Datasets:

mpasila

/

DarkViperAU-Essays

like 0

The third, and the thing that I am most interested in, is how reaction content as a whole is impacts all creators in the market.

Necrit in his video focuses exclusively on half of the second category and ignores entirely the first and third. I will personally be making reference to all three.

'''Necrit:'''

But there are also others who believe that this is totally fine and that reactions are transformative.

'''(Back to Matt)'''

Whether or not reactions are transformative is never addressed by Necrit again and I honestly wish he had given it a go.

The word transformative colloquially means '''"causing a major change to something"'''. Reactions are obviously not majorly changing a video, they are simply hosting a watch party for us. If I asked you "Hey, have you seen this video?" you could honestly say "Yeah, I saw it, I saw it on Asmongold's stream".

Your friends sitting next to you on the couch while you watch Lord of the Rings may be able to stop and tell you heaps about the movie, giving you additional information, but at no point does that majorly change the movie itself.

Legally speaking, nothing supports these watch parties being transformative either. You can read the ruling from the judge explaining the criteria that H3H3 had to pass to win their fair use case that also explains why other forms of reaction content would not pass.

You can read '''“Where's the Fair Use”''' by the lawyer '''Jessica Vogel''' that covers the entire history of the presence of fair use in America. You can watch “'''Legal Eagle'''” be the 900th lawyer to explain this, but you don't really have to because you can just read the fair use guidelines.

Transformation in a legal sense is more about the value that you leave behind in the original work.

Can someone who views the new work still find value in the original? Are you purposely taking only the bare minimum of what you need for your new differentiated work to make sense? Are you trying to create something new or merely looking for a way to copy something else? Are you targeting a different audience for a different purpose?

Reactors do not know what is in the video beforehand. They are not taking some specific aspect of it for some specific purpose and are therefore constantly showing content they have no use for.

They are not making a differentiated work because all they are doing is watching a video and pausing it occasionally. When re-uploading the video to YouTube, they will frequently have the same title and thumbnail. They are so much not a differentiated work.

If you read into it, fair use is incredibly weak in what it defends. There are even courts that may have ruled against H3H3 given how they ruled in prior fair use cases. More importantly though, what Ethan created was far different than what Necrit is defending in his video and what I personally have a problem with.

'''Necrit:'''

But ever since my Riot MMO videos blasted off, things got a lot more interesting.

I got to collect some interesting data, which I am going to present to you. And I am going to show you how exactly people reacting to my videos affected my channel.

'''(Back to Matt)'''

So hopefully you can see the problem. Necrit’s interest is not in how React content farms impact the creator ecosystem.

How the growing number of Asmongold-like channels spamming out 10 videos a day can impact creators' ability to survive and grow in a world of limited eyeballs, advertising space; and time to watch videos at all. It is simply, “was my video impacted specifically by the re-upload of it?”

It is as meaningful as judging the system of slot machines based on a single spin. Unless you can find a way to argue that your results can be extrapolated, but unfortunately, Necrit does not even try to.

'''Necrit:'''

Truth be told, there were times when I knew that people would react to my videos, so I altered the content to give people more entertainment for the reactions.

Be it the easiest joke of my life about Nintendo 64 controllers, you have no idea what the universe is about, but you like MMOs, your hairline is receding and you have a very crippling fear of Nintendo 64 controllers.

Or joking about people passing out.

So reactions is something you can definitely play into if you do enough market research, and you know what kind of audience you are going to attract.

For example, I saw Asmongold reacting to a video where people discussed Riot's MMO. In that video they were just talking about tweets, and yet this was enough to make him react to it. Which made me realise, we actually know a lot more about the MMO than just some tweets, so I went and made that massive video with the assumption that it would be picked up outside of just League of Legends.

'''(Back to Matt)'''

I find this idea more than a bit distasteful, especially considering that at no point in his video does Necrit show or establish actual benefits for his channel from reactions.

Necrit's ideal world seems to be one where creators freely work to create the best content for someone else to upload so they can maintain their wealth and success. The person who then actually did the work just has the hope that the reactor's prosperity trickles down to them. You shouldn't expect at least a share of the wealth generated from your work, you should just be happy with the illusory payment of exposure.

It is beyond my ability to understand why Necrit would favour a world where success is not determined by who works the hardest or is the most creative. But instead, who can give the most of their work for free to the already rich and successful? He sincerely seems to believe that the more videos that Asmongold uploads, and the greater his share of the online media space, the better off all the people who actually do the work to make their content will be. So if we could only convince all the reactors to upload a thousand videos today, oh boy how easy everyone else's lives would, become.

Again, it's basically an infinite money glitch if you know nothing about how markets work.

In fact, why even have recommendations for creators at all, when recommendations for reactors are apparently so superior in Necrit's world? The problem is that you may imagine you gain from reaction to your video, but do all of your videos fare better having to compete with the millions of reactions flooding the markets. Competing with them for the finer attention available, especially when YouTube algorithmically favours channels that upload frequently and consistently over those that don't.

More importantly, I don't agree with Necrit that every successful creator should see other people's creative works as an all-you-can-eat buffet that you can snatch from whenever you don't want to make something yourself. Necrit's ideas pair well with the expression that “it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to ask for permission.”