takes hard work and talent to succeed in YouTube (minus a few outliers).
I actually just started making broodwar content. I do so for self-growth. My mind often just stops when I am talking, so casting games I am working to combat that. Meanwhile creating content for the community.
On the flipside, I kind of hate living in an ad-filled world, particularly because of how far psychology has advanced in manipulating people.
It does? As far as I know all realiable studies showed that you can only determine the subject that's talked about, but not the opinions themselves. And that effect is limited also.
On the flipside, I kind of hate living in an ad-filled world, particularly because of how far psychology has advanced in manipulating people.
It does? As far as I know all realiable studies showed that you can only determine the subject that's talked about, but not the opinions themselves. And that effect is limited also.
Did you mean to reply to something else? I don't understand.
On the flipside, I kind of hate living in an ad-filled world, particularly because of how far psychology has advanced in manipulating people.
It does? As far as I know all realiable studies showed that you can only determine the subject that's talked about, but not the opinions themselves. And that effect is limited also.
Did you mean to reply to something else? I don't understand.
Psychology might be advanced, but you can't possibly control people via ads or change fundamental opinions by stuff like micro targeting. All you can do is raising awareness that a product/idea exists, but if the customer doesn't want to buy it, the item won't be sold. The same way you can't really shift major opinions in debates, whoever says something different only tries to sell his services. Your ads can be as thought through as possible, the ads themselves play a comparatively small role, other factors such as price and pictures are far more important. What I quoted is more of an urban legend with some very small grain of truth to it.
I think you are grossly incorrect on this. Advertising does not just make you aware of the existence of a product, it plays on your fears and insecurities, putting thoughts into your mind that would not otherwise have occurred to you. Techniques that have existed long before psychology, but are more refined and more common today. One of the major problems being that it is perfectly legal to bend the truth, to make claims that have no evidence, and to cast doubt on claims that do have better evidence.
At the heart of it, the problem is that none of us are experts in everything, so we are constantly faced with the lemon and peach problem. We don't know when we are being sold a lemon, and when we are being sold a peach, but we are always paying the price of the peach. The person with the knowledge can always take advantage of the disparity of knowledge, and disguise lemons as peaches, even if they sell both. Techniques to earn people's trust are quite advanced, and you can train people who are otherwise poor liars into being quite effective. As the layman you want to be able to trust experts to help guide you, but it's very hard to separate the corrupt from the honest.
On February 17 2019 01:49 Chef wrote: it plays on your fears and insecurities, putting thoughts into your mind that would not otherwise have occurred to you. Techniques that have existed long before psychology, but are more refined and more common today. One of the major problems being that it is perfectly legal to bend the truth, to make claims that have no evidence, and to cast doubt on claims that do have better evidence.
This is as good description of religion as any, if not better than most, really. I don't know if psychology has that power but religions have displayed this in all its might for thousand of years.
On February 17 2019 01:49 Chef wrote: At the heart of it, the problem is that none of us are experts in everything, so we are constantly faced with the lemon and peach problem. We don't know when we are being sold a lemon, and when we are being sold a peach, but we are always paying the price of the peach. The person with the knowledge can always take advantage of the disparity of knowledge, and disguise lemons as peaches, even if they sell both. Techniques to earn people's trust are quite advanced, and you can train people who are otherwise poor liars into being quite effective. As the layman you want to be able to trust experts to help guide you, but it's very hard to separate the corrupt from the honest.
Would you be so nice as to supply us with some scientific studies that support those claim? Like, peer reviewed ones and large trial groups. I would really want to learn more on this subject and you seem to be knowledgeable about it. Thank you in advance!
On February 17 2019 01:49 Chef wrote: I think you are grossly incorrect on this. Advertising does not just make you aware of the existence of a product, it plays on your fears and insecurities, putting thoughts into your mind that would not otherwise have occurred to you. Techniques that have existed long before psychology, but are more refined and more common today. One of the major problems being that it is perfectly legal to bend the truth, to make claims that have no evidence, and to cast doubt on claims that do have better evidence.
At the heart of it, the problem is that none of us are experts in everything, so we are constantly faced with the lemon and peach problem. We don't know when we are being sold a lemon, and when we are being sold a peach, but we are always paying the price of the peach. The person with the knowledge can always take advantage of the disparity of knowledge, and disguise lemons as peaches, even if they sell both. Techniques to earn people's trust are quite advanced, and you can train people who are otherwise poor liars into being quite effective. As the layman you want to be able to trust experts to help guide you, but it's very hard to separate the corrupt from the honest.
Yeah, I'm not sure what you are actually referring to, you use a lot of words out of context and mix them all together. This honestly is worth a longer post, but I'm not sure if it derails this blog.
First off, there's a huge difference in between a single ad, an ad driven campaign and the different channels you can use. Regardless, all of them have in common that the customer does need to have an initial interest and the means to purchase, if both are not there, you can't do anything about it. It doesn't matter what kind of product you look at: a woman won't buy the lipstick if it's too expensive, no matter how you try to sell an increased sex appeal. A person won't by medicine against nervous eye syndrome (made up conditions), if there's not a tendency to be a overly scared of medical conditions.
In several cases, there's huge problems when the pharma industry bribes doctors to hand out medicine that's useless, but to be honest, that's mostly a political problem and not really advertising or psychology anymore.
As for political campaign goes, there's a good line in between advertisment and political propaganda. The latter can do a lot, but needs a lot and usually is obvious in nowadays media environment. It's not the 1930es anymore and people can freely exchange information if they chose to do it. Hence, fear mongering does pay off, but usually to those who are already scared and insecure. While you are quite successful to paint horrible pictures to your supporters and thus get them to vote / share their opinions, you usually end up doing exactly the opposite to those who're already opposed to the idea you propagate. Therefore: it's limited and a double edged sword. Ideas like micro targeting are way better, but since they're usually expensive, their range is rather limited and most times not strong enough to sway opinions in a significant way.
A human mind does make decisions after a very, very long process. Simplifying those is attractive, but has no basis in reality. To summarize it, you could look up those comic meme things like
On February 17 2019 01:49 Chef wrote: it plays on your fears and insecurities, putting thoughts into your mind that would not otherwise have occurred to you. Techniques that have existed long before psychology, but are more refined and more common today. One of the major problems being that it is perfectly legal to bend the truth, to make claims that have no evidence, and to cast doubt on claims that do have better evidence.
This is as good description of religion as any, if not better than most, really. I don't know if psychology has that power but religions have displayed this in all its might for thousand of years.
On February 17 2019 01:49 Chef wrote: At the heart of it, the problem is that none of us are experts in everything, so we are constantly faced with the lemon and peach problem. We don't know when we are being sold a lemon, and when we are being sold a peach, but we are always paying the price of the peach. The person with the knowledge can always take advantage of the disparity of knowledge, and disguise lemons as peaches, even if they sell both. Techniques to earn people's trust are quite advanced, and you can train people who are otherwise poor liars into being quite effective. As the layman you want to be able to trust experts to help guide you, but it's very hard to separate the corrupt from the honest.
Would you be so nice as to supply us with some scientific studies that support those claim? Like, peer reviewed ones and large trial groups. I would really want to learn more on this subject and you seem to be knowledgeable about it. Thank you in advance!
The lemon and peach issue is one of the classic game types of game theory. It will not be hard to find information about it. You can also google 'framing psychological studies' and find numerous results for scholarly articles. While your desire for academic rigor is noble, this is an internet forum and I am not going to spend my time aggregating it for you to win an argument on the internet for an offhand remark I made. If you need to make important decisions, I suggest you look for information elsewhere.
A fun example of framing: A disease is coming and we have two options, we can't do both. 600 people are expected to die. 1 A: Save 200 people for sure. B: 1/3 chance to save 600 people, 2/3 chance save no one.
2 A: Lose 400 people for sure. B: 1/3 chance to lose no one, 2/3 chance lose everyone
In the study, people choose to save 200 people rather than take a chance to save everyone, or they choose to have a chance to lose no one rather than lose 400 people for sure.
To be honest it just seems to me Gecko has a problem with the word 'manipulate.' I don't take it as much of a retort that if you try to sell a product to someone who can't use it you'll have a hard time. I did not say that advertisements can mind control like Dark Archons If you've had to deal with private medicine before, you'll have had first hand experience with framing and other tricks to get you to say yes to expensive products and procedures that aren't always very good for your health. A lot of times these things don't do the talking for themselves, they really have to be pushed or people won't buy them. Risks and trade offs and other information you really ought to have to make an informed decision will be totally absent or minimized, while any minor health benefit will be greatly emphasized. Maybe that's so basic you don't want to count it as psychology, but it affects our minds and it makes us worry if we don't do what we're told, and it gives us an unpleasant uneasiness until we settle the matter, say yes, and buy the thing. Even when we're talking about fun products that are supposed to make you happy, a lot of the time I think people buy things just to make the desire that was put into their mind from an advertisement go away, so they can think about something else, and hardly get anything out of it at all. No I don't have peer reviewed academic research on this, it's just my pet theory from personal experience and from observing the world I live in.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/25AMgVm.jpg)
If you've had to deal with private medicine before, you'll have had first hand experience with framing and other tricks to get you to say yes to expensive products and procedures that aren't always very good for your health. A lot of times these things don't do the talking for themselves, they really have to be pushed or people won't buy them. Risks and trade offs and other information you really ought to have to make an informed decision will be totally absent or minimized, while any minor health benefit will be greatly emphasized. Maybe that's so basic you don't want to count it as psychology, but it affects our minds and it makes us worry if we don't do what we're told, and it gives us an unpleasant uneasiness until we settle the matter, say yes, and buy the thing. Even when we're talking about fun products that are supposed to make you happy, a lot of the time I think people buy things just to make the desire that was put into their mind from an advertisement go away, so they can think about something else, and hardly get anything out of it at all. No I don't have peer reviewed academic research on this, it's just my pet theory from personal experience and from observing the world I live in.
