Eight-year-old tops YouTube list of high earners with $26 million

Free

10K under the hat
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
10,783
Location
Underground in America
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
2009
SLU Posts
55565
Ugh.


Ryan Kaji, whose channel Ryan's World has 22.9 million subscribers, earned $26 million in 2019 -- up $4 million from his earnings in 2018, when he also gained the highest-earning YouTuber spot.

Forbes estimates that the ten highest earners on YouTube, which is owned by Google, brought in a total of $162 million between June 1, 2018 and June 1, 2019.
 
  • 1Facepalm
  • 1Interesting
Reactions: Govi and Brenda Archer

Dakota Tebaldi

Well-known member
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
3,878
Location
Gulf Coast, USA
Joined SLU
02-22-2008
SLU Posts
16791
1. THIS IS CHILD EXPLOITATION

2. This little thing at the end of the article:

YouTube has announced that next year it will stop personalized advertisements on children's content.

This comes after Google agreed to pay $170 million to settle accusations that YouTube broke the law when it knowingly tracked and sold ads targeted to children.
...isn't elaborated on, but it means that Ryan's World will not be the top YouTube earner of 2020, and nor will any other child-starring YouTube channel. Starting next year YouTube will only be able to put randomized, non-targeted ads on child-directed videos and channels, and those kinds of ads make only a fraction of the amount of shared revenue that directed ads can make.

Separately from that problem, the Ryan's World channel is the subject of an FTC complaint over its failure to disclose that the vast majority of the "toy reviews" were actually sponsored product promotions.
 

Bartholomew Gallacher

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
2,360
SL Rez
2002
I do find those estimates hard to believe; Felix Kjellberg aka Pewdipie has over 102 million subscribers, so far more coverage and his core audience is also financially quite stuffed.

So somebody with only 22% of PDP's coverage should make much more money? I don't think so.
 

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,461
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Google youtube and coppa. First that 8 yo should not be on the platform anyway according to both but in a couple of weeks all their vids will not be earning money.
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Fionalein

an old grumpy cat
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
981
SL Rez
2017
So somebody with only 22% of PDP's coverage should make much more money? I don't think so.
No idea what pewdiepie sells - officially nothing I guess - this guy on the other hand is where parents went to to get an idea for presents. I can see a stronger marketing connection in those "reviews".
 

Anya Ristow

Bernie Bro
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
737
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
Nov 2007
SLU Posts
2999
...isn't elaborated on, but it means that Ryan's World will not be the top YouTube earner of 2020, and nor will any other child-starring YouTube channel. Starting next year YouTube will only be able to put randomized, non-targeted ads on child-directed videos and channels, and those kinds of ads make only a fraction of the amount of shared revenue that directed ads can make.
Also, any channel or video marked as "for children" will have its comments disabled (removing one way a video is flagged by "the algorithm" as popular), and youtube will not promote it in suggested videos.

There's a grey area that is creating a lot of angst on youtube: videos that are not targeted at children but still potentially of interest to them. Basically, under the new coppa rules, if someone at the FTC thinks your video is targeted at children, then it is, even if you are an adult, curse in the video, and have zero viewership among children. Adults reviewing or commenting on toys, video games, comics, etc are screwed.

You can mark your video or whole channel as child-directed, and be subject to all the new restrictions that youtube will place on it, rendering it hard to find and impossible to monetize, or you can leave it not so marked and risk being sued.

FWIW this is one of my favorite channels. He talks about the video game Overwatch. This is another. He brutally reviews video of play that people send him. Channels about a video game with anime-level violence. Bright colors and video game characters in their video thumbnails, things specifically singled out as child-directed. Sometimes they have game-related figurines and swag in their sets. They haven't said anything about coppa, yet, but they and others like them should probably be talking to a lawyer. I'm wearing the blame the controller "need healing" t-shirt today :)
 
Last edited:
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Fionalein

an old grumpy cat
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
981
SL Rez
2017
There's a grey area that is creating a lot of angst on youtube: videos that are not targeted at children but still potentially of interest to them. Basically, under the new coppa rules, if someone at the FTC thinks your video is targeted at children, then it is, even if you are an adult, curse in the video, and have zero viewership among children. Adults reviewing or commenting on toys, video games, comics, etc are screwed.
This is actually already hurting SL bloggers ... apparently any video game content is tagged as "potentionaly attractive to minors"
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Dakota Tebaldi

Well-known member
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
3,878
Location
Gulf Coast, USA
Joined SLU
02-22-2008
SLU Posts
16791
Unfortunately, there's not really much that can be done about it. It's illegal to serve targeted ads to kids, for a good reason. YouTube has been doing it for years and finally got caught, and the people who built a living off what YouTube was doing will have to face that reality.

As I said in the other thread, it's not the SL bloggers' fault; they didn't realize what YouTube was doing was illegal. But, it was, and now it's going to stop, and the content creators are going to have to find a way to either adapt or move on now. AFAIK, most channels before now that have been demonetized have used Patreon to let fans "subscribe" and pay them directly.

This isn't the FTC's fault at all. Google would like nothing more than for YouTube creators to misdirect their anger at the FTC. But the whole situation is 100% YouTube's fault.
 

Anya Ristow

Bernie Bro
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
737
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
Nov 2007
SLU Posts
2999
This isn't the FTC's fault at all. Google would like nothing more than for YouTube creators to misdirect their anger at the FTC. But the whole situation is 100% YouTube's fault.
It is the FTC's fault. Google has been violating the law, and much of their remedy is unnecessary, so they are also at fault, but the FTC's rules are too broad, the punishment out of proportion, and they've done nothing to assure anyone that common sense will prevail.
 

Dakota Tebaldi

Well-known member
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
3,878
Location
Gulf Coast, USA
Joined SLU
02-22-2008
SLU Posts
16791
I really disagree. I don't think "you shall not serve targeted ads to children" is too broad of a rule. And I definitely don't feel the punishment for doing so is out of proportion; YouTube makes millions and millions and millions of dollars violating the law, they can stand to lose a few thousand when caught.

The idea going around that actual content creators who make content not-for-kids but that some kids merely happen to watch are going to be fined thousands of dollars by the FTC is mostly hysteria. They might well have their channels demonetized but that is completely YouTube's decision, the FTC settlement doesn't require anything of the sort. YouTube is intentionally being overzealous in its reaction and claiming that it's necessary to comply with the settlement in an attempt to get creators to think the settlement or COPPA are overreaching, and it's obviously working.
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,461
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Also, any channel or video marked as "for children" will have its comments disabled (removing one way a video is flagged by "the algorithm" as popular), and youtube will not promote it in suggested videos.

There's a grey area that is creating a lot of angst on youtube: videos that are not targeted at children but still potentially of interest to them. Basically, under the new coppa rules, if someone at the FTC thinks your video is targeted at children, then it is, even if you are an adult, curse in the video, and have zero viewership among children. Adults reviewing or commenting on toys, video games, comics, etc are screwed.

You can mark your video or whole channel as child-directed, and be subject to all the new restrictions that youtube will place on it, rendering it hard to find and impossible to monetize, or you can leave it not so marked and risk being sued.

FWIW this is one of my favorite channels. He talks about the video game Overwatch. This is another. He brutally reviews video of play that people send him. Channels about a video game with anime-level violence. Bright colors and video game characters in their video thumbnails, things specifically singled out as child-directed. Sometimes they have game-related figurines and swag in their sets. They haven't said anything about coppa, yet, but they and others like them should probably be talking to a lawyer. I'm wearing the blame the controller "need healing" t-shirt today :)
YT definitely needs a family friendly option.

Some of the topics I was interested in before turning 13:

Ancient Greek philosophy
Cosmology
Practical wilderness survival
Computer hardware and programming
Cryptography
History
Chemistry

On and on. Basically, you simply can not do a video that will not be attractive to some kids. Maybe back long ago there was kids content but that ship has sailed.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,461
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Unfortunately, there's not really much that can be done about it. It's illegal to serve targeted ads to kids, for a good reason. YouTube has been doing it for years and finally got caught, and the people who built a living off what YouTube was doing will have to face that reality.

As I said in the other thread, it's not the SL bloggers' fault; they didn't realize what YouTube was doing was illegal. But, it was, and now it's going to stop, and the content creators are going to have to find a way to either adapt or move on now. AFAIK, most channels before now that have been demonetized have used Patreon to let fans "subscribe" and pay them directly.

This isn't the FTC's fault at all. Google would like nothing more than for YouTube creators to misdirect their anger at the FTC. But the whole situation is 100% YouTube's fault.
Exactly. You even see it in how they react to people asking questions. YT lawyers up and looks like they are scolding ppl. The FTC takes meetings with millenials running gamer channels.
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Anya Ristow

Bernie Bro
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
737
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
Nov 2007
SLU Posts
2999
I really disagree. I don't think "you shall not serve targeted ads to children" is too broad of a rule.
Child-targeted content includes things with bright colors and words like cool.

And I definitely don't feel the punishment for doing so is out of proportion; YouTube makes millions and millions and millions of dollars violating the law, they can stand to lose a few thousand when caught.
*Content creators* can be fined $40K per offending video.

The idea going around that actual content creators who make content not-for-kids but that some kids merely happen to watch are going to be fined thousands of dollars by the FTC is mostly hysteria.
That's where common sense comes in. When asked for clarity, the FTC has responded with very broad guidelines and refused to use language that excludes anything. And they explicitly state that content creators can be sued. People for whom $40K is ruinous are worried. People for whom a legal defense would make youtube not worth the trouble are worried.

Youtube itself is unresponsive to channel owners. A government agency getting involved only makes it worse.

They might well have their channels demonetized but that is completely YouTube's decision, the FTC settlement doesn't require anything of the sort.
For all intents and purposes, a video that does not have targeted ads is demonetized, because untargeted ads pay approximately zero.

YouTube is intentionally being overzealous
This much is true.

ETA FTC: YouTube channel owners: Is your content directed to children?

So how does COPPA apply to channel owners who upload their content to YouTube or another third-party platform? COPPA applies in the same way it would if the channel owner had its own website or app. If a channel owner uploads content to a platform like YouTube, the channel might meet the definition of a “website or online service” covered by COPPA, depending on the nature of the content and the information collected. If the content is directed to children and if the channel owner, or someone on its behalf (for example, an ad network), collects personal information from viewers of that content (for example, through a persistent identifier that tracks a user to serve interest-based ads), the channel is covered by COPPA. Once COPPA applies, the operator must provide notice, obtain verifiable parental consent, and meet COPPA’s other requirements.
there are many subject matter categories where you don’t have to worry about COPPA. For example, if your videos are about traditionally adult activities like employment, finances, politics, home ownership, home improvement, or travel, you’re probably not covered unless your content is geared toward kids. The same would be true for videos aimed at high school or college students. On the other hand, if your content includes traditional children’s pastimes or activities, it may be child-directed. For example, the FTC recently determined that an online dress-up game was child-directed.
There's a lack of guidance for stuff that falls between "home improvement" and "online dress-up game".

Youtube's guidance is more hopeful.

Way more info
 
Last edited:
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer

Brenda Archer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,135
Location
Arizona
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sept 2007
SLU Posts
12005
Would it help to put things behind an 18+ warning and does YouTube support a trap page?
“Warning, this is adult content because of language” and then make sure to put in a few swears.
 

Kara Spengler

Queer OccupyE9 Sluni-Goon
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
5,461
Location
SL: November RL: DC
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
December, 2008
SLU Posts
23289
Would it help to put things behind an 18+ warning and does YouTube support a trap page?
“Warning, this is adult content because of language” and then make sure to put in a few swears.
YT, like all sites, has been doing a "you must be 13 to sign up" for years. The problem is they do not force ppl to be signed in to watch vids then bragged they had a lot of kids on their site.
 

Brenda Archer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,135
Location
Arizona
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sept 2007
SLU Posts
12005
YT, like all sites, has been doing a "you must be 13 to sign up" for years. The problem is they do not force ppl to be signed in to watch vids then bragged they had a lot of kids on their site.
Thanks. It looks as though YouTube can’t be trusted at all.
 

Dakota Tebaldi

Well-known member
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
3,878
Location
Gulf Coast, USA
Joined SLU
02-22-2008
SLU Posts
16791
Child-targeted content includes things with bright colors and words like cool.
Because YouTube is purposefully interpreting things that way, contributing to the hysteria.

*Content creators* can be fined $40K per offending video.
It's not going to happen out of the blue. Content creators won't suddenly be ambushed by the FTC with a thousand-dollar fine. Even if somebody's video game channel winds up targeted, they'll be warned about it first.

That's where common sense comes in. When asked for clarity, the FTC has responded with very broad guidelines and refused to use language that excludes anything. And they explicitly state that content creators can be sued. People for whom $40K is ruinous are worried. People for whom a legal defense would make youtube not worth the trouble are worried.
Yes, there's a reason for that. It's because they anticipate certain channels deliberately mis-categorizing their own content in order to skirt the law and YouTube's detection systems, so they're reserving some discretionary power. Some creator who didn't think kids might want to watch their video about Pokemon is going to get flagged and demonetized by YouTube long before they'd have to worry about the FTC directly doing anything to them.
 
  • 1Thanks
Reactions: Brenda Archer