Thread by @Leelum

I'm seeing the argument that YouTube provides the diversity that #Channel4 was created for. Here's why they're wrong:

💰Financial: If YouTube is profitable for mainstream channels (& their content), they'd be all over it. They're not.

🧵 1/?

The advertising cut by YT is substantial & the per-viewer income lower. There is a reason YT isn't funding films or series which require large prop departments, a range of talent, writers, and so on.

In fact, for many YouTubers, getting picked up by a network is the dream.

For sure, a moderately successful channel can bring in the money - but not via YouTube. For example, only 26% of @LinusTech income in 2020 was via YT directly. The rest was from sponsorships, merchandise, etc.

That model might work for a highly specific single-topic channel, but not for an broadcaster. The BBC closed it's B2C merchandise store due to a lack of sales some time ago, and Channel Four doesn't have one.

And I'm sure you'd all be raging if Bake Off had a full-blown sponsorship spot with Hollywood talking about flour for 5 mins mid episode.

And I'll talk about content shortly, but YouTube's economic model simply doesn't allow for a single channel to be able to pay for the types of content you see produced by C4.

📢Platform: I'm not sure about you, but I think the internet has a video monopoly issue. The ad-funded online video market is effectively YouTube. It needs *more* competition, not less.

There's been talks for a YT rival for years, it's been less than fruitful.

That rival, in the UK, is public broadcasters. All4, iplayer etc. Unfortunately, the cost to produce high-quality media pushes private enterprises to lower costs. We should, ofc, consider the benefits past just finances, good media is a public good after all.

These platforms only exist as free to watch because they're protected by statute.

📺Content: I'm not going to spend much time on this. But I don't see a YT channel independently producing it's own journalism. What you get on YT is a re-hash of other peoples news.

& for the financial issues above, YT content is more often than not, bottom-of-the barrel stuff

Not saying it's all crap. You get channels like Vox, but again, they need and rely on income outside of YT, & need that huge American audience to stay afloat.

You get the issue here. There's the threat that a similar British channel would quickly pivot to larger non-uk content.

So here's the end of the thread, and it's pretty simple. Channel 4 isn't broken. It provides unique content due to it's unique place in the market. You can't replace it with YouTube.

The only reason you'd cut C4 is political.