Do you believe that today’s YouTube stars are being exploited or empowered? Write a short persuasive piece that shares your opinion.
YouTube is an easily accessible communication channel, founded back in 2005 and for the past 11 years has granted anyone with a cellphone and internet connection to become a YouTuber, therefore as about 100 hours of videos are uploaded each minute; YouTube has become the multimillionaire business it is now. Whether you associated "YouTube(rs)" with stars like Tyler Oakley, Bethany Mota, Anthony Padilla, Ian Hecox or or or... a question, that more likely never crossed your mind but now begs verification is: does this platform work on exploiting or empowering them? Before I express my stance on this question let me go back to Anthony or Ian. If you stumble upon any stranger and ask about them, I, beyond any shadow of doubt know you will receive nothing but blank stares! Now, refer to them as "Smosh" as they identify themselves on YouTube, where they have gained what's over than 20 million subscribers or "fans", you'll in all likelihood receive pretty positive feedbacks.
Going back to the question, let's examine what empowerment in this context really means, it can can refer to rewarding an individual or even a group with an increased authority or power in a self determined way over an individual or community, which if you really grasp is what YouTube is bestowing on its stars, it's known for a fact that most beauty gurus have their videos sponsored, which chiefly depends on the subscriber/view count; an increase in this value also increases the chance of a video being sponsored. Let's take a familiar example, Anthony and Ian have advertisers willing to pay a pretty penny just to have their products featured in their videos for what's less than 30 seconds, even if the transparency of product is ignored! However, the truth is, this is just one aspect to examine. Another one would definitely be the fame accompanied with their subscriber count, numerous YouTubers are fashion admirers and thanks to this popularity, their achievements through YouTube go beyond just having sold out merchandise but are also able to start their own brands, fashion and make up lines.
The aforementioned benefits definitely suggest that YouTube is empowering their stars, but let's turn the magnifying glass to another angle and view them as agents, if you haven't taken heed of the fact that every one of those benefits is concomitant with the subscriber/like count, here I am pointing it out to you! I believe how this industry works is really just a two-way road, the more YouTube is empowering its agents the more it's exploiting them. Which brings me to the following if you look at a graph of YouTube exploiting vs empowering them it would look similar to that to the right.
YouTube is an easily accessible communication channel, founded back in 2005 and for the past 11 years has granted anyone with a cellphone and internet connection to become a YouTuber, therefore as about 100 hours of videos are uploaded each minute; YouTube has become the multimillionaire business it is now. Whether you associated "YouTube(rs)" with stars like Tyler Oakley, Bethany Mota, Anthony Padilla, Ian Hecox or or or... a question, that more likely never crossed your mind but now begs verification is: does this platform work on exploiting or empowering them? Before I express my stance on this question let me go back to Anthony or Ian. If you stumble upon any stranger and ask about them, I, beyond any shadow of doubt know you will receive nothing but blank stares! Now, refer to them as "Smosh" as they identify themselves on YouTube, where they have gained what's over than 20 million subscribers or "fans", you'll in all likelihood receive pretty positive feedbacks.
Going back to the question, let's examine what empowerment in this context really means, it can can refer to rewarding an individual or even a group with an increased authority or power in a self determined way over an individual or community, which if you really grasp is what YouTube is bestowing on its stars, it's known for a fact that most beauty gurus have their videos sponsored, which chiefly depends on the subscriber/view count; an increase in this value also increases the chance of a video being sponsored. Let's take a familiar example, Anthony and Ian have advertisers willing to pay a pretty penny just to have their products featured in their videos for what's less than 30 seconds, even if the transparency of product is ignored! However, the truth is, this is just one aspect to examine. Another one would definitely be the fame accompanied with their subscriber count, numerous YouTubers are fashion admirers and thanks to this popularity, their achievements through YouTube go beyond just having sold out merchandise but are also able to start their own brands, fashion and make up lines.
The aforementioned benefits definitely suggest that YouTube is empowering their stars, but let's turn the magnifying glass to another angle and view them as agents, if you haven't taken heed of the fact that every one of those benefits is concomitant with the subscriber/like count, here I am pointing it out to you! I believe how this industry works is really just a two-way road, the more YouTube is empowering its agents the more it's exploiting them. Which brings me to the following if you look at a graph of YouTube exploiting vs empowering them it would look similar to that to the right.
Comments
Post a Comment