Internets Vlogging


YouTube Red starts rolling out today for U.S. residents, and since the announcement a week ago vloggers have been flipping out. In case you aren’t aware of what YouTube Red will entail, here’s a summary.

YouTube Red lets you enjoy videos across all of YouTube without ads, while also letting you save videos to watch offline on your phone or tablet and play videos in the background, all for $9.99 a month.

The main issue for content creators seems to be that if they don’t agree to YouTube’s new terms they might have their videos “hidden from public view on both the ad-supported and ad-free tiers”.

Vloggers have started a hashtag, #SAYNOTOYOUTUBERED to voice their displeasure.

yt1 yt2 yt3

Some vloggers have “partnered” with YouTube and will be available through the subscription model only, so if your favorite vlogger has partnered up to be a “Creator” you’ll have to shell out the ten bucks a month to see their videos. However, YouTube says users will “still be able to enjoy YouTube”, but claims “with YouTube Red, you’ll be able to support the people who make your favorite videos while watching what you want, when you want, on any device you want, uninterrupted.”

  1. I am Red

    Anyone else slightly disappointed that this isn't a Youtube own-brand corn site they're angry over?

    THIS! (130)NOPE! (3)

    • Amanda Hugginkiss

      I totally thought that's what it was.

      THIS! (34)NOPE! (1)

      • Lisa

        Yep I'm pretty confused why they'd pick this name bc there's already a popular corn site called redtube! Why not call it YouTube Gold (fancy) or Green (for go)???

        THIS! (58)NOPE! (2)

        • Camp Counsellor for FierceSpecialMommyFlakes

          YouTube Chevron.

          THIS! (97)NOPE! (3)

          • chevronsandflamingos

            Youtube Flamingo.

            THIS! (5)NOPE! (1)

            • Coffee Toss Tramp Bitch

              YouTube Cactus

              THIS! (3)NOPE! (1)

              • Bumblepuppy

                I just wanted to say, I know where your user name is from, and I absolutely love it. That is all!

                THIS! (3)NOPE! (1)

      • Flasè Dah

        Yes, and I also keep reading it as You Tubered. I don't know what it means, but it sounds wrong.

        THIS! (85)NOPE! (1)

    • MeSoHangry

      It may have just been Gawker (VERY reliable source for news/s), but they had YOUTUBERED look like dripping blood coming from fangs. So I thought maybe it was uncensored/horror themed for October when I first saw it.

      Also, f*** that. I would never pay to watch youtube lol. I really only use it to check out music or look at animal videos. What the hell?

      THIS! (65)NOPE! (2)

      • Douche Baguette

        Yep, I only go there for LDR clips and racoon antics!

        THIS! (7)NOPE! (1)

      • Menopause Pie


        THIS! (11)NOPE! (2)

    • Um No Ha Ha

      That's an excellent point! Why name it "Red" given the wildly popular RedTube? Weird.

      THIS! (19)NOPE! (2)

      • The Most Fuckable Of Them All

        I must live under a rock. I've never heard of RedTube. I'm gonna wait til I get home from work to look it up though.

        THIS! (7)NOPE! (2)

        • NOPE

          Why wait? I'm sure your employer won't mind.

          THIS! (38)NOPE! (3)

  2. Elle

    Hopefully Sam and Nia will be gone forever!

    THIS! (137)NOPE! (2)

  3. cackling stump

    I had no clue what this is but I read it as "You Tubered" which made me think of tubers, which made me think of potatoes, which made me think of french fries, which I now plan to have for lunch.


    THIS! (317)NOPE! (1)

  4. Can-Swiss

    It's like YouTube is a private company trying to make money or something!??! It's not like they were offering their hosting services for free for these vloggers... oh, wait a minute....

    THIS! (103)NOPE! (17)

    • loafy

      Eh, for years, it's actually been the other way around - vloggers were offering their content for free for these companies. The reason companies like YouTube got so big in the first place was because their business model was basically "make money off of other people creating content." (Making money off of other people's content was the ~wave of the future~ in Silicon Valley a few years ago; see also the way investors poured cash into companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr.) There is no such thing as a private company offering their services to you "for free." If they're not charging you money to use the thing, they're charging someone else money for the traffic you bring when you use the thing. The problem is, that model can only go so far, and you can only make so much money off of hosting content - which is why you see YouTube, Twitter, Tumblr, etc. tweaking their business models to try and make extra money off of creators and consumers.

      THIS! (36)NOPE! (3)

  5. Mabel Syrup

    I'm stunned that anyone would consider paying ten bucks a month to avoid ads. I mean, even Netflix is cheaper than that.

    THIS! (158)NOPE! (1)

    • Um No Ha Ha

      Not to mention didn't they already try and fail at monetizing via subscriptions?

      THIS! (7)NOPE! (1)

    • gotanygrapes

      I would totally consider paying that. I have three kids, and they haven't watched a TV program in a long, long time. YouTube is where it's at now. You're the social reject if you don't know every word to the Minecraft parody of Radioactive or if you've never seen adult women unwrap blind bags. (If you don't know, don't ask. It's weird.) It'd be worth not subjecting my kids to all the ads, I think.

      HOWEVER, I had no idea they were going to block content from non-subscribers. That's pretty messed up. I pay to have my Pandora commercial-free and of higher quality, but if I didn't, I'd still have full access to their content. Interested to see how this unfolds. If the uproar is big enough, they may alter their business plan (and name?) the way Netflix did when people flipped out about them separating their streaming service and their snail mail service.

      THIS! (19)NOPE! (7)

      • Potted Plant

        Oh God, the Minecraft parody videos. If I never have to hear my kids sing "Red Stone active" again, I will die a happy woman.

        THIS! (6)NOPE! (1)

      • AllyOOp

        My 14 year old niece watches YouTube exclusively. She watches zero television, she just watches hundreds (and I mean HUNDREDS) of YouTube vlogs and beauty videos each week. It blows my mind.

        THIS! (1)NOPE! (1)

  6. notkept

    As long as this doesn't f*** with my ability to watch appliance repair and nursing procedure videos I don't curr.

    THIS! (144)NOPE! (2)

  7. Scully

    I would rather read a blog and pretty much can't stand vlogs or vloggers, so I'm OK with this.

    THIS! (66)NOPE! (3)

    • What the what

      Same. I didn't realize this was a thing.

      THIS! (13)NOPE! (1)

    • Aunt Cornelia, rogue saboteur copy editor

      I know I am not one of The Youths anymore because I just. Don't Get. YouTube.

      THIS! (51)NOPE! (0)

    • what_is_written

      Yep. I am a really fast reader and have two young kids so the times I actually sit down to listen to a blogger yammer on and on are VERY few and far between.

      THIS! (27)NOPE! (4)

  8. dayman

    SFSS, but I don't actually totally understand their issue. I follow zero vloggers because I can't be bothered. I would rather watch old commercials and bootleg videos of old musicals because I'm cool like that. If that stuff goes behind a paywall, I just...won't watch it anymore. I don't really know many, if any, people who are going to start paying to use YouTube. Does this actually really hurt vloggers?

    Also: yeah, YouTubered is what I saw too. Might have gone with a different color on that one...

    THIS! (53)NOPE! (1)

    • AllyOOp

      Yes, because under the old model vloggers received money for monetized views (views where the viewers watched an ad prior to the video). They will lost revenue from subcription-based viewers who will watch their videos without ads. They can, of course, opt to not allow their videos to be seen by subscribers but if they do that YouTube may turn all their videos to private.

      Some vloggers make six-figures on their channels and monetized views can be a significant part of that.

      THIS! (3)NOPE! (0)

  9. On the one hand, this is a brilliant real-time case study of ROI concerning (essentially) paywalls, creator content, etc, which I find fascinating. On the other hand, it's Youtubers being OMGANGRY, which I find hilarious.

    I call it a win-win.

    THIS! (78)NOPE! (1)

  10. Cersei Lannister’s Stylish Pixie Cut

    i will gladly say no to any and every online streaming service that starts charging. i'm not about paying for the same things that were free for ten years, and what is youtube really offering, anyway?

    THIS! (60)NOPE! (4)

    • boombalatty

      Maybe they're hoping kids will pester their parents into paying for it? Not going to happen in my house. If the app ain't free, it's not for me, is what I've always taught my kid, and the same thing goes for Youtube. I'll start paying for crap when they start sending my checks for all the data they've collected on me.


      THIS! (95)NOPE! (8)

    • I Want a Donut So Bad

      Sebaceous cyst videos, is what.

      THIS! (47)NOPE! (3)

  11. Just as an aside, if you're worried that a fave video will go away (or you have a slew of go-to videos) and you don't yet have them downloaded, Google "Freemake Video Downloader" and install it (from a trusted site, like CNet). I've never had a problem with it, and it does a great job with movie-length Youtube vids.

    THIS! (19)NOPE! (1)

  12. Omnishambles

    I'm confused. When they say uploaders have to "agree to the terms", does that mean content creators have to pay $10/mo to upload videos or else their videos will get hidden? Didn't YouTube all ready have a premium service for video uploaders? Bigger file allowances and the like? Or was that only Vimeo?

    Or are they being forced to have their videos being pay-to-watch only, and they want their videos available to everyone for free?

    From the TechCrunch article: "In theory, if YouTube presented an offer that made creators more money without a significant loss of control, they’d happily volunteer."

    Are content creators being forced to sign an agreement that gives YouTube the rights to their content? As in, once it's uploaded to YouTube, YouTube is now legally the owner of that content instead of the uploader? Because THAT would be super problematic and I could see why ESPN and others have begun to remove their content.

    Basically, I'm trying to see what exactly the issue is that is giving the content creators such hissy fits. I'm sure as balls not going to pay $10/mo to watch dumb cat videos, but that's an issue for me the watcher, not as a video uploader/content creator. YouTube ain't Netflix, there's nowhere near enough high quality content to warrant such a price tag.

    THIS! (42)NOPE! (1)

    • GetOffMyUnicorn

      We are dealing with this right now. As a subsidiary (and also a private company) of a MAJOR video source on YouTube, which is also part of the premium service you mentioned in your first question-we basically had to sign off on Red. We were late joining and as a result, our content was hidden. All of it. And we could not upload. We signed onto Red and everything was just fine. It's f***ing bullshit. The details are definitely not hammered out (both with our parent company and YouTube). It's all very murky but this has been our experience thus far. And undoubtedly, it will get muddier before it gets more clear. With Red, we now have to renegotiate the contract with our parent company and that's not fun, either.

      THIS! (16)NOPE! (0)

  13. Dowager Countess of NOPE

    I am trying hard to conjure up the energy to give a flying squirrel shit about vlogger's #struggles. They are on youtube trying to earn a buck and then b**** about youtube doing things to earn a buck (ok, a frillion bucks but whatevs.)

    Dammit. See, I already cared more than I intended to. Damn you, Tubered! Damn you to hell.

    THIS! (39)NOPE! (5)

    • AllyOOp

      I think a lot of the butthurt is from content creators who had it so good for so long because they were in the right place at the right time. They started their channels out of boredom or as a way to connect with other people who like makeup or comic books or whatever, and then Google opened the money spigot and they got really rich really fast. A lot of content creators quit jobs where they were making six-figures a year plus benefits, that's how lucrative it was to have a decent channel. Not even a super popular channel - just a mid-range channel.

      Now Google has a handle on how to really make YouTube pay off for THEM and they're working it. These creators have to be scared shitless because it's going to have PROFOUND effects on their monthly income.

      THIS! (7)NOPE! (1)