Facebook is Planning an Assault on YouTube

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,081
Last week we reported that Facebook was upgrading it's streaming services with a new monetization system. Now CNBC is reporting that Facebook has talked to bedia buyers to expand it's video service, "Watch" into a rival to YouTube by opening the platform to more individual creators.

It sounds great in theory. However we may run into a "The devil you know is better than the one you don't" kind of situations. Myself and many others would love for a competitor or alternative to YouTube to show up, I just don't know if I want that competitor to be Facebook.

Facebook wants to create a system where creators can upload their shows for free, then earn a cut of the revenue from ads placed on that content — similar to how YouTube pays its online creators. Another source with knowledge of the situation said Facebook's ultimate goal is to create a sustainable ad-supported video platform, where it won't have to pay for the majority of content.
 

Darkswordz

Gawd
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
730
tenor.gif
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,931
If, and I do mean if, this takes off, content creators would just upload to both.
I do think there is room for a youtube rival. A service that did not demonetize gun channels as youtube does would become my first stop.
 

mynamehere

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Messages
1,763
If, and I do mean if, this takes off, content creators would just upload to both.
I do think there is room for a youtube rival. A service that did not demonetize gun channels as youtube does would become my first stop.
I'm sure Fakebook will demonetize everything they disagree with. YouTube has made it even harder to get monetized. With a minimum of 1000 subscriber and 4000 hours within the last year, it's pretty much impossible for fledgling channels, let alone anything that doesn't fit their agenda, or what they deem "acceptable" to get monetized. I definitely agree that we need free speech alternatives to all of the main social media giants.
 

SighTurtle

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
1,410
Facebook's history with video streaming and other content is not good. If they are serious, they should really try better. As well as taking on Youtube, Facebook is also trying to make inroads against Twitch, signing agreements with ESL for CSGO and Dota 2 tournaments to be streamed on the platform.

So far, not a success. :whistle:

But ya, I'm not ready to switch off Youtube and Twitch. I don't even have a Facebook anymore.
 

Mav451

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
4,740
I heard about this already from CWA (clash with ash), from one of his recent vids.
I mean, more power to him if their compensation is compelling, but I'm doing just fine on YT.
And there's plenty of pros I can pivot to instead, if his content is compromised at all b/c of the deal.

Yeah the CS:GO stream was awful, but who knows, maybe FB can learn from its early mistakes? Every platform has growing pains...is my best effort at playing devil's advocate :D
 

donald_k

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 23, 2002
Messages
426
Vimeo depending on the plan and who you are. There is a class of service associated with said plans - my work (CAN Dept of National Defence) pays $$$ for Vimeo hosting when the situation calls for public hosting than internal only hosting where class of service is also important.

https://vimeo.com/business?v=footer
 

Messy

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 11, 2004
Messages
163
I just don't know if I want that competitor to be Facebook

oh that's easy! i 100% know that i don't want it to be facebook! there is a zero percent chance i would touch that. granted, it's like choosing between getting ram-rodded by the CIA instead of the NSA but still - there's something more slimey about facebook.
 

krotch

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Messages
4,509
I'm personally surprised more companies haven't jumped into a portion of the videos market. Like Amazon allowing users to upload reviews for products on their site.
 

grim4593

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
349
Perhaps if they were able to open up permissions for things like videos. Right now if a user's privacy settings do not allow sharing on a "public" video you can't share it and show it to others.
And there really isn't a good way to share videos unless you do it through the Facebook interface (tags, post to feed, etc).
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,944
Twitch has far more of a chance at taking on Youtube then basically any other company right now. While it isn't perfect, it is one of the best streaming platforms out there and Amazon has the server backbone to support millions of unique people watching videos all at once. Plus, they have the money to do it. Facebook has the money, but with everything else they have a very long way to go.
 

kju1

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 27, 2002
Messages
3,460
Last week we reported that Facebook was upgrading it's streaming services with a new monetization system. Now CNBC is reporting that Facebook has talked to bedia buyers to expand it's video service, "Watch" into a rival to YouTube by opening the platform to more individual creators.

It sounds great in theory. However we may run into a "The devil you know is better than the one you don't" kind of situations. Myself and many others would love for a competitor or alternative to YouTube to show up, I just don't know if I want that competitor to be Facebook.

Facebook wants to create a system where creators can upload their shows for free, then earn a cut of the revenue from ads placed on that content — similar to how YouTube pays its online creators. Another source with knowledge of the situation said Facebook's ultimate goal is to create a sustainable ad-supported video platform, where it won't have to pay for the majority of content.

You have to watch out for those bedia companies...shady folks!
 

steakman1971

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
2,433
Supposedly Amazon might be getting in this game. Amazon and Google are in a dick wagging contest as of late - competition should be good.
I still use YouTube for a lot of stuff - it's great for appliance repair and how-to videos. I've even done a few "code academies" hosted on YouTube. If FB and/or Amazon jump into the fray, getting quality content will be the hard part. I guess you just offer more money for views on your platform and hope it attracts people. Any reason why I couldn't upload my video to multiple sources (before any contracts are signed - not even sure those are a thing?)
Back to FB video - I won't watch it. I really hate FB. I have an account as its the only way I keep in touch with some of my relatives. However, I never login and check it. It's garbage.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
32,382
Supposedly Amazon might be getting in this game. Amazon and Google are in a dick wagging contest as of late - competition should be good.
I still use YouTube for a lot of stuff - it's great for appliance repair and how-to videos. I've even done a few "code academies" hosted on YouTube. If FB and/or Amazon jump into the fray, getting quality content will be the hard part. I guess you just offer more money for views on your platform and hope it attracts people. Any reason why I couldn't upload my video to multiple sources (before any contracts are signed - not even sure those are a thing?)
Back to FB video - I won't watch it. I really hate FB. I have an account as its the only way I keep in touch with some of my relatives. However, I never login and check it. It's garbage.
Amazon has already been in the process of turning Twitch into a Youtube-like platform.
 

SomeoneElse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
1,941
Back to FB video - I won't watch it. I really hate FB. I have an account as its the only way I keep in touch with some of my relatives. However, I never login and check it. It's garbage.
I agree and have the same sentiment about it. I loath FB, it such a waste of time and full of vitriol on both sides....it a cesspool. Anymore the timeline is just people "sharing" crap.
 

Gasaraki_

Gawd
Joined
Oct 27, 2016
Messages
617
I'm sure Fakebook will demonetize everything they disagree with. YouTube has made it even harder to get monetized. With a minimum of 1000 subscriber and 4000 hours within the last year, it's pretty much impossible for fledgling channels, let alone anything that doesn't fit their agenda, or what they deem "acceptable" to get monetized. I definitely agree that we need free speech alternatives to all of the main social media giants.

But how does trying to make money from YouTube have anything to do with free speech?
 

Megaslug

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
173
Yeah, Facebook isn't the answer. They've shown at least as much willingness, of not more, to censor content they don't approve of. YouTube needs a strong competitor, but Facebook ain't it.
 

FlawleZ

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
1,589
YouTube loses money for Google. One can only hope...
Source? YouTube's net worth alone is almost equal to Facebook's. Even if it does operate on a loss Google won't bat an eye...
 

HvyMtl

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
1,730
Um. F Watch? Plan your nomenclature well? Not just watch it, F Watch it.... Um. No.

If it is like any other part of Facebook, you will have to SIGN IN to watch. I dont do that with youtube. Heck, I ad block galore on Youtube, to remove the annoying ads that I have to watch to then watch what I wanted to. Facebook will be the required ads x50.

Wrong format to take on an established, and deep pocketed, player.
 

Rahh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
1,607
Failbook needs to go away. The younger generation has already abandoned it. I feel like they are starting to get worried and trying to come up with something else fast to keep people on their site.
 

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,081
Failbook needs to go away. The younger generation has already abandoned it. I feel like they are starting to get worried and trying to come up with something else fast to keep people on their site.

Maybe Tom will be Mark's friend.
 

doublejack

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
491
I love watching CS:GO, and the truth is that the official ESL stream is dead to me now that they have singed with Facebook. Politics and personal bias aside, there is a legitimate issue - my smart TV has both a native Twitch and YouTube app. Watching CS:GO through either platform is effortless, the quality is awesome, and it just works. There is no good, easy way to get a Facebook "Watch" stream on my TV. I can't use the built in browser, "Watch" is disabled. There is no native "Watch" app, AFAIK only newer Samsung TVs have that. My options all suck. I could cast it from my phone to the TV, but that ties up my phone so is not an option. I could buy a chromecast and use that, but no thanks. I don't need Google getting any more insight into my life than they already get, plus I have zero use for a chromecast outside of this one possible case.

So, ESL... I hope the drop in viewership is worth it. And does it count as cord cutting from Facebook if I never take part?
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
I love watching CS:GO, and the truth is that the official ESL stream is dead to me now that they have singed with Facebook. Politics and personal bias aside, there is a legitimate issue - my smart TV has both a native Twitch and YouTube app. Watching CS:GO through either platform is effortless, the quality is awesome, and it just works. There is no good, easy way to get a Facebook "Watch" stream on my TV. I can't use the built in browser, "Watch" is disabled. There is no native "Watch" app, AFAIK only newer Samsung TVs have that. My options all suck. I could cast it from my phone to the TV, but that ties up my phone so is not an option. I could buy a chromecast and use that, but no thanks. I don't need Google getting any more insight into my life than they already get, plus I have zero use for a chromecast outside of this one possible case.

So, ESL... I hope the drop in viewership is worth it. And does it count as cord cutting from Facebook if I never take part?

I realize that this sucks for you but this is why I have always told people smart TVs are stupid. Smart TVs only work with the biggest and most used applications. Hook up your laptop or any other device and suddenly you have access to EVERYTHING the internet has to offer. Smart TVs just add an expense to a display that has limited functionality and will definitely become obsolete with time as the company wishes to sell you a new TV. Buy a TV for the picture quality and its core specficiations, refresh rate, motion blur, color depth etc... And completely ignore smart functions let a dedicated device do that.
 

doublejack

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
491
I realize that this sucks for you but this is why I have always told people smart TVs are stupid. Smart TVs only work with the biggest and most used applications. Hook up your laptop or any other device and suddenly you have access to EVERYTHING the internet has to offer. Smart TVs just add an expense to a display that has limited functionality and will definitely become obsolete with time as the company wishes to sell you a new TV. Buy a TV for the picture quality and its core specficiations, refresh rate, motion blur, color depth etc... And completely ignore smart functions let a dedicated device do that.

Sorry, but I don't see it that way. My previous setup was a plasma TV that was essentially just a monitor, with an HTPC doing all the real work. I was using a decently powerful socket 1150 rig so that I could play games through Steam's Big Picture mode, as well as native HD content (although a raspberry pi will handle HD decoding now). It ran on linux, Ubuntu to be exact.

Anyway, replacing that setup with a 4k smart TV not only radically improved the picture quality, but it uses about 1/4th the electricity. Plus I more or less had to leave the HTPC running 24/7 for convenience, whereas the smart TV boots up fast enough to make that a non-issue. The end result is the smart TV will pay for itself inside of 24 months just on electricity savings.

Not only is the smart TV far more energy efficient, the overall experience blows away the TV / HTPC combo. I'd never want to go back. I've got a manufacturer created app on my phone that allows it to work as a TV remote. I have native apps on the TV for all mainstream platforms - Netflix, YouTube, Twitch, Hulu, Amazon, Plex, etc. There's even a Steam app for in-home streaming games from my PC, and usb ports so I can use a keyboard & mouse, or controllers. There are infrequent system updates, and things just work - generally all the time and without fail.

Contrast that to a PC that requires updating and maintenance on the part of the end user to keep running smoothly. Sometimes things stop working and you have to download new packages to get them going again. It is much more work to maintain, more complicated for the kids to operate, and ultimately more costly.

I think your viewpoint is / was more valid when talking about expensive TVs. Someone dropping $1,500 or $3k on a TV is expecting to use it for a good long while, and in that case it is easier to justify the added expense of a full fledged HTPC as well as the necessary HTPC updates to keep the TV useful over a long period of time. The trade-off for that longevity is it becomes more cumbersome to use. My TV, though, cost less than $300 out the door. If I get 4 or 5 years out of it that's plenty. I'm not the least bit concerned about it becoming obsolete from a software perspective, because I know that in a few years newer TVs will look far better. At that point I'll just buy a new set and make an incremental upgrade.
 
Top