I was watching the video of someone recently and I thought to myself "this guy has done good content" perhaps it was just my point of view or maybe my choices are terrible.
However I've gotten people who have come to me in the past to help them make some some choices and decisions based on my preferences and these people are always pleased when I help them, so I won't entirely say that my choices are bad.
With this person's video they never got tnt type of attention they needed to go viral, their videos were really good but not a lot of people were watching.
Think they've uploaded over 200 videos and maybe only 5% of that actually did great in terms of viewership and engagement, yet they kept posting.
I compared their videos that did well and I noticed something. The two video that did well were relatable on a higher level. You'd need to have so level of enthusiasm and knowledge to actually enjoy their other video and I felt this was sad.
They'd probably need a lot more to get monetized
A lot of intelligent people on the internet and to attract or gain attention, making attempt at creation intelligent content will not get you virality, success and the money you desire from content creation.
Personally I watch or prefer satirical content because this is his you know the creative abilities of a person and how much of a mastery they have in their art. However this doesn't sell a lot.
This is why most intelligent creators switch from great contents to foolery, thirst trap, partial suggestive nudity, mukbaang, insensitive contents and many other terrible stuff.
This guarantees them some level of popularity, money and fame especially in a very short term.
Most monetization platforms are the same
I started creating on Twitter recently and I discovered that 80% of the content that goes viral aren't intelligent conversations, has nothing to do with deep dives or maybe a knowledgeable content.
A lot of them are useless, few of them makes sense, but most of them are nothing to write home about. However because the algorithm understands that most Twitter users wants to be entertained rather than enlightenned.
It pushes content where people are fooling, talking about irrelevant things and basically just arguing over nonsense.
There are intelligent contents that are never pushed, never promoted and that's because the system depends on virality to sell and this is how they push contents that are that way.
Most viral creators made a switch at some point in their creative journey. They didn't upgrade or become better at creating, they downgraded; creating, adapting, and doing what the public wants to see.
While this actually stifles their talent and productivity the reality is that they're happy that someone gets to compliment them, they get engagement which can then translate to money.
But is money everything?
Of course.
You need money as a motivation for continuity, otherwise you'll begin doubting yourself and asking whether all that consistency to be better is actually worth it. Of course it is.
Most of the time we don't know it, but this is actually the case. Money is important to also fund your creative journey, and this is that cost of actually being a creator.
Consistency is mostly possible when short term results can fuel the motivation for continuity. Many creators out there are facing issues like this, and sadly a lot of them will quit because of zero motivations to continue.
This is where people make the choices to switch it all up because consistency is never guaranteed to elevate or reward you.
You see why fake lives sell faster, because this is what social media was created to promote, the internet should be a place of learning a vast market place to go up beyond boundary, however since the human mind was condition for comfort the algorithm will always feed it with what it's looking out for leisure, flex, entertainment instead of learning on new knowledge and enlightenment...
just imagine peller for instance how much that kid is milking from the system or effe, this guys just continue to put up content that in no way inspire educate or uplift just noise, yet see the results, you now decide to begin an educative content say aboout something valuable or how to make legit money from content creation doing something useful and meaning full see which one will sell faster....
the way i see web2? is just for freelancing, while web3 is for some intellectuals who want to make the most of their creativity
Your reply is upvoted by @topcomment; a manual curation service that rewards meaningful and engaging comments.
More Info - Support us! - Reports - Discord Channel
I think there are both good and bad creators irrespective of web2 or web3. I also feel that a lot of creators would have done better if they had the motivation to keep dishing out good contents.
The likes of Peller and Efe are not even good content creators to begin with. There's no uniqueness in their contents, just thirst trap and doing useless things, and since a lot of Nigerians aren't really smart, this is the type of content they'll always choose.
like seriously it's annoying but this is life and sometimes to make the most of it, just have to play along, but most times also consistency will definitely pay off, just be on the right track and continue doing what's good and valueable it's just a matter of time
I know of Telegram channels on cryptocurrency with around 100,000 subscribers. During the bull run, these channels were earning $10,000+, but when the crypto winter hit, their income plummeted to less than $1,000 per month. I also know of a channel with 1,300 subscribers, but the author earns 20-30k per month, regardless of the crypto market. The manner of presentation and the level of information are very different: for the mass consumer, it's more entertainment content, while for a smaller channel, analytics and educational materials are a different level. Therefore, it all depends entirely on you: if you choose to write content tailored to your audience's needs, you'll degrade yourself, but if you choose to write content for a narrow audience, the audience will build accordingly.
20 to 30k you mean in dollars? Wow. How come, and with only 1.3k subscribers?
Well I won't be surprised. I think for them to earn 30k, their content must be unique, not saturated, and actually gives a lot of value. I'll like to know this channel, if you have a name, I'll like to check if they're still creating stuffs.
They've built over the years and whether it's bull or not, they'll earn good from what they've built
Everything you've listed is unique content, not oversaturated (that's secondary), and offering great value (vague). Many channels and blogs possess these qualities.
What distinguishes such channels is that they influence one's worldview, not just providing information but forcing one to engage one's brain while reading, provoking mental activity, and influencing identity formation.
The channel is in Russian. If you're interested and can handle the content using an automatic translator, I'll give you the name; it's not classified information.
As for your question about only 1.3k subscribers, the quality of the information presented is different and attracts a certain audience. Create a YouTube channel with cats and you'll have millions of views in just a couple of months, but the income from such an audience will be close to zero. This is entertainment content, while content about finance, which is specialized, attracts a certain type of person. It's probably the same in any industry.
A lot of the content performing well and going viral is bad, little effort or not valuable at all, it's not guaranteed lot of work will bring lot of views and such... Getting viral and known how to are different skills
Yes, definitely. A lot of bad content going viral sometimes are mostly low value and not even good enough for the virality they have. I think it's what it is, and sometimes it's unfair
The thing that makes me feel sad — as an actual content creator — as that so much of what seems to become popular is mindless AI created dreck that most of the time is pure fiction of no lasting value... yet hundreds of thousands of people latch on to it like it is somehow "great."
Which really does not encourage me to do anything with consistency. You get to a point of "why even bother..."
=^..^=
I think a lot of people get to the "why even bother" point. To be fair, YouTube is cracking down on AI slop, but I'm not sure other web2 platforms have done the same. If they actually do (I mean all of them) it gives real creators the opportunity to actually make money in web2.
As for web3, I think Hive is currently the only place to earn anything from zero (without capital)
You just nailed it. To be able to make it as a content creator in these blue, white and black apps, you have to feed the audience what they want. Of course, it's the people that decides which post goes viral or not, whether quality or not.
Consistency pays off... but you need persevere.
Sometimes consistent people are demotivated because they can't at least earn enough money to continue pushing them as well.
That is just how the algorithm works. It sucks to see it, but I still think that luck is a huge factor in succeeding on those major platforms. After getting that luck, you need to retain the audience otherwise they will move on.
I think luck is just a fraction of it. Sometimes viral creators intentionally studies what works and tweaks their content to suit these narrative, and they don't matter if it's trash content provided they make money
You are very right, not all time consistency pays, Many have tried and later quit because of lack motivation which is money but sometimes you have to focus on the effort not the rewards. Nothing is easy though but consistency really matters in everything you want to do.
The rewards howbeit small can fuel your passion for consistency