Slashdot Mirror


YouTube To Make New Originals Available For Free, Ad-Supported Viewing (variety.com)

YouTube is removing the paywall for its original programming. Starting next year, the company will move to make all of its new original programming available for free for anyone to watch. "With the change, YouTube is moving toward more mainstream celebrity-driven and creator-based reality fare, while it will continue to greenlight scripted productions," reports Variety. From the report: Until now, YouTube Originals have mainly been available on its YouTube Premium subscription service, although YouTube also has expanded the shows and movies it makes available on an ad-supported basis. The company calls the new YouTube Originals strategy its "Single Slate," which will combine ad-supported and subscription VOD programming initiatives that by 2020 will provide free windows for all YouTube users. Some original productions will remain behind the paywall, including season 2 of "Cobra Kai," an offshoot of the "Karate Kid" movies. Moving forward, YouTube Premium will include early access to original, exclusive content as a reason to pay for the service. YouTube has faced stiff competition in trying to lure paying customers with original content against the likes of Netflix, Hulu and Amazon, which spend far more on content. "As we look to 2019, we will continue to invest in scripted programming and shift to make our YouTube Originals ad supported to meet the growing demand of a more global fanbase," a YouTube rep said in a statement. "This next phase of our originals strategy will expand the audience of our YouTube Original creators, and provide advertisers with incredible content that reaches the YouTube generation."

63 comments

  1. potential by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you're a potential screenwriter or aspiring actor, there has never been a better time to get your stuff produced. If you like watching niche stuff, now is also your time. Enjoy.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to go back and watch some educational content about Socialism so you can differentiate it from Communism properly someday.

    2. Re:potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up you filthy social democrat. Capitalism can't be reformed.

  2. New features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I got curious about the new YouTube originals and I got a trial subscription. There is an amazing video editing tool that allows you to take two different films and the AI automatically detects the characters in the films and allows you to make a new story out the combined characters. It uses and advanced type of interpolation, NLP, and sentiment analysis to pick out all the possible attitudes and positions of the characters. You can then supply your own script which it will automatically apply to the extracted characters and create an entirely new movie. I loaded up a few films and ultimately I decided to create a quest-like movie using the script of the princess bride using the animated characters Gru and Godzilla

    1. Re:New features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got curious about the new YouTube originals and I got a trial subscription. There is an amazing video editing tool that allows you to take two different films and the AI automatically detects the characters in the films and allows you to make a new story out the combined characters. It uses and advanced type of interpolation, NLP, and sentiment analysis to pick out all the possible attitudes and positions of the characters. You can then supply your own script which it will automatically apply to the extracted characters and create an entirely new movie. I loaded up a few films and ultimately I decided to create a quest-like movie using the script of the princess bride using the animated characters Gru and Godzilla

      Thank you, mr. Ballsucker.

    2. Re:New features by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      This is so not going to end in a huge copyright shitstorm.

      I'll go get the popcorn, this should be awesome.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's paid for with the money they take from lobbying groups for banning and shadow banning conservatives online:

    https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/08/18/2021220/google-explains-why-it-banned-the-app-for-gab-a-right-wing-twitter-rival

  4. Re:Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    They are not required to carry Nazi propaganda.

  5. Re:Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's good money in shadow banning conservatives? Well... shit, we should be doing more of it! Isn't that what a conservative would say? You know, free markets and all that...

  6. Re: Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You only needed to post this troll comment once.

    It's unlikely there's money in banning conservatives. They can bring in ad revenue from those videos and views, so there's no good business reason to drive them off. Can you prove your allegation?

  7. Cue People Complaining by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    That Youtube favors it's content over theirs to a chorus of UNFAIR.

    1. Re:Cue People Complaining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's UNFAIR that you can't learn it's from its...

  8. I have no problem with ad-supported viewing... by mark-t · · Score: 4, Interesting

    .... when the ads are inserted at reasonable locations for the content.

    Youtube inserts commercials right in the middle of a person talking and it always pisses me the hell off... The commercials are short, but it's still effing annoying.

    If they can't find a decent place to put their commercials, and they insist on monetizing it, then they should reject the video, and ask the uploader to insert blackouts where commercials can be put before reuploading it before it will be allowed to remain up.

    1. Re:I have no problem with ad-supported viewing... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Youtube inserts commercials right in the middle of a person talking and it always pisses me the hell off

      That's a great point - for all of the AI chops Google has, you'd think they could work on a way to shift the location of the ad by 10-20 seconds in either direction to be less interruptive. I've also found the breaks often come at a really terrible moment.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    2. Re:I have no problem with ad-supported viewing... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Anyone got a good solution for blocking YouTube ads on smart TVs?

      Ads are served from the same servers as the content now, so the old trick of DNS blocking doesn't work any more. If you have an Android TV box you can get a hacked YouTube app (assuming you trust it), but for smart TVs there isn't really anything you can do.

      YouTube Red is an option but isn't available in many places.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:I have no problem with ad-supported viewing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youtube inserts commercials right in the middle of a person talking and it always pisses me the hell off... The commercials are short, but it's still effing annoying.

      Just install the basic plugins recommended by EFF starting with uBlock Origin and forget ads even exist. Add VPN for good measure.

      Should take under 5 min for an average slashdotter... Are sure you are not a masochist?

    4. Re:I have no problem with ad-supported viewing... by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      Install Firefox Mobile + uBlock Origin on your smart TV? That's what I've done.

    5. Re:I have no problem with ad-supported viewing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GGet a raspberry Pi, set up PiHole, and route TV traffic through that. Google is your friend, easy to set up

  9. One Good Show by SmaryJerry · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This should be a good change. One good show from YouTube is a SciFi called Origin. On any other network or Netflix is would probably be reasonably popular but no know even knows it exists because its on YouTube Premium.

    1. Re: One Good Show by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I tried to watch Origin, surprisingly rich looking production. People already noticed embarrassing scu fi gaffs, but in terms of CGI - very tastefully done.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    2. Re: One Good Show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pity the science was garbage.

      Did they have artificial gravity generation or not? Which direction was the spaceship travelling? Accelerating or decelerating? Why were the rings spinning? Why were those solar sails so tiny? Do these people not know how airlocks work? Evidently their engineers don't or you wouldn't be able to get around the airtight armoured doors by using a crawl space. Likely these same engineers thought it was a great idea to have a long empty space at the core of the ship parallel to the direction of travel. Since they had the tech for human hybernation why did they need on-board hydroponics? For the majority of the passengers the journey time was subjective days and the remaining crew could be fed more efficiently with stores. Why did they need those motorised lamps for the plants? A bank of LEDs fixed overhead and turned on and off would have an identical result with a fraction of the weight and power consumption and much less likely to fail... And on and on.

      SF suffers when authors come up with a cool scene or plot mechanic but then have to fudge the science to make it work. Even if the science is made up its constraints should be the source of the plot and drama not the other way around.

  10. Re:Not Free by ArylAkamov · · Score: 2

    REEEEEE KNOT-SEES

  11. Re:Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Killing Nazis is a proud American tradition. Tissue?

  12. Re:Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hang on, you can get paid for punching nazis? Talk about mixing business and pleasure!

  13. From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by quenda · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How is advertising-supported TV going in the US?

    In Australia, the TV networks are circling the plug hole (anticlockwise, of course).
    Quality has gone through the floor - lots of "reality TV" and re-runs of imports.
    15 minutes of advertising per hour, not including the product placement and travel, home improvement, etc shows that look more like infomercials.

    Cable was super-expensive here (and still has adverts), so we were mostly moving to piracy and a bit of TIVO-ing until Netflix and the like arrived.

    So you-tube heading in that direction does not sound like a good thing.

    1. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by jrumney · · Score: 1

      The problem now is that there are too many Netflix-like silos with one good show each, so to watch the good shows you end up needing to subscribe to them all, or give up and pirate since there isn't really enough value in each one to justify the subscription. Making them advertising supported gets rid of the subscription barrier, and probably brings in more revenue due to the jump in the number of people watching that one good show through the official channel rather than pirating it. That said, I'm yet to find what YouTube's one good show is...

    2. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3

      How is advertising-supported TV going in the US?

      It turned into a shit-show, apparently just like in the land down under. Personally, I don't consider ad-supported to be free. They're just charging me in time and annoyance instead of money. I'm still irked over Amazon inserting a 30 second ad in front of episodes I watch on Prime. How many damned times do I have to watch the preview of The Man in the High Castle Season Two? I'm currently considering whether this is worth cancelling Prime over. I really only picked up Prime for the video service.

      Netflix has the right idea. Just send me an e-mail customized with some shows they figure I might enjoy watching based on my preference. I can always opt-out of it, but I don't mind seeing their recommendations, because it takes all of three second, not thirty seconds for each new show I start.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    3. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by quenda · · Score: 1

      The problem now is that there are too many Netflix-like silos with one good show each, so to watch the good shows you end up needing to subscribe to them all, or give up and pirate

      Another method is to switch between them when needed. You can even do a monthly rotation.
      If they start doing 12-month subscriptions, it will be back to the yo ho ho for me.

    4. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Problem is the less ads you see the far more intrusive and annoying they become, really irritating. You must be accustomed to the, else they mainly piss you off. Tolerable is in content product sponsor messages, interruptions in content, gone in that moment, don't watch the rest, simply done, way too annoying, not going to put up with another rude interruption. The digital age has shifted content to be more like a personal experience. Think when you are talking to some one and then some clown in a costume comes up, interrupts you and the other person and start screaming at you to buy something and basically demands you listen to their entire twaddle or they will prevent you from talking to the other person, from that moment on.

      Google's problem with publishing content, their name has changed from one of respect and friendship to a democracy interfering, privacy invasive, SJW controlling freak and so their ability to sell content is screwed, they taint the content they try to sell by attaching their name to it. I took one glance at that premium content, assumed it was all going to be SJW bullshit and ignored it, boring, simply not interested. Did I check any programs, not a one, simply Google put their name to it, so I ignored it, Google has a bad reputation after all the censoring.

      Fair, unfair, meh, my time my choice and so, so many choices, watch Google premium or play a computer game (hundreds of 'good' choices in there), do some social commenting (again lots of choices), generally peruse the internet, go to the movies, visit some one, go some where, go for a walk, do a bit around my home and of course Netflix or the content I already own, which fills a lot of Netflix gaps, stream from the internet in general and even read a book.

      Just so, so many choices, especially content choices and of course more personal social interactivity choices. Google want to publish content, don't be a SJW Twat, don't be privacy invasive anal retentive control freaks, other wise people won't like you and won't buy stuff from you. Keep in mind is most definitely not a social media company, it is a marketing company that uses social media as bait and the bait only needs to be good enough to get suckers to bite and then Google manipulates the interaction to keep the sucker hooked whilst pushing crap ad after crap ad down their gaping, hooked in place, maws.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You started off strong, then went full retard.

    6. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      That said, I'm yet to find what YouTube's one good show is...

      It's the show where the plumber shows you how to unclog drains. That guy is a hoot.

      Better still, check out Scotty Kilmer's channel. He's an old-school mechanic who fixes up old cars. This guys tips have helped me out more than once. Plus, he's lit up like he just drank a couple of quarts of espresso.

      https://youtu.be/9PUTfxrPIfA

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Netflix is also reasonably priced. £8/month for HD. YouTube Premium is £12/month!

      That's just silly money. I'd happily pay £2/month for ad-free. Don't care about the original stuff or music.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      Plus, he's lit up like he just drank a couple of quarts of espresso.

      That made me laugh because I had the same impression, but hadn't actually put my finger on it. Scotty is always fun to watch, even though he doesn't generally go into great detail. nonetheless, he is informative enough and entertaining to boot. He has a personality that translates to the screen very well.

    9. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That channel is trash, rather little useful info with poor sound quality and tons of annoying jump cuts and camera angle changes. There are plenty of better mechanic channels out there with ChrisFix being one of the best in terms of useful info and actually showing all of the steps clearly with proper camera work.

    10. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Better still, check out Scotty Kilmer's channel. He's an old-school mechanic who fixes up old cars.

      I used to watch his show until the ninth or tenth time I saw him half-assing something, letting his cats crawl around in customer cars, etc. He's exactly the kind of guy who gives backyard mechanics a bad name.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I enjoy a lot of CW shows, some fox ones, and a few on other networks.

      The ratio of good original content will be different since 60-90 of what you get from Netflix and HBO is reruns of movies and shows. They don't need to pad out a 24 hr day schedule.

      Also, different people like different things. The shows that you and I see as crap, other people love.

    12. Re:From Netflix/HBO to network TV model by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      How is advertising-supported TV going in the US?

      In Australia, the TV networks are circling the plug hole (anticlockwise, of course).
      Quality has gone through the floor - lots of "reality TV" and re-runs of imports.
      15 minutes of advertising per hour, not including the product placement and travel, home improvement, etc shows that look more like infomercials.

      Cable was super-expensive here (and still has adverts), so we were mostly moving to piracy and a bit of TIVO-ing until Netflix and the like arrived.

      So you-tube heading in that direction does not sound like a good thing.

      You have to remember that for ads, eyeballs count. "Reality" TV is what is popular rating wise and it's what people watch. Thus, networks all do a bunch of reality TV shows. And rating slides for reality shows can be greater because a reality TV program is cheap to produce.

      And it's not just eyeballs, but the right eyeballs. Otherwise TV would be filled with NCIS and related shows which pull in quite good ratings, but generally of the wrong demographic so its real ratings are far lower. (Those shows pull in the older demographic, and if you're not in the 18-48 range, advertisers don't care about you).

      It's why piracy of TV shows is not a big a deal, or even the whole "DVR threat". Because those TV executives realize that pirates and ad skippers don't count towards ratings so they can be ignored when making programming decisions. It's why shows get moved around - if a show is popular among the pirate crowd, but unpopular in its timeslot, the show gets cancelled. Sure fans will get angry, but the execs simply say if there that many fans, why didn't they watch the show and boost the ratings.

  14. "celebrity-driven and creator-based reality fare" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glad to see the internet turned out to be so much more substantive and intellectual than television. Truly revolutionary times we live in.

  15. LOL ... UsTube? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With the change, YouTube is moving toward more mainstream celebrity-driven and creator-based reality fare

    So, it's not so much about users uploading content, it's about YouTube suddenly acting like they're a content producer and they're going to make 'original' drivel? So we'll call it UsTube instead?

    Wow, are these companies running out of a way to be what they started as? Seems like Facebook, YouTube, and everyone else are suddenly having delusions of producing video content.

    And more garbage reality TV will be produced, and nobody will actually give a fuck.

  16. Still Angry at Youtube by BrendaEM · · Score: 0

    I have created plenty of content...for a demonized youtube channel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... If I only had 200 more subscribers. Sigh.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    1. Re:Still Angry at Youtube by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean "demonetised". Demonised has a different meaning.

    2. Re:Still Angry at Youtube by Mr.+Droopy+Drawers · · Score: 0

      I see your point. You've got some great content!

      How do you find the good geek stuff and skip the fluff?

      I must not be good at searching for content on YT. I even support people via Patreon for good stuff.

      --

      To Copy from One is Plagiarism; To Copy from Many is Research.

  17. Good news, bad news by bobstreo · · Score: 2

    The good news is that with all the streaming services creating "Original" content, we'll soon be at peak actor employment. Hopefully the new "studios" will actually create something of value, I'm not holding my breath though.

    The bad news: Your time at restaurants will go up significantly as no more wait staff will be available in NYC and LA.

  18. Free!!! by messymerry · · Score: 1

    It's not free if it's ad supported. Time is money. Where do people come up with these headlines. Nothing Alphabet does is free. Shun them.

    --
    Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
  19. Do not tolerate advertisements. Period. by Snufu · · Score: 1

    If your platform requires advertisements it is dead to me. The internet revolution has provided communication that is cheap, universal, and most significantly, two way. The best content is produced by individuals who either share their work freely or use a patronage model for revenue. These people have genuinely diverse opinions and most importantly are not trying to sell you anything.

    We are no longer captive to commercial entities. Do not accept ads.

    1. Re:Do not tolerate advertisements. Period. by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      Do not accept ads.

      Ads are the reason I stopped listening to the radio over twenty years ago, and stopped watching broadcast TV about eight years ago. The ad-supported model always turns abusive, so I completely agree with your sentiment: do not accept ads.

    2. Re:Do not tolerate advertisements. Period. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet here we are, on slashdot, which runs ads.

  20. Re: Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You've been watching too much fake news. The Nazis were leftists just like Democrats, not far-right. They weren't even "nationalists" as fake news keeps claiming. It was the National SOCIALIST Party.

  21. Re: Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Political violence against the Nazi Party was wrong.

    The More You Know (TM)

  22. who gives a shot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Less than 5% of the world can view it to start with. Waste of time.

  23. free for anyone to watch. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That will make a change. Usually, they just make things free for anyone IN THE USA to watch.

  24. Not that YouTube matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will just be a lot of "this content not available in your region" for most people anyway

    They keep forgetting the "inter" part of "internet"

  25. Re:Not Free by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

    No - That's what you assume a conservative would say based out your bias

  26. Ad Supported is NOT Free by Slicker · · Score: 1

    Pushing ads in faces is not free. It comes at the cost of wasting time and pissing people off. It may be their website but luring people in with enticing videos only to shove ads in their faces is rude as hell. Having to pay off every individual website you use to avoid this is epidemic.. a disease..This is the reason many of us left cable television. In the 1980's, it was ads between and at intermission of a show. Now its more ads than show... brain damage inducing.

    The Internet was designed for information and resource sharing -- a cooperative endeavor. The web enhanced this. However now instead of cooperative sharing, we have others taking control of our computers and, using our computation resources for their own desires, and shoving things we don't want in our faces. And we have to pay them off, each individually, to get them to stop.... and that often only partially works.

    We need something to replace the web. We need a decentralized mesh network into which we can share files, videos, programs, etc. without the need for some big company's servers. As it is, they are using our computers in order to get money -- with absolutely no regard for what they do to us.

  27. Did y'all miss the point? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    Or have I just imagined one?

    It looks like the subscription model has failed and YouTube is reverting.

    That's interesting because I see the TV and magazine revenue structure returning whereby we subscribe AND view ads.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  28. Re: Not Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Nazi's called themselves socialists for marketing reasons.

    No one wants socialism beyond a few hundred goofballs.

    Some of us do want things we all need to be socialized, like roads and bridges and courts and national defense and oh wait those things already are.

    Socialism, the BIG SCARY WORD fake conservatives use when they want to pretend they know things.

  29. Re:"available for free for anyone" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting AC to preserve moderation.

    You're a fucking retard.
    "Available for free" is acceptable.
    "Available free" is not acceptable.
    "Available freely" is acceptable.

    Learn what an adverb is before you fucking spout off. I'm sick of you clowns chopping off the "ly" or "ily" from adverbs and just pretending adjectives are adverbs.

  30. Re:Not Free by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

    Calling the people who killed the Nazis is not.
    Or do you think the men sent to die held the same progressive lgbtq agenda as the modern left does?
    Either way it was a disingenuous remark I was replying to and you know it.