Fede Goldenberg’s Post

When a industry is built by artists But run by profiteers There’s often misalignment of motivations Artists - generally - don’t care about money. I can’t speak for anyone but me, but I find money incredibly boring. 🥱 This isn’t to imply unimportant- just uninspiring. Unmoving. And in the worst cases, even demotivating. It’s certainly distracting It can stifle creativity and censor ideas It can also promote an agenda It can push a narrative It can turn family against each other It can turn countrymen into enemies It can turn nature into a commodity It can turn faith into greed It can turn children into slaves It can turn parents into monsters It can turn hero’s into criminals It can turn art into an asset - and in so doing, changes the very essence of the thing. To an artist, whom often sees their work as a child - an extension of their very soul, to see it reduced to something as mundane as a ROI metric and force to contort itself unnaturally to fit into a category it was never intended for just to survive can be soul crushing and disheartening. Forcing many artists to sell their rights away before they even begin or go broke trying to retain the spirit of their artistic identity in the face of ever increasing competition and worsening economic conditions globally. Leaving artists vulnerable. Money - as a proxy for power - has historically been used to manipulate artists, more than empower them. Allowing a few to choose the accepted narratives available to the many. That’s changing. This is what happens when fans get to vote with their views. Hollywood doesn’t really have a great way into this world. Their model doesn’t fit. Funny enough - many of the YT channel operators I know are still wanting to get into Hollywood. Not understanding why their content doesn’t translate to GA. Then you have writers - from authors to screenwriter- that believe they have the most authentic version of a story. YouTuber, an author, and a filmmaker are all storytellers - but we expect them to tell that story in a different way. Each medium having its own rules and conventions. To master one is not to know the other. But to master story is the first step to all. Because it’s the story that should determine the medium, not the other way around. Some stories are small, quick and visually shocking - perfect for a short. Some are long, deep, emotional journeys across a single life defined by a tragic end or novel detail - ideal for a novel or biopic. Some are a collection of interwoven narratives, told across the expansive of space and time; representing generations of related stories into a single, epic tale fit for a series To compare one to the other to determine which is better, imho, fails to grasp the true nature of what being a storyteller is. The two story vehicles are fundamentally different; the same story manifests uniquely on each - adapting to the medium. Start with the story

YT is just a platform (distribution) with an open advertising revenue share model. While it competes for the same eyeballs, it doesn't threaten to replace the Hollywood model. They are two very different things. The YT model is more conducive to small productions with little upfront production costs because its returns do not scale in a way that justifies large production spending. This means that you will only ever get a certain style of product from YT that will never compete in the same space as the larger production spends. They are two very different products that while competing for the same finite audience, are two very different beasts.

If you follow my page, then this article shared will seem funny to you. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 #Streaming || #OTT || #Platform || #ContentMarketingStrategy

Viewing increases slightly but with a more diverse mix of sources. This is a near zero sum game being played out with our waking hours, but content sources that don't meet consumer needs are the ones that are losing big, and for that we mean TV Everywhere - when I want it, where I want it and on whatever device I have... and that does still include the big TV.

As traditional TV viewership declines, YouTube is becoming the primary source of entertainment for many Americans, offering a diverse array of content that caters to varied interests. #YouTube #DigitalMedia #CordCutting #StreamingVsCable https://lnkd.in/dGw6Uq45

On the ongoing debate over how #television should deal with #YouTube, it can be easy to forget the advantages television content has in the online world. This is from the 2023 UK Ofcom Media Nations report showing viewership of short form video content. The top two categories - "how to" and news videos - are not only natural fits for television content but also, in many cases, uses television content. The same goes for other categories mentioned here, such as clips from comedy programmes and sports. That raises two points: 1. A lot of the content on short-form video platforms comes from television. If that content was not available, what would be the impact on these platforms' viewing time? 2. Should TV companies / Broadcasters be putting a lot more focus on seeing how they can monetise their short-form content themselves rather than outsourcing the effort to 3rd party platforms such as YouTube and TikTok? Yes, the latter have an important role to play but they also (1) compete for the same advertising money and (2) by developing their own platforms, broadcasters can capture more of the revenues for themselves plus get the audiences to show their continued appeal. My view is that, partnerships with the likes of YouTube are important and are certainly a positive, but there is a lot of potential upside - both in terms of revenues and valuation - for the broadcasters from executing a successful strategy on (2). As usual, this is not investment advice.

The availability of culturally relevant content plays a major role in which platforms and services Black TV content viewers decide to use, according to Horowitz Research’s annual report, FOCUS Black Volume I: Subscriptions 2024. The report, which tracks the evolution of the pay and free TV, streaming, internet and mobile environment among Black Americans, finds that content geared toward Black audiences is important for over 6 in 10 (62 per cent) Black households, underscoring how necessary culturally relevant content is to the value proposition for streaming services. https://lnkd.in/ghZGczSZ

ICYMI: In a world where content consumption is evolving faster than ever, Free Ad-Supported TV (FAST) emerges as a beacon of innovation, offering a win-win solution for both content owners and viewers alike. Explore the world of #FAST and why should content owners consider it as a valuable asset in FAST Channels TV's latest blog, WTF is FAST? #FASTchannels #streaming #FAST #streamingtv #AVOD Advanced Television

Have you noticed how broadcasters are shaking things up in content delivery? In today's fast-paced media landscape, they are reinventing their strategies to keep up with ever-changing viewer preferences. Did you know that 46% of viewers now choose subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) services over live TV? This shift is not just a trend; it’s a wake-up call for broadcasters to innovate. Read more insights from NewscastStudio: https://bit.ly/3ZLOpd1 #BroadcastInnovation #MultiPlatformDelivery #ViewerEngagement #TekmarkBroadcast

How YouTube became a TV powerhouse and how much ad revenue it makes YouTube dominates TV streaming, surpassing Netflix, with free content and live sports, making it indispensable for viewers and advertisers. Read mode on following blog post!