• psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      They could argue for

      • a greater share of the value
      • more certainty about being allowed to stay on the platform

      Pretty much like anyone’s top two asks. More money, more security.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, it is not all upside. What has more value. Content people want to watch somehow. Or an empty “platform” that slurps up most of the gains.

      I’m not saying there is no value inherent to platform’s. Merely pointing out the disingenuous nature of that argument.

        • Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          An empty platform has little value. Hundreds have gotten shut down for this very reason.

          Content by and large makes the platform. Not the other way round. Yet the platform soaks up the lions share of the benefit. Leaving most who aren’t whales to see nothing at all. This is the problem google is very complicit with. I’m all for them making enough to sustain the service. I just think they owe far more than they are giving, to the content that made them.

          Nebula is great. And is trundling along just fine. It could use some more promotion and love sure. But it’s goals aren’t the same as a behemoth like Google’s. Who’s talents aren’t in creating content, but promoting it.

            • Eldritch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Creators would exist without the platform. They always have. But the platform definitely does bring value. The problem is that for a while now, greedy corporations have slowly been pushing the balance so that they received most of the benefit of everyone else’s work. It’s an overarching problem of capitalism that we need to deal with. But have been putting off for 50 to 60 years.

              • Neve8028@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Creators would exist without the platform. They always have.

                Not sure what you mean with this. Youtube has allowed anyone with a camera and an internet connection to put content out in the world. It was completely different back before youtube existed.

                • Eldritch@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’ve been on the internet since 94. I know what it was like. YouTube did not create creators. People posted video to the internet long before YouTube was a thing. And long before Google owned it. Because they didn’t create it.

                  • Neve8028@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’m not saying people didn’t share videos beforehand, but youtube created a platform that allowed people to do it more easily, be discovered more easily, and actually make a decent living through it. The internet landscape, especially in respect to influencers or content creators, is entirely different now than it was in the 90’s.

    • pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Going with what is happening in the SAG/AFTRA strike, perhaps the big names shouldn’t join the strike because they would come across as entitled, but they are more than welcome to donate towards the strike.