YouTube Moving Wrong Direction Along Longtail?

Who is Ray William Johnson, and why might YouTube need to change its name to RayWilliamJohnsonTube.com? How is YouTube, perhaps, moving the wrong way along the longtail, providing typical viewers (grazers not bingers) with an increasingly homogeneous experience?

Ray William Johnson dominates YouTube via his large and fervent fan base

If you’re not familiar with the term “longtail,” it was popularized by Chris Anderson (Wired) in 2004. Anderson used the term to refer to the success of Amazon and Netflix selling “less of more.” While mainstream retailers would only keep select merchandise in inventory (the 20% of products that would represent 80% of sales), the online stores could appeal to the rest of us.

YouTube’s early success (2005-2009) was serving the masses by offering the “long tail” of video content. However in the past year, the site’s homepage and “related/spotlight” videos have reverted to a more traditional commerce and entertainment model. Now a very, very small sample of creators (fewer than 10%) represent far more than 80% of the website’s views. As the site moves toward a more customized homepage, that means that “grazers” like GigaOm’s Liz Shannon Miller, are less likely to find relevant content… at least by browsing.

For evidence of this observation, look no further than the increasingly YouTube’s “most viewed” page, which once represented a more diverse collection of amateur and professional creators (even though “web stars” have dominated it during their increasingly compressed life cycles). Today it’s almost exclusively dominated by professional musicians, and about 5-10 amateur creators: specifically, ShaneDawsonTV, Sxephil, Shaytards, RayWilliamJohnson.

These are talented creators, and great marketers by my definition. They know their viewing audience, they satisfy them to their benefit, and they activate them to reach a broader crowd. But for the typical YouTube visitor (an intermittent visitor), YouTube has become a “sea of sameness.” The “webstar” lifecycle is becoming increasingly short as competition increases. This paradigm bothered me less, of course, when I was enjoying my 15 minutes. While I still get 5-6 million views a month, I’m rarely among the spotlighted videos… presumably because my videos are less frequent and engaging the audience less. That said, even when I was a predictable face on YouTube’s most-popular videos of the day, I knew that there was far better content that deserved this honor.

Of the most-viewed videos of the month, Johnson owns 7 of the top 20

Ray William Johnson is perhaps the “poster child” of what “hard core YouTubers” want. The NYC amateur entertainer creates daily video blogs (vlogs) that are funny, irreverent and usually celebrate funny Internet videos he curates (many that were or became “memes”). He works hard, and his formula is precise — from the rapid-fire “show” format to the neon, circle-toon thumbnails and ALL CAP titles! It’s not an accident that William’s short videos are rewarded with more than a million views a day. That could mean as much as $800-$1,000 of income daily (see MyU2B stats), amounting to perhaps $500-$700,000 per year (although this is educated speculation). If history can help us predict the future, we can assume he will eventually lose his “most popular” throne to someone else, even if his videos remain regular and strong, and his monthly reviews holds or grows.

Johnson is not the first or last amateur creator to “crack the code” for getting serious views on YouTube, and growing his fan base via a virtual cycle. It’s easier to explain than to imitate: His strong fan base of YouTube “bingers” (those who view and engage frequently) regularly propels him to a wider audience of “grazers” (those people who visit sporadically and can’t help but notice the mesmerizing thumbnails, ala the photos here). He encourages viewers to watch, comment, favorite and rate (thumbs up), which is what drives YouTube’s algorithm for “spotlighted” videos. This accelerates the virtuous cycle, as long as his videos continue to convert “grazers” to “bingers.” And that’s good for him and YouTube, which depends on regular creators to attract and retain audiences to support its advertising model.

So should YouTube change anything, or is it a natural and healthy phenomenon? That’s debatable, and perhaps a moot point considering the limited interest by Google. YouTube may be the largest video sharing site, but its revenue is maybe 1% of Google’s revenue. That’s a rounding error to Google, who won’t soon let “the tail wag the dog.” As advertising revenue flows to online-video and consumption grows significantly, Google’s approach to YouTube may change.

YouTube’s fundamental challenge is this: absent the influence of human editors, the site “crowd sources” the curating/programming role to the portion of YouTube viewers who are active. That works nicely, but it does create a self-fulfilling prophecy that has strangled the growth of other online properties.

The new viewer has three viewing options:

  1. Search for preferred content (a vital but “non sticky” model),
  2. “teach” YouTube its preferences (a useful but rare approach for most people),
  3. or more commonly, default to the “crowd sourced” favorites.

So we have a virtuous cycle for creators, and perhaps a vicious cycle if YouTube hopes to expand its audience, something that will become more vital to advertisers and the economics of the online-video industry. Let’s say (not so hypothetically) that 1,000 to 10,000 people (ages 13-19 year old), take the active role of “crowd sourcing” by rating, favoriting and commenting. Their “taste” defines the “spotlighted” videos that YouTube promotes to new visitors. This can attract similar viewers, but alienates those who don’t share in the hardcore viewers’ tastes. Thus it may force them to resort to using YouTube as a search engine only, put effort into customizing the site to meet their needs, or send them elsewhere.

Paradoxically, YouTube’s increasingly homogenous content resembles the homogenous staffing model of its parent, Google (where high GPAs tend to be weighted more than other attributes). It’s a smart way to grow initially, but can also thwart diversity and evolution.

But perhaps I’m looking at this longtail shift the wrong way. It’s not a bad thing if you happen to share the taste of Ray William Johnson, or if you’re him. This phenomenon is also typical of most entertainment experiences, where the “star” pyramid is tall and sharp. In Hollywood, fame begets fame. Should it be different in this emerging media?

Regardless on your take, you might agree this phenomenon opens a large window for someone who (or something that) can “program” an experience that is more broadly appealing or that serves a more attractive advertising demographic… using YouTube’s platform or another. There are loads of ways to remedy this virtuous/vicious cycle using technology and human programmers, but it requires a different approach than the one to date. And it’s quite different from Google’s core DNA of creating great search and free technology products that rival many paid ones.

Your thoughts? I’ll be reading. It’s a snow day.

Author: Nalts

Hi. I'm Nalts.

26 thoughts on “YouTube Moving Wrong Direction Along Longtail?”

  1. Not sure what you’re saying here Kevin. To me not much has changed since folks came to watch cat videos, family guy and porn in 2006/7 most of them had no idea who lonely girl was and they still won’t.

  2. You hit the nail on the head. He IS hilarious and his dialog and delivery are just as infectious as the memes he reviews. There are some that have questioned his rise to popularity, using bots and sock accounts and until recently, did not get permission to use the other videos in his.

    It does seem YouTube has just become a popular club. and that the “Rich become richer, while the poor become poorer. More small partners are getting disabled and come to ME for help. I seem to be the poster child for that.

    I do enjoy his videos, but have always wondered what videos/Youtubers has he has pushed out. Although the active Tubers and community Under the “Upper crust” Seem to be very active, engaging and collaborating.

    Thank you for categorizing this “phenomenon” that everyone has been wondering about. But will YouTube Expose possible questionable activities? if that were the case, would YouTube ignore/hide that so that it would keep it’s top channels as legit and avoid any scandal?

    I do wish I saw you up there more Nalts!
    Keep on YouTubin!

  3. Cutting to the chase.. I loved the original layout before Google mashed it all up. Short and long.. YouTube used to be a people site. Most weren’t looking for fame and money. Browse on the front page “People & Blogs” and look what comes up! Not one of the originals- Zipster, Nalts, Paul, Thor, etc. etc. If you don’t have 14,000+ views your SOL. If your over 30 (the target market), your SOL.

    I know they are aiming for a business model, but are most people who poke around YouTube are being steered away from what made YouTube a very special place for them? The YouTube gatherings have turned into expensive marketing seminars instead of the former grassroots comradery that it once was. The videos are becoming more like director’s auditions for reality shows.

    Being crank on one more point.. type in search- “Allentown” (upload date: today) like I do day after day. About the only thing that comes up are car and apt. rentals ads alongside every conceivable business from hospitals, lawyers, nightclubs to Woofworldpa kennels. Where the hell did the “tubers” go!!

    I know a lot of my videos stink (I don’t expect much), but sheeesh only 10 or 20 hits in 3 weeks on most of these.. you got to be kidding me! YouTube front page browsing.. something screwed up there! Same thing with applies to my other channel as well.. http://www.youtube.com/user/ExtraSpecial1

  4. I think that your guesstimate figures are way off Nalts.

    Just pulling figures out of my ass I would guess that 0.3% of YouTube’s partners generate less than 1% of the site’s views but they are promoted on almost 100% of the site’s pages.

    The “interaction creates promotion which creates interaction which creates promotion which creates interaction…” unstable feedback loop is the result of exploitation of the YouTube Algorithm’s flawed design which leaves the system’s quality control mechanisms exposed to content creators.

    I used the word “interaction” instead of “view” on purpose because a view is just another interaction.

    Throughout YouTube’s short history the site has been dominated by systems-analysts (geeks, including you), not by talented artists. Those geeks exploited any system drivers that they could see and could control (Google hides all its drivers, SEO is only a guessing game).

    On the surface YouTube’s feedback loop is open to anyone, but the entry requirements to morph it into an unstable feedback loop have recently escalated and now the sure-fire means on getting into that rich-get-richer loop state involve the content creator becoming a liar or a thief (or both).

    Here is a howto.

    You need a source of interactions to get the ball rolling. This simple barrier means that the 35 hours of video that is uploaded every minute on YouTube goes unwatched.

    Interaction sources
    1. Use the Editors – Befriend them, pay them, sleep with them. Any YouTube employee that can get your content promoted counts as an editor.
    2. Climb up on the shoulders of other YouTubers. Again, befriend them, pay them, sleep with them. The box-for-box scheme is a particularly easy and pernicious way to become pseudo-successful without talent.
    3. Make videos with titles that include current news topics being searched for.

    Once you have a source of interactions you need to fine-tune your content towards the subset of those people most easily coerced into making interactions on your behalf without questioning the merit, ethics or consequences of their actions.

    In other words, you need to target vulnerable children. At least a fifth of children are from broken homes with an absent parent. These kids flock to YouTube to fill the holes in their life. If you make content targeted at them and become the consistent point of reference in their lives, then they will do whatever you ask without question.

    /The Liar/
    If you make a crap video and ask an adult to give it a thumbs up the adult will rarely do as you say. A child on the other hand will do as you ask because you are an adult and adults are to be obeyed.

    Views, ratings, comments, favorites, shares are all there for the taking, as long as you target children who can be manipulated into becoming a part of any “white-lie” you desire.

    Once you have become a modern-day Fagin you should be able to generate several thousand interactions from a few thousand children (which would otherwise require millions of views by adults).

    In order to profit from this manipulation you still need millions views, including those from adults, so you disguise the source of your video’s “popularity” by pretending that it is a viral video by using a deceptive title and thumbnail.

    The new views (interactions) that this lie will bring will trigger the YouTube Algorithm and cause the video to become widely promoted on the site. If the deception is really successful and enough interactions take place (especially negative ones) then the video will become permanently promoted on the site due to its high “popularity”.

    At this point you have created your unstable feedback loop. Rinse. Repeat. Profit.

    /The Thief/
    If you don’t have your own children to act as lures then you are going to have to find something else to use. Any crap will do, silly voices, cartoon characters, eating worms, everything you thought was cool before you reached puberty.

    The problem is, even producing crap takes time. You want to be posting 2 videos a day if possible. To speed up video production while still maintaining an audience the best idea is to steal other people’s content or intellectual property. This has the added bonus of driving more views when people mistake your counterfeit content for the original content. It may even (God forbid) introduce enough engaging entertainment value into what you are doing to allow fanboys to defend “your” growing fanbase.

    For example:
    Steal a singers name and song titles to use as your video titles. You won’t be touched by YouTube, they actually encourage this behavior because it forces the singer to put the real content on YouTube.

    Steal a song’s melody and call it a parody.

    Steal news footage, trailer footage or movie footage and call your video a commentary.

    Steal other people’s viral videos and chop them up so that you can claim fair use, even though you are monetizing them.

    Again, at this point you have created your unstable feedback loop. Rinse. Repeat. Profit.

    There is a price to be paid (other than the eternal damnation of the souls of the people engaged in this practice).

    The browse page has already become a ghost town. In a very short time, watch-page grazers will have learned NOT to click on Related Videos at all, even if they are your videos.

    The views for the “popular” content creators are coming from them being placed on other videos watch pages as “Related Videos” even when the videos are not related to the video being watched in any way whatsoever. Don’t take my word for it. Check your videos’ watch pages for this 0.3% YouTube Elite, they will be there grinning back at you in a video that has absolutely nothing to do with yours.

    YouTube have access to all the metrics that they need to fix this. They can use hidden, unexploitable quality controls. They can take child exploitation out of the equation.

    They don’t have access to anyone with will or the guts to fix this.

    I don’t blame them. You are putting your future presence on YouTube in danger by even talking about this stuff in a disparaging manner. I would not be surprised if RWJ’s systems-analyst TheWillOFDC hasn’t already shot an email off to YouTube implying that your content should be demoted because you are encouraging behavior that is against YouTube’s TOU and you should be denied a high soapbox to do it from. I also would not be surprised if a YouTube monkey complied with his request without checking what he was talking about. You are stomping around in a snake pit and you don’t know which head belongs to which tail. Or who is sleeping with who.

  5. Nalts: Keep makig Videos! Keep on YouTubin!

    1000lurkers: I guess I am too honest to be sucessful on YouTube. trying to get some collabs together. But focusing too much on getting my Adsense back (On Principle mind you.)

    FREE KIDDSOCK

  6. Youtube is heading in the wrong direction? Yeah, no kidding, Naltsy! I could have told you that. In fact, I said basically all the same things you said here, and also what Kiddsock said in the comments section a few posts ago, but all I got was BuddhaCharlie yelling and going loco at me!

  7. Great analysis Nalts, I agree with you fully. These algorithms are making the rich get richer, while the poor get… frustrated. This isn’t the most profitable model, as it keeps the grazers isolated from discovering other talented but “smaller” partners, quality content creators who those grazers would subscribe to (if only they knew they existed), and this would greatly increase the recurring ad revenue of YouTube because now those grazers would be watching more content regularly.
    I wonder when they will ever figure this out and get rid of the current model employed by these algorithms? (I wonder if it will EVER happen.)

  8. This is pretty much the general trend for entertainment in general. You have your top elites who are very popular and make ridiculous amounts of money and then you have your starving artists who either support themselves doing some else or sell their souls to make a living.

    Humans in general can’t keep track of more than a few dozen stars in a particular medium so once the top ranks are mostly saturated, you get feedback loops enforcing a rich get richer system which, however, tends to be unstable long-term.

    It makes sense for YouTube to want to stabilize the system and slow down the turnover rate by artificially keeping the spotlight on some creators since it creates a more predictably revenue stream.

    Or something like that. I’m just making shit up here.

  9. Kevin – funny that after inviting us to comment by saying its a snow day sounding like a kid who is happy to miss school and now sound like a middle aged bald guy who misses school when you refer to these comments as being like a high school reunion.

    Here’s the thing, I remember back in 2008 when you and themightythor were belly aching about youtube overpromoting non-partner on the front page which of course is the exact opposite thing that complain is going on now as causual browsers coming to the site. Maybe it’s the winter and cabin fever which gets to you this time of year. But no matter how you try to repackage it at the end of the day it sounds like you are just whining cuz they aren’t promoting you.

  10. @Alexis and everyone

    You are equating the word stability with maintaining the status quo, but for control systems (including feedback loops) stability has a defined meaning discreet from its everyday use.

    When people talk about channels being in an unstable feedback loop, it means that those channels are going to keep growing exponentially because the loop exists, not that they are going to fall over and disappear. Once the cause of the instability is removed then the channel may disappear amongst the unwashed masses.

    A stable control system is one that responds appropriately to an external input and then returns to its intitial state once that input is removed. A YouTube example would be the PianoChatImprov channel. After an initial burst of unusual popularity caused by (TOU breaking) content being virally shared and featured by YouTube’s Editors, the volume of interest is once again decreasing.

    An unstable control system is one who’s output response continues to increase even after the external input is removed. This can be caused by a feedback loop where the output response feeds backs into the system and acts as an additional input. The link below is just a random illustration of an unstable wave output from the web. It mimics the rise in subscribers that channels with unstable feedback loops on YouTube experience. As the linked page says “any unnecessary amplification can contribute to instability.”

    http://www.strategosinc.com/feedback_systems_1.htm

    Some sources of any unnecessary amplification on YouTube are;
    1. Continuous Editor features over months and years (Rocketboom, TotallySketch, BarelyPolitical etc). This behavior would allow a channel to maintain the “critical mass” that it needs to access YouTube’s honors pages when the channel would otherwise have been overtaken and faded away. This is not a feedback loop and, as YouTube users become Editor-Feature blind because of the function’s constant abuse, the function is becoming less of source of unstable channel growth and more of a totem reminding people that YouTube isn’t rotten to the core, its rotten from the core.
    2. Permanent Algorithm-generated features of videos with high interaction counts regardless of the audiences intent when committing those interactions (a dislike is the same as a like, a gamed view is the same as a legitimate view). The featuring creates more interactions and the feedback loop in formed.
    3. The targeting and manipulation of children to effectively hack YouTube’s quality control systems by manufacturing incongruous personality-based interactions (ratings, favorites, comments) which drown out content-based interactions on other channel’s videos and triggers YouTube promotion of the child-targeting channel. The promotion supplies more children and the feedback loop is formed.

    It isn’t Google’s fault that YouTube users and YouTube employees abuse the site’s control systems to create the unstable feedback loops that allow a few channels to dominate the site.

    It is Google’s fault that they have not taken those control systems out of the hands of content creators and out of the hands of YouTube employees.

    The people running YouTube are crooks and the rule is simple, be crooked or be ignored.

    It is possible to change the YouTube Algorithm to reward honest behavior instead of rewarding dishonest behavior and I believe that if this were done then genuine content creators would benefit. The majority of people in the real world don’t cheat and steal because its is a fucking awful way to live. YouTube’s promotion of cheats and thieves has made YouTube a fucking awful place to spend time.

    YouTube has to be straightened out. But where is the incentive to straighten it out going to come from?

    Any content creator with an ounce of intelligence has gamed videos on YouTube earning them money. If YouTube is fixed then all of them will lose that income stream. Look at your own content inventory and ask yourself is your income coming from a genuinely popular video, or a gamed video, or worst of all a highly disliked video that YouTube is promoting because it ignores its consumer’s judgment and treats “likes” and “dislikes” the same.

    There is no place for dishonest, lazy, insular YouTube employees as curators of an honest system. The view counts on YouTube show that people ignore content that is clearly identified as an Editor Promotion. YouTube’s content consumers are sick of the Editors. As for content creators, if you are one of the top 1000 Partners on YouTube and you have not been featured on the browse/discovery/videos page in the last 12 months then please realize, those bastards stole your money (365days x 3 creators = 1095 featured creator spots minimum). Please also realize that getting featured now is worthless because the function has been whored into the ground.

    A change in behavior isn’t going to come from the current content creators or from the YouTube employees. Google won’t change the site’s Content Management System’s operation unless old media runs a story on the current site exploits. So that leaves the content consumers as the ones who will have to drive the change. If the MySpace example is followed then the consumers will drive the change by quietly leaving the site as individuals. YouTube will change once they are gone.

    I am going to paste Google’s Advertisement Editorial Policy here so you can filter the titles, thumbnails and tags that typical “big” YouTube videos have through it and hopefully see how my crackpot “YouTube’s actions are evil and self-destructive” viewpoint doesn’t exist in isolation from the practices Google itself uses in order to maintain consumer trust.

    The question is, do you want to get healed?

    Ad Text Editorial Policy

    * Be clear and concise
    * Be relevant and targeted to users’ interests
    * Be accurate and honest
    * No hidden surprises
    * Cannot offer prizes for clicks
    * Use correct spelling
    * Punctuation cannot be repeated two or more times in a row (no !!)
    * No exclamation point in the title of the ad
    * No substituting words with symbols, numbers or letters
    * Use correct spacing. For example, no “c-h-e-a-p” or “shop,buy,sell”).
    * No extra punctuation
    * Use proper grammar
    * Capitalization only allowed for the first letter of each word
    * Cannot repeat the same word three or more times in a row
    * No offensive or inappropriate language
    * No call to action (for example, “click here”)
    * Superlatives (best, #1) are only allowed if verification by a valid third party is clearly displayed on your site
    * Competitive claims (better, easier, stronger) must be supported on landing page

    Image and Animated Ads Policy

    * No deceptive tactics
    * Be family safe (appropriate for minors) — no alcohol, adult, sexual themes or inappropriate language
    * No strobe, flashing, or distracting effects

  11. You know, I may be an example of the bright side of Rays videos. He featured my work in one of his episodes and as a result I have gained a huge fan base in a short period of time. I find it hard to fault the guy because with the audience he has, he can really help other youtubers get noticed.

  12. That is Good Jon. Which Video was it? Did he ask permission before he used it? Ray just got Flagged on one his videos again for Copyright, so there are still issues and questions about his methods.

    It is an interesting dilema about how he uses videos and no one really knows if he is getting permission. I think it frustrates alot of channels because for the most part, people try to follow the guidelines.

    Plus there is also a question of how he rose to the Top So Fast. Some think that he used bots, sock accounts or even bought subscribers. There is no way to prove anything unless Google/YouTube Really did some digging. BUT he seems too big of a cash cow for them to really look into it. How many other top channels have used questionable methods to move up? No one really knows, but some people have their suspicions.

    What Ray does is very much like America’s Funniest Videos, but all with in 5 minutes. Except they had a submission system, by which people waived all rights to the footage in return for a possibility for winning a prize.

    Ray’s Script is tight and delivery is spot on and Hilarious. Should Ray use a system like that to protect himsef and should no one submit a video to Ray without agreeing to Waive all rights to the video?

    The Copyright issue, I mentioned above, that Ray has now, seems to be submitted by someone that did not gain from the exposure.

    There is one of my Old Videos that gets like 150 views on average a day. I do not get any Subscriptions or comments from these Views. I suspect that it is from the related videos. “Eat the Banana” & “Banana Mouth”. I just added annotations to try to get viewers to subscribe & Comment. Otherwise I will have to think that it is some kind of bot stuck on this video. Not something I am doing And Not something really being viewed. I would assume YouTube would takeit down if they saw that. So I Hope it is real views, but I just need to get quality Subs.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seKj9Mquyrk

    Nalts, I did the same thing to one of your veggie vids.

    Would I like Ray to show it on his video. PArt says yes, part says no. It is actually someone else’s video that I Voiced over as a Parody. I never put Reveue Sharing on it because of that. I did Video Response it to the Orginal Video/Channel, but they never acknowledged my messages or responses.

  13. @Kiddsock

    Ray was very nice about things. He sent me an e-mail through youtube asking me permission to use my video and I told him he could. The video was this one he used http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WT5F6LcwNEw
    and the RWJ episode that it was featured in was this one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um81v93XaaY

    I remember the day it went live because I woke up and my inbox was full of comments. Now I get, on average, about 20-25 thousand views a day collectively on all my stuff. The ad dollars don’t pay the bills or anything but they help.

    I would hope Ray would use legit methods to gain
    subscribers. Those buying subscriber sites are sketchy as hell. It’s not like your gaining real fans so what’s the point? There is some stuff like Tube Toolbox that automates friend request and stuff like that. I don’t mind that as much cause it reaches out to real people but ultimately, content will always be king.

    -Jon
    -Appsro inc

  14. Very cool Jon. I did notice one thing That Ray changed. He does not say the channel name when he shows the comment question of the day. He only Shows the name while saying “Bing.” Saying the name makes you want to check them out. He’s giving credit, but taking away the incentive to make a connection with the Original Submitter.

    I am one of those channels that are frustrated with all this noise about Top Tubers possbile questionable rise to the top. Rumors of Bots, Buying Subscriptions, false thumbnails, Titles, Tags and Categories, and even using other people’s content and submissions to gain views.

    I played things safe and I got Disabled by Adsense. Partnership supposedly can not do anything about it. If I was Ray or Shane, it would be fixed instantly. I would have been up to 10K Subs on my original Channel. I don;t like to ask other YouTubers For ShoutOuts. I submit where I think would be fun and would hopefully help me. Like the Nalts Floating head thing. That was just fun to do. StirFryTV even spotlighted me because of the DistrictLines Free TShirt Program, but i did not get many subs/views at all. I was Really surprised at that.

    There was alot of Talk on Twitter last night and today on False Categories and Thumbsnails. There is a movement to have users flag those videos for spam/false text, thumbnails. Partnership is encouranging that, but will anything be done about it. Have to see.

    FREE KIDDSOCK

  15. Youtube has been heading in the wrong direction for a long time.

    I am glad you are (somewhat) speaking out against this.

    Ray William Johnson sucks. I am not a hater but I saw his stuff recently and all he is doing is stealing other people’s content and commenting on it. Should he even be allowed to post ads on his videos considering most of it is stolen content?

    Also, I hear he uses bots.

    Regardless, he has an unfair advantage over everyone else.

  16. I think the backlash is deserved. People are sick of having the same crap thrown in their face over and over again. It is stupid that the same few people get featured and promoted over and over again and it is almost impossible for new talent to break in.

  17. It’s not Backlash. I think it is something that people have been talking about for a while. You just brought it someone to the forefront. There is MORE talk on YouTube Videos today about Category Fraud. And More on TWitter. Kind of getting Ugly.

    You are not a Hasbeen Nalts. You just kinda spread yourself too Thin. Many Top YouTubers have taken Ideas and Inspiration from you. So they should Kiss your ass and Promote you for things you did WAY before for they did.

Comments are closed.