My take on the xQc React Drama...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- OPEN ME (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:･ﾟ✧
➥ WATCH ME LIVE: / stanz
FOLLOW MY SOCIALS (¬‿¬ )
➥ Twitter: / nathanstanz
➥ Instagram: / nathanstanz
➥ Twitch: / stanz
➥ Discord: / discord
➥ Podcast: / thestanzshow
➥ Gaming: / stanzbutgaming
➥ Clips: / stanzclips
Edited By (ﾉ´ヮ`)ﾉ*: ･ﾟ
🢂 Caanths | / caanths
#stanz #drama #xqc
If XQC doesn't care about the money he makes from his react videos, he should give it to the original creators or charity. It might not be a lot to him but to the creator of the video it could mean a lot more.
asking xqc to follow thru with literally anything challenge
they can claim it
@@burn2400 4:45
@@burn2400bullshit, only multi channel networks can claim videos. As a normal creator you can either dmca it or nothing
Yeah that's what I don't get, how about just reach out to the creators and pay to use it or give them the revenue. You already made money once on twitch and now you're going to directly under mine them on UA-cam? They even steal their thumbnails half the time
I’m glad Stanz pointed out how us saying Stanz’s react is transformative enough would be a biased take cause I was about to comment about how I thought it was transformative enough 😂. It is interesting to see if a standard could be set in regards to what percentage of content per commentary would be transformative enough and minimal use
personally i think 33% of your finished video should be original content at a bare minimum
@@rm_steelemine is personally 50%, but it can depend. If everything is in context and you are taking out bits and pieces and talking about a video you already watched, it could be lower. If you are just straight up reacting to a full video, nothing outside of 5x the length of that video is alright. Its why i don’t believe asmongold adding 30 minutes of commentary onto a 30 minute video is transformative, but EFAP doing a 7-10 hour reaction to two 20-30 minute vids absolutely is.
@@Boss24601 can't say i've seen videos from either of those two but adding 6 hours onto an hour worth of videos is pretty huge, and definitely transformative. i think ultimately though, any fair legal or site-enforced hard line can't exist, because adding on any amount of "woah, that's crazy" type reactions to a video will never be transformative, and 12 minutes of stuff relating the content of the video to themself or the real world definitely straddles the line. but, in the second case, that would probably be more fitted as an edited video with only relevant clips from the reacted work anyway. though I still don't how many people would go view the original video after watching even a highly edited reaction to it.
@@rm_steele thats not really the point. I don’t care how many people go see a movie when I think about a movie review. I just care weather or not its transformative or takes time and effort. Its not about being lazy and stealing views from one video, it’s about being lazy and stealing views/impressions from potentially every single video on youtube
@@Boss24601 movie reviews would also get taken down immediately if they included the person's reaction to the entire movie. the concept i mentioned at the end of my post is more of a movie review style video compared to a reaction. movie reviews and reaction videos aren't really comparable.
My issue is XQC is that he keeps bringing up money but failing to acknowledge that some people's full income comes from UA-cam and if he ends up swallowing up someone's video that relies on that ad revenue, it only hurts that creator.
You're probably right, but the counter argument is they are driving alot of traffic to the original creator. People like JCS has every single video watched by hundreds of streamers as soon as they dropped - that channel undoubtedly grew off the back of react streamers - it all comes full circle.
Same with daily dose, without react streamers that channel wouldn't have 10% of it's current subs.
Being shown to hundreds of thousands of people who probably wouldn't have watched anyway is free advertisement - sure you may lose a bit of ad revenue but it will pay off in the end if you keep making good vids
@@TG-it8ztHow many people do you think watch an hour long reaction video to a JCS video if it was recommended to them first, and then go watch the original JCS video again?
@@AliRizwanMasoodthere is more than 1 video
@@burn2400 agreed. And the problem compounds for every single reaction video
@@brandon6784 this is by far the worst take I've seen for justifying reaction content and proves that critical comprehension is still a problem when talking about Reaction content..... As well as basic empathy.
How about your favorite streamer/reactor put their content behind a paywall instead?
Can’t get enough of 3 day late Stanz takes!
The edit only took 4 hours though, we out here - caanths the edit man
@@stanzts was one of stanz best edited videos too good shit
Stanz has to wait for mogul mail to form his opinion like the rest of us.
UA-cam will most likely NEVER implement the “opt in” react system you put forward, but I feel like it would work so well. Giving permission, and having an option for reacts to have views count towards the original video, maybe having a pop up asking to subscribe to the original channel? There’s so many opportunities for it to be beneficial to all parties involved
The thing is, all content is opt out by default legally. This is literally what copyright law is for
By counting the views to the original you could probably make a loophole with constant reuploads of videos while funneling the views to the original. Just don't "react" to shit lol.
I like Lud's take that creators should have tools that allow them to take a percentage of monetisation from reaction videos. At the minute, only MCNs can do this, but everyday creators should have the same tool.
They shouldn't get a percentage. They made the video. They are the sole reason the reactions are made. They put in the effort the reactor does not. A joke here or there does not warrant any value. The original creators deserve the income the reactors do not.
All reactors do is be a parasite sucking on the effort of the original creators. They are popular because the produce high quality videos not through their own effort but that of others. It's redistribution that negativity impacts the entire youtube platform.
Original creators have to also contend with reactors in the algorithm.
Imagine you see an original video next to an xqc reaction. Which would you watch? Now if hundreds of thousands of people were asked that many would pick the reaction and that is the issue. The reaction that is high quality and low effort is competing with an high quality high effort video by an original creator.
@@mopilokl.
.
😊😅😊%😅ñ 😅m.
This is why Atrioc is my favorite when it comes to react content. Sure, on stream he just watches it like every other react streamer does, but when he uploads it on his channel, he has his editors edit parts of it and only keep funny parts or interesting bits of his commentary, so his youtube viewers that are interested with the original will go watch it. He also doesn't just copy the title and thumbnail of the original, which helps it not compete with searches for the original video.
I’ve been watching his house reactions at the end of streams and man he just adds so much in my opinion.
Exactly, same with stanz on the deep dives. He doesn't just really sit there and watch an entire video for some creator, Stanz and Caanths Provides a lot of context, clips, info, opinion and feedback on the creator they do a deep dive on
Yeah recently watched his video reacting to the crunch culture conundrum. He only included the parts where he said something and skipped over everything else. Even the creator of the video said he was the only person who had valuable input while reacting.
@@doobzsalam1847I love when he freaks out at house doing something fucking unhinged
i’m so confused are we just accepting atrioc back as a creator after the QT deepfake stuff? like it’s so icky.
As a fan of react content, it blows my mind that some people will just upload full length reactions, especially ones where the reaction isn’t significantly longer than the og video. It also blows my mind that some streamers will just let a video play while they go to the toilet or something for ‘chat to watch’.
I feel like every 6 months we keep circling back to this same conversation but nothing ever changes.
As someone who watches a lot of reacting on stream, I'd prefer they let the video run while they are away. It's usually for like 3 minute tops and most will keep watching on their phone so they have shit to say when they get back
As someone who doesn't like reaction content creators, I can say brand new bag for pearl but I didnt pay for it🗣️‼️⁉️🔥🔥🔥🥶🥶🥶
@@woody_you_want ...or they could just pause it and not use other people's content to entertain their own audience while they're not even on stream. I mean it's just 3 minutes tops right? I think they'll make do putting on a "Be right back!" screen for a couple minutes..
@@NickyDusseif nobody is there lil bro nobody is gonna stay there, cause of people attention span so nah I’d rather have content playing then no content
@@deturaiTTV Yes, you're not alone on feeling that. My point was that it's not like the streamer will fucking die if they don't constantly have content playing 24/7 on their channel. If you run out of content you can produce, you go offline - there shouldn't be an unethical, exploitative way to artificially stay live longer while using other people's work to do so.
So yes, most people when watching a stream want to be entertained and would prefer if there was a never ending, curated flow of content. Doesn't mean that's what they all should be doing, even if they can get away with it.
My problem with the common argument about getting exposure for the reaction is that, at that point, you're basically making a deal, which should inherently happen with consent from both parties. You can't pull that argument just assuming people are cool with the trade or that they even want to be associated with you as a creator in the first place. That's just entitlement.
It's also an immoral trade too if the creator is smaller. They take the effort of the creator with the promise of potential interaction. The reactor can never guarantee the original will get viewers.
One thing I will say is that for react streamers if you're going to leave the room just pause the goddamn video. It's actually way worse of an experience when something cool happens and the streamer just isn't there.
the chat would complain, even when xqc pauses the video to talk about it chat would go crazy
@@burn2400 literally a non issue for the streamer, chats going crazy whilst the streamer literally isn't in the room looking at chat and pretty much as soon as they get back and unpause the chat is over it because they have their video to watch
@@praneethramesh4535 well the streamers care lmao. They do it to steal money from the original creators, so ofc they will let it play and not risk people leaving if they paused the video
Mutahar: you're a dumb idiot
Xqc: you're a doodoo head
Ludwig: now fellas, there's two ways to look at this situation morally-
Xqc is basically used as a platform by some people for their daily content. He selects the content that he personally likes, and there's people who watch it alongside with him, meaning that they will not spend as much time searching for TikToks/hour long videos to watch cause someone they "trust" did that for them and serves them their food.
Only used as a platform if he actually credits the OC. Can't be a medium if viewers don't even know where to watch the og content. It's like giving out a product but the whole label is taken off and customers are just left indifferent to it or clueless where to get it again.
Yeah great. Even if we accepted that's valuable, is it worth tens of millions of USD? Which are stolen from the market (the original creators).
Like okay, let's say he is a curator of "good content" for some people. It's still not something he should get millions for, while the GOOD CONTENT CREATORS are unpaid interns in his curator network lmao
@@BeSk9991remember that those thousands in his stream could have been anywhere else during that time. He's taking from the entire market not just the individual creators.
@@mopilok I know, I addressed this in another comment elsewhere, on Twitter and reddit as well.
But I just tried to explain to the person that even if we accept "media curator" is a valuable thing, they should still be given like almost no reward for it. Because 99.9 % of work is done by the original creators, who should receive the money.
Petition for Stanz to retake his thumbnail face with the new haircut
STANZ CUT!! Looks great Stanz
I watch a smaller creator called Necrit, who made a couple viral videos on the league lore since the MMO might be coming. He said in a video that react content from people like asmongold, and xQc really doesn't change his own views. People that watch react content like to watch it for the input of the streamer, usually not for the original content. Might be different if the OC is larger though, but I think it should be the same. Necrit even said that he gained subscribers but not views, since a lot of people wanted to have his future videos pop up in their feed.
I'll be honest, I found you a few years ago thanks to Ludwig and enjoyed your vids edited from stuff you were doing on stream. Once I started seeing a heap of videos from you of just straight up react content I actually started actively avoiding you. I've been really enjoying the more original content you've been putting out these last few months, and even the more transformative react stuff now as you do have good takes. Keep up the good work!
When Muta says he cares about his freinds on the platform I think he's being genuine and just does yt for the hell of it.
I'm pretty sure he's like a landlord or something.
Doesn't he have an IT job or something? I assumed he did since he seems to know a lot about computer science stuff.
Yes he owns property and he worked ik IT at some point, but not anymore.
yeah he just makes videos as a side thing his main income isn't youtube
@@WuuPG bro having a sucessful youtube channel with millions of subs and views FOR SURE makes more than renting out a couple houses or working an it job. It's definitely his main source of income, the other things are his side jobs
@@dcp0102 You clearly haven't had much experience being a Landlord or an IT specialist that worked with the FREAKING GOVERNMENT
Necrit made a video going over the analytics on his videos that have had many reacts videos to them. It’s a great watch to know more about some of the statistics.
This could be the system:
When you upload, you can click a box: "is this a reaction?" and you can connect to the video you reacted to. UA-cam should then send ~90% of the monetized revenue to the original video. Any reaction videos that don't go through this system will be taken down and given copyright strikes
I think if it’s possible to have roughly the same viewing experience watching a react video compared to the original, then it hasn’t been transformative enough. If xqc had uploaded an edited down version with only the parts of the video that has interesting commentary I don’t think there’s anyone who would have an issue with it. If people are really there for xqc’s reaction then they’ll still be there to watch. If people want to watch the full video then they know where to check it out.
It's personally weird when viewers don't watch a video because they want to watch it with their fave creators, especially when those creators don't even add anything. I usually just watch it when its out then rewatch if a creator I like do watch it too.
I cant say much, the only time I watch Mr Beast is if someone is reacting and I can actually recall getting recommended one of his vids then being like ill watch someone else watch it
Seems like you have plenty of time to waste huh
i dont go out of my way to not watch a video but if i see someone i like has watched it i’ll watch that instead of watching it twice, if the video is entertaining i’ll go like it and subscribe to them
Yeah sometimes I do that. I also found a lot of creators only through reacts. There have been videos I watched 3-4 times because I actually wanted to know what the person reacting has to say about it. Coffeezillas vids come to mind for example. I can understand how it can be frustrating for original content creators though
@@N5FX yeah not everyone is pushing 30 with a wife and kids lmao
My issue with all the react channels are those fan made ones that are covering my feed everytime i watch a single offlinetv/OTK/Hasan video and it really goes for any streamer that is big enough, too many fan channels spamming content.
I don't understand how this is even a debate. What xqc did is literally illegal. There is no other side. The only reason he and everyone else gets away with doing it is because the people he is stealing from either cannot afford to hold him accountable or don't want to.
illegal?
The problem is that most creators only have two options when this happens:
They either a) ignore it which makes the reactor think it's okay or b) strike the video and potentially take down a big reactors channel which is very harsh and they will get attacked by fans.
There needs to be something in-between that creators can do like claim the revenue on their own.
How is it illegal?
@@littlepeeteir3190copyright and fair use laws state that you can only use so much material without violating it, or transform the video in a significant way that it makes it an entirely new video. For example, when asmongold reacts to a 10 minute video, but he makes a 40 minute video out of it, it can be argued that he made an entirely new video from it. What xqc did was just essentially play the video, provided little to no commentary over it so he arguably didn't transform it that way. And by uploading the entire video without cutting or editing the video in any way, he went over the limits set forth by the copyright and fair use laws making it illegal.
there is literally zero legal precedent as to what counts as transformative and what counts as stealing content. so no, it is not illegal. until someone takes this to court and sets some precedent it is legal
Doesn't youtube already list a % of video used on the copyright striking page? I think they could pretty easily use that as a start to determine revenue splitting to the original creator.
You’re correct. That way people like xqc could get what they contribute (5% or less) or asmongold would get half because he pretty much spends as much or more time discussing a video’s points than watching it. And the video original creator would also benefit directly. For their video being viewed on the platform they uploaded it on in the first place
The way xQc said “you used personal attacks and anecdotal evidence” and then the entire tweet was personal attacks and anecdotal evidence
You’re going to be on the right side of history here, this was a really really balanced and good take.
I am very heavily invested in this, and while I think that dark viper may have gone too far in some places, I fully agree that react content is the scourge of the internet in terms of morality and fairness. And frankly that hurts me to say; heck, I’ve paid for some admittedly non-transformative reaction content from creators I really like. I loved the taskmaster reacts in the past right here on this very channel. But I can’t deny that that style of content is unsustainable, and wrong.
For the detractor’s side of react content, Viper makes some excellent points about consent, which I think are really valid. Further, I don’t like that these creators are taking away views and revenue from smaller creators. We’ve also seen that often this “exposure” doesn’t result in much extra momentum for smaller creators either. If there was a better argument that these sorts of reactions drove traffic back to the original creators, maybe I could get on board, but as it stands right now, it really doesn’t seem like that’s the case.
The funny thing is, though, this sort of thing was already sorted years ago. It’s in the law. If the content is not transformative, it’s illegal. At least that’s the way that it is in the regular world of traditional media and copyright. Why should that be any different online? These rules exist for a reason, and the fact that they’re just blatantly ignored online because it’s convenient to do so doesn’t change the facts.
React content that acts as a market substitute (regardless of how many times you “pause the video”) without providing educational commentary, parodying, satire, or significant transformation that could legally hold up in a court of law, should be purged.
EDIT: I love Stanz but I’m gonna also come down here and say that while I agree with ya (Stanz) 100% in this video, many (possibly most) of your past reactions from more than 2 months back probably don’t meet the threshold for fair use/transformation and while I’m sad to see that react content go from a personal level, I’m happy you’ve made the right choice to stop doing that.
When you say you've paid for react content from streamers you like do you mean you paid a streamer to react to your own content?
@@aspuzling No- I’ve paid for a streamer to react to other content (indirectly through Patreon)
I feel like consent is only a small aspect of the problem.
Even if the creator consented, if the video is uploaded to youtube the video is still made with low effort and will contend with high effort original content in the algorithm. They are not only affecting the creator of the reacted piece but also people creating their own original content. Thus the react streamer already has a leg up as they don't need to put as much effort as others. The can produce content faster and thus grow even quicker and so effects the entire market.
I think it would be cool for a credit system on UA-cam. If your content uses another UA-camrs content, the creator can credit them and some revenue goes to the OC. The incentive to do this is that if the OC finds out and isn’t credited they can blast the reactor on Twitter and make them look bad
Idk what it is but i also think reacting to old content is way more valid because it's already made most of its money. I think there is much better arguments there for being a reactor to be able to contribute to the videos continued success
Interesting to hear Stanz talk about how there is only a finite number of impressions (or views as he says) and that reaction videos effectively take away those impressions from other videos, not just the original content being reacted to but other videos as well, while Ludwig essentially dismisses the notion of "impression stealing", shall we call it, as bogus whilst discussing a previous different "react drama". Being both streamers who do reaction content and somewhat occupies a similar niche in the streaming world, it's interesting to me see how your opinions differ.
youtube shouldnt outright just delete every video with too high percent of someone else's content but it should be auto copyright claimed or something, so if the creator believes it's fair use they can file a counter and publish the video
Honestly no. All the ad rev should just be given to the creator at the % of their content that was used.
@@OvertPumkin sure, but my point is there needs to be a way to dispute that. transformative or critical content should not necessarily support the original creator (by taking funds from the "remixer")
@lexikiq remix was a poor choice of words, wouldn't use music terms they wrote the book on give me my cut :)
you can copyright claim them it happened with ludwig he got copyright striked twice but even then the revnnue doesnt go to the og creator
If you could hop onto youtube, see a reaction video in your recommended, and see the original video directly linked under the video in someway. I think it's great to have that tickbox system, but I think the underlying problem with react content is that fans go to the react video first and see no reason to watch the original video afterwards. Even just this would encourage a few people to watch the original first, and I know that I'm DEFINITELY far and away from the majority of people, but I probably would myself.
It’s crazy how incredibly BASED mutahar‘s take was and how he even said not uploading would be different, and EVEN THEN he’s getting so much hate haha
Creating revenue split for react will be another loophole to be abuse by copy right claim abusers. And it will not just contained within react meta afterall commentary and video essay often get claimed for a 3 second clip.
I find it funny how Ludwig refers to Legal Eagle and the “hot doctor” lol. I’m guessing he’s referring to Doctor Mike, unless anyone else knows of other hot doctors I should be following 👀
Chubbyemu is more cute than hot imo, but I'm asexual so who knows, cheers ck him out anyway
@@Avendesora ❤️ thanks the suggestion
love Stanz for his nuanced takes pointing out both sides and not just dogpiling toward what would be good for him
Personally id just be happy if they started linking the real video in the description.
I got too excited to get this notification😂 Love your content
I’m not a creator but a bigger part of the problem to me seems like the actual uncut/unedited upload of the whole thing. Like the stream segment should be cut down to a shorter video that then directs viewers to the original video in it’s entirety
Kind of like cgp grey, CGP has made it very clear (as in striking everyone) that no one can react to his content. Thus force, no one does anymore, no arguments (other than those who have been striked) just move on and don’t react to cgp. Another point is that a smaller creator can be reversed peer pressured (can’t think of the word) to not pursue anything against bigger creators due to not wanting any conflict or drama, even worse legal issues.
Entirely unrelated but xqc weighting 85 pounds soaking wet on a bloated day calling someone a weak soy boy is really goofy
Loved this transformative reaction to tweets.
Stanz should watch a recap of 2017 react content drama. 😂 it was so funny at the time, people barely nodding their head during the video and that was it lol
Make the reaction streamers share the revenue 50/50 and you'll see how mad they'll get.
It surely wouldn't be too hard for UA-cam to add a form on the video upload screen saying "Does this video contain substantial content from another video on the platform? If yes, link it here:" and then do some kind of revenue share or give the reacted video an analytics boost or something
I think after a certain amount of time where the content has plateaued, then it should be fine to react to because it will only bring more exposure to the creator, but any time prior the reaction should be taken down.
this is an interesting aspect i hadn't really considered. I totally agree that time after the original is uploaded is an impactful part of how beneficial/damaging the views and impressions can be on the original creators views and the monetary gain they receive, especially when on the same platform such as the XQC - Lemmino debate
@shm0n3y Yeah, I agree. I watch a few big youtubers such as Miniminter and Zerka from the sidemen, and although they do react to their friends' content, they hardly ever do within a couple weeks for that very purpose. I think it is a difficult topic, though, because it's hard to say if XQCs fanbase would ever even watch a Lemmino video if he hadn't posted the video. I mean, I hadn't heard of him prior to seeing XQCs video, but it made me go across to his channel and find other videos that piqued my interest.
No the problem is not necessarily that the video being reacted to will get less views but the reactor is using the original creators labour.
The person getting reacted to is an unpayed intern helping the reactor gain money and wider audience ultimately growing way more then any creator making original creator ever could.
Reactors put in no effort and can produce high quality videos daily, whereas original content creators have to spend time and effort to do so.
@mopilok Well, yes, I'm aware of that. The thing is that he's reacting to it on another platform, which is, in my eyes, completely fine. The issue is that he's uploading a segment of his stream uncut or edited to the same platform which you cannot stop really, it has been an issue on UA-cam for years because it'd result in more copyright strikes or videos being stripped from the Internet. Therefore, I think there should be a certain amount of time before the reactor can upload their reaction to the original creators content. Yes, they created the video, but after a week, their video plateaus. A person reacting to it will only bring them more exposure.
Long extended bit to run with little-no payoff: restream xQc stream with prerecorded reactions on loop. Do this for an extended period of time (weeks/months).
I feel like there's a massive difference between reacting to curated content/actually making original content in a fair way and just reacting to a single 2 hour video. If a content creator/editor has curated content to react to (like some of Stanz' videos) it's transformative, just leaving a video playing while you're basically just watching it and happening to stream it is such bullshit.
Also holy fuck do I hate the word "trigger(ed)"
I'm not crazy about XqC by any means, but I will say I've stumbled upon some videos and creators through reaction content that I wouldn't have found otherwise. I'm also basing this mainly off TimTheTatman who largely reacts to his friends, but the few creators I haven't heard of before, he's put me on to. Just a small pea brain addition to an argument well beyond my standing lol
Not sure if Mutahar was really looking for a fight. He just has always been pretty critical of xQC. Mutahar has kind of had a grudge against xQC after he reacted to Muta's videos two or three times, but on 2xSpeed and often not even to the end. He's been complaining about this pretty much anytime anybody has brought up xQc to him.
True, but aside from his aggresive remarks, he made some good points, xqc has 2 main points, one is that he isn't doing it for the money, he is only doing it for his fans enjoyment, and that his reactions boost the content creator. Mutahar debunks mainly the first point, if he only does it for his fans why not put the reactions to movies, or anime, copyright true, but you can filter the scenes with editing, there's a lot of reactors to anime, and they figured out how to post it, yet xqc ignores this cause he is caught in his lie, xqc wants to put minimal effort and gain money, so he avoids the fact that posting a youtube video with minimal editing and barely any commentary of his reaction of another video, steals some of the possible views that original video would receive, cause the problem isn't that he reacts, it's that he posts the reaction in the same platform of the original video
A cool fix for this would be, if the reaction of a video would get recommended on the home page, some UA-cam magic happens and switches out the react video for the original video. Almost like how youtube recognizes music videos, there could be a different video type for react videos. If you want to see reactions to a certain video, you would search for it, and every video reacting to that original video would appear only in the search area, but it won't show up in recommended. This way, the original creator gets the original views, and if people want to see if their favorite content creator reacted to it they could look it up.
This whole "transformative content" is cool and all, but reccomendations for those kinds of videos feels a little weird. Maybe implementing a "reactions" tab or smt
Well as someone who is not a fan of reaction videos and who has recently learned about your channel I can confidently say you actually make semi-decent react videos because you actually do make it transformative and as you pointed out earlier you don't just turn it on eat your lunch go to the bathroom and sit there and silence. If more reactors would actually be engaged by what they're watching I don't think we'd be having this conversation at all.
"youre just mad and insecure cause I make more money, also I dont care about money"
I'd say a good 35% of the channels I watch now come from reaction content. Especially the long form documentary stuff.
Also I literally found stanz due to him reacting to taskmaster
It’s kinda crazy to say “people should only be able to interact with other people’s content, even if it’s transformative, if they opt in first”, because that’s basically saying that no one is allowed to feature anyone else’s content with the intent to critique it. Suddenly if someone makes a really bad or racist video or something, but opts out of allowing reactions, you can’t make a video critiquing that video and giving examples of what they said or did. That feels like a really extreme measure and a great way to ensure that bad content creators can silence all criticism not just from their videos or their channel but the entire platform of UA-cam as a whole.
I think we need a common understanding for the definition of reaction content and put it in a different section to commentary videos. The issue is whenever people talk about the issue of reaction videos they almost never state their personal definition.
Reacting is just a tricky subject and there is no clear line between “good” and “bad” reacting.
I found soo many smaller creators (including Stanz) through reactions from bigger creators
(I'm a juicer btw) It's strange for me how an argument is redirected by xQc to "him making money on youtube" (that he doesn't care about) instead of the fair reward for an original content creator like "LEMMiNO" that poured their heart and soul in the every single video and spent far too many hours in comparison to the react streamer like xQc
I mean the argument is actually simple, the reason why xqc is being mentioned is cause he is a big part of the problem, but the main argument are two things, xqc could post an edited version of the same vod, maybe if it's an hour just make 15 minutes, this forces people to either watch the original vod or watch the original video, and secondly the problem with posting it on youtube, it's that takes views from the original content creator since it's the same platform, no one is saying much about reacting on twitch cause it's a different platform it doesn't affect people on youtube, if he posts this on youtube, the problem isn't that xqc gains more money, it's that lemmino gets less money, than what he could've gotten, ludwig solutions seems to be the better answer for this problem
Just when I decide to care about a topic you make a vid right on time ! 😂
Yt won't change anything unless there's case law or something i think
It’s a really nuanced discussion and that’s because there are many facets of this topic. There’s Twitch, UA-cam, the streamers relationship with their community, and how it should be moving forward. Twitch wise streamers should ENGAGE with their topics or have friends around you can bounce off. When you take a break, make sure you either reshuffle your content in a video or say “We’ll be back”. On the UA-cam side you should edit down these reactions and make sure its transformative in the literal sense. That also goes into the streamers community. A lot of streamers allow fans to post VODs and clips onto fan channels because it’s a necessary evil. Sure it takes money from you but it also allows more people to see you and that’s how some streamers grow. Those clippable moments on shorts, Tik Tok or in 9 minute UA-cam videos. The problem is that when these clip channels mess up, the streamer claims that it’s not them but the fan. But up to that point you co-signed this behavior because it got you more exposure. So their actions is reflective of a streamer. UA-cam should put systems in place to prevent things like this happening. Keep in mind that the TOS has a “reused content” label which can demonetize creators. So UA-cam knows this exist but don’t care enough to do above the bare minimum. Great video
I feel like what matters is the original creator, hasn’t the reason react stuff has been okay is because it draws more eyes from a different audience for a net benefit for the original? While I doubt many people from xqc’s stream or video went to the original video I also question how many of that audience would watch the original video on their own, but now are introduced to a new creator they might go to watch other videos. If nothing else all the talk is almost definitely good for the original video.
I have definitely started watching and subbing to a lot of UA-camrs that I normally wouldn't have watched from discovering them from streamers reacting to them
I think it's been shown that on average, small creators whose content has been reacted to do not receive a measurable benefit in terms of new viewers. This is why Ludwig says in his video "trickle down reactonomics doesn't work". Another excellent example of this Jay Exci's video describing the impact of Hassan reacting to one of his videos (it's a great video seriously). Other creators have demonstrated that their position in the algorithm actually goes _down_ after receiving a boost from a reactor because the initial influx of views doesn't last and hence they get deprioritised by the algorithm later on.
A better alternative is to allow the algorithm to tailor relevant content to the right viewers. The chances are the algorithm knows more about you than any reactor.
There's no statistical long term benefit to getting reacted to, instead it's more likely to be a long-term downside, due to how the algorithm works. There are quite a few comprehensive videos on this on youtube.
It's like saying asking musicians and artists to work and perform for exposure is good for them and there's no need to pay them for their work or saying that giving tax-breaks to billionaires is good for the economy and the common people, because the wealth will "trickle down". It won't. It doesn't work in any other area, just as it doesn't work on youtube. "Trickle down" viewership doesn't exist and is a misconception purposefully perpetuated by the richest content creators with the biggest following, so their fans believe it and defend their actions when they exploit other creators to game the algorithm and grow their own channel. It fosters an environment in which everyone is forced to play by these rules estbalished by the powerful or be shamed, attacked and misrepresented by these big name react content creators (Hasan, Asmon, Xqc,etc.) And therefore no one can call this out without potentially jeopardizing their career opportunities.
"Trickle down" viewership is as realistic as "trickle down" economy and just like billionaires are lying when asking for tax-breaks saying it will benefit everyone, rich react content creators are lying by saying them watching someone else's hard work will make other people grow. Of course there are outliers to the rule, but in general the only party profiting from this long-term is the reactor.
They end up beings curator of all the best content across multiple genres and fields of interest on their own channel, therefore being recommended by the algorithm to multiple different fanbases and for their own fans remove a need to ever check out a different channel long-term, cause they know the best videos will be found on the reactors channel, two days after its release. It is inherently highly predatory and pretending to be doing charity and helping others by doing it and reframing the narrative is manipulative and disgusting.
@@Flunksqk good thing I was explicitly talking about how I don’t think trickledown views happen but that views aren’t being taken away from the original, I know it’s been shown in other videos that the percentage difference in the original video versus reactions stays the same across multiple original videos, the point being that the audiences are distinct (so this might only be for creators with different enough content) so there is very little viewer crossover either way. The point being the reactions don’t harm videos (in those cases because of course algorithms are complicated) while having small benefits.
The react streamer is just creating a pyramid where they are at the top stealing videos. The reactor will grow way more then the creators of original content and the reactors channel will also be further pushed in the algorithm.
The streamer is not helping others through generosity but because no matter what they gain
I feel like the least UA-cam could do, just like a foot in the door agreement would be that when a UA-cam Streamer™️ reacts to someone’s full video, the creator of said video gets a number of views equal to the number and of viewers who were present for the entire showing of said video. Even if it’s just for the algo, that counts for something!
I think the notion that the views would be significantly increased by not posting a reactions seems crazy to me, I watch stanz reactions because its stanz. And as long as stanz posted something Im gonna watch that, same with a tik tok time from ludwig.
I don’t believe X wrote that.
Another banger Stanz! This reminds me of the good ol’ TheStanzShow days.
I dont think there is anything wrong IF you provide more to the content. Someone like Vlogging Through History who added 1.5 hours onto the the Lemino vid or Hasan who provides alot of commentary. Though Hasan does do the leave the room thing, which i hate.
he leaves to pee or get food or take his dog out? it’s not like he’s constantly gone? the man streams for 8/10 hours a day??
The problem with this argument is that it doesn't address the "market replacement" branch of the fair-use guidelines. Even if VTH is adding hours onto the original video, if you can watch his analysis as a replacement for watching the original video then he isn't following fair-use guidelines (and therefore it's probably illegal). Compare that with something like Legal Eagle's "reaction" to movies. He only includes the clips that are relevant to the analysis he wants to add. You can't watch one of his videos and get the same experience as you would by watching the original movie. If VTH edited out all the parts that weren't relevant then he might have more of a leg to stand on.
@@siobhan-rae I'm not saying he can't get up. Just pause like Lud does until you get back
@aspuzling VTH broke it up into 4 separate videos. So it doesn't hit that same "long form content" that the original hits and he is quite a small channel. He does hit the threshold becuase of the amount of extra information that he adds to the content. He's a civil war and ww1 expert so if he does reactions to videos on those topics he can add a lot of important info that maybe the video doesn't have. Plus he leads off asking the viewer to go watch the original content first and is really good with links.
@@GodfatherBoxSet I agree with everything you said - but it doesn't change the fact that watching his analysis videos can be a substitute for watching the original. I have watched the original Lemmino Kennedy video and so I watched the first few minutes of VTH's analysis of it. He obviously provides a lot of interesting context and personal backstory to the video which is great, but he also spends a good amount of time saying nothing, or pausing to make comments that are not relevant.
Don't get me wrong, I like what VTH does and I enjoy his videos, but I can't deny that his presentation is low effort, breaks the fair-use guidelines and is probably illegal.
May be controversial, but a lot of people would never watch it without it being reacted to.
This is what makes this such a hard topic. It’s the same reason games let streamers stream their games because the outreach is so massive. Only difference is that the views on an xqc vid don’t go to the original
The real issue is that reaction videos getting pushed in the algorithm in general. Original content made with high effort and takes ages have to contend with a person making low effort, high quality content that can be produced way faster l. The reactor grows way faster and gets a much larger audience the more they react. Why do you think the top streamers are reactors?
It's because they redistribute videos. Many viewers do not watch the original videos being reacted to because they can just let the reactor find and broadcast it. Also many viewers watch streams in the background as well so have no interest clicking on a link to the original video.
Honestly impressed by reaponses, thought there would be at least one peraon calling me a dumb ass lol
The idea that reaction videos take away revenue from original creators shows a total lack of understanding about how consumers consume content. Those clicks and views aren’t being pulled away from the video, they would never have gone there in the first place.
I think it’s fairly obvious what the intent behind transformative content is and if you’re on the fence of if it is then it’s not transformative. Using a video to provide context for points you’re trying to make is transformative. Parody is transformative. Commenting on pieces of a video to agree of disagree with points is transformative. Watching a video start to finish with pauses on the way to give your “take” is not transformative. That’s a watch along where the original creator gets no credit.
Maybe theyre viewers who wouldve never seeked the original content out because they werent aware the content exists. So many videos i see them react to I wouldve never known about on my own because it just never fell onto my homepage or recommended.
One thing I've noticed is that when some reactors play another content creators videos, they skip their sponsors. If you're gonna make money off another creators video, the very least you can do is play their sponsored segment. Your viewers can skip it if they want, but at least play it so the original creator maybe gets a few extra hits on their Nord VPN code, or whatever their sponsor is.
The reason jet lag likes Lud watching jet lag is because he does advreads for them nebula and they work so some streamers should just not be selfish and try to help the oh creator
Muta is a commentary UA-camr that is right next to react content in the slop trough
Its all such meaningless drama. UA-cam will likely not change anything because they have no reason to do so, xQc and other bad reactors will continue stealing content, people will continue complaining about it, and the youtubers that feed off the drama will continually benefit.
It's like a millionaire stealing $100 from a homeless man and saying it's OK because the $100 is not significant to the millionaire. It's still significant to the homeless man, so why steal it in the first place?
In the same way, just because xQC doesn't care about the money doesn't mean the money isn't significant to Lemmino, so why steal the video in the first place? Give the revenue over to Lemmino at least.
I don't mind reactions, but you've got to add something to the reactions, not just sit there and watch the video and once it's over say "that was cool".
Saying the money isn't that much and is meaningless to you whilst thinking that makes you in the right is pretty funny, ngl. I'm gonna watch this video live on stream whilst I have my dinner and I'm gonna monetize the YT VOD, too. I refuse to believe that Felix is this unaware and is just acting dumb. If you can't split the money with the creator, make the video unmonetized. Also, if you didn't get permission from the creator, don't upload it at all. It's exactly like when a KFC opens up right next to a McDonalds just to take some of their customer base. People have most likely been recommended xQc's video over the original, it surely has to be a statistical probability.
Im subscribed to Mutahar on here, and trust me, he is genuinely passionate about youtube and content. When he says it's about, "Friends," I don't really doubt.
An important difference between some reactors is how and in what form they reupload the content like Hasan doesn't upload the vod of him watching the whole thing. His fans do and I watch those vods but he can't be responsible for that. Another thing is that saying that a person could either allow or not allow isn't optimal since 1 they will get hate for saying no 2 they will have to choose between exposure and money. Lastly, a creator might be fine with reactions, or some reactors given how different streamers behave but might also want the money since it's their content so banning all reacting or allowing all reactions hurts both sides. I think a system based on how much of the original content is included should go towards determining the split of revenue between the reactor and creator. With a certain threshold like 30% minimum. However, what we should all realize is that it's not our decision neither is it the reactors it's the creators of the content who should decide. I'd love to see someone create a union for content creators who the reactors can contact in order to get permission for the re-uploading of content, similar to how Stanz suggested it be a UA-cam system only it's not UA-cam. This way any fan loses the right to complain since if they have permission it's all fine at the same time the reactor loses all right to upload it if they say no and should now be shit on.
Stanz you have a great channel!
Keep it up!
I never really liked nor disliked XQC but man his response, especially his second one is so out of touch. Simply saying something like "I don't care about the money, I'm the last person that cares because I make so much money anyways outside of react content" is so out of touch. You may not care, but the guy who made the video does care about the money. If he really doesn't care, why doesn't he just wire the money to the creators he's basically taking from by not having any significant input in his react content. A perfect example of good reactors are Asmongold, who pauses A LOT and provides tons of input and insight. XQC just does not care and it shoes and its pretty annoying. I get that Lud wants to back XQC up since they're friends and he's collaborated with him on successful projects multiple times, but this XQC really digs his own holes sometimes because of his juicer brain.
To be honest i feel like theres a pretty large group of people like myself who dont even watch these types of videos unless xqc or someone react to it. Not to say it still isnt a problem but its still something to consider.
the only way youtube can help youtubers and not made people get mad at reactors is just allow original content creator to just get some of the monetization from the reactor on how much was used easily.
Unfortunately, and I am a culprit of this, but some videos just arent entertaining enogh to justify watching on my own. There are plenty and plenty of videos that I have watched react videos on that I never would have watched the original for, simply bc the reaction to the video was more entertaining than the video itself. Back when netflix was doing the whole "no account share thing" one popular sentinent i saw is that people who watch netflix on someone else's account aren't going to buy their own netflix account when they lose access. Account sharing wasn't costing netflix money because it was money that netflix was never going to get in the first place. The same applies to most videos for me. The react video isn't stealing my view from the orginal video bc I was never going to watch the original in the first place.
XQC posting his reaction onto UA-cam is not the problem. The issue is him posting the full video, if he posts a 20mins reaction of different sections; The viewer might think to go to the original video to watch it in full. XQC posting the full video negates any positives from reaction content. UA-camrs like Elvis the alien does film reviews in a way where you think to watch that movie afterwards.
i see both sides. i personally would watch a react of a video over the op almost every time if i enjoy the creator at all. youd think any video being reuploaaded would just automatically get an ad cut that should probably be a thing.
Streamers act like they are the only ones doing react content, but there is an entire genre for tv/movie reaction on youtube, but they ussualy play it smart and follow some unwritten rules, they are heavyly edited and they do not show more then 10 min of footage and they allways credit the source. The unedited lazy non-react ripoff/reupload should be non monetizable at the very least, that is trash. I was watching a girls reaction channel and she was actually invited to the mission imposible premier and they met Tom Cruise, so hollywood itself is taking a liking to the react genre done right, hopefully dumb streamers do not mess it up for everyone else
Which reactor was that? Sounds like a cool experience
@@AliRizwanMasood The channel is "popcorn in bed"
How can I get into chess boxing
We need to talk about how the people on both sides of this twitter argument are actually the most insufferable people online ever omg
Daily Dose of Internet literally pays the OG creator and tags them. Perfect system.
I think if reaction content is to continue on twitch I do think we need to pionner methods to make it feel less expoltitive here are some suggestions:
1. Don't take the piss and freeboat content
2. Move away from the "react harder" defense and instead push the concept of "react meaingfully"
3. Don't post unedited reactions onto other platforms to canablise views.
4. Ensure proper meaingful credit is given
5. Have proper communication channels so creators can opt out of being reacted to in the future
6. Don't react to a creator's entire catalogue of content therefore giving viewers no reason to seek them out themselves
7. Encourage a policy in which reactors will suggest another video in a creator's catalogue to watch on thier own time
8. Encourage reactors to react within a format or theme of some kind to encouage them to engage more and for artistic intergrity.
These are all things that we can push and encourage people to do and overall none of them are unreasonably difficult to do.
It feels like the complaint is react content, but all the most egregious examples are people NOT reacting. The point of good react content is something like watching asmondgold on mmo stuff. I’m not involved in mmos but I hear something going on so I check his content since he’ll typically give me the needed context.
So Necrit actually made a great video about how Asmondgolds reactions to his videos.
IMO the only thing that will stop this outside of youtube implementing revenue claim for all channels is reactageddon.
Since we know the reactors and youtube won't do anything, there should just be a community-wide normalization of DMCA takedowns on all react content. If the occasional person does it here or there, DMCA takedowns aren't very helpful because eventualy someone will fight it and take it to court and such, which as a small creator you don't really have the means to fight. However if a several reactors gets DMCA takedowns from 20+ different creators they've done react videos to, that will pretty much instantly stop them, their channel is deleted and the message sent is clear to anyone else. What are they gonna do, take them ALL to court? The vast majority of react videos are clearly NOT fair use. Maybe I'm missing something here.
14:00 THIS! Stanz, that's what I'm sayinnn', lil bro!
UA-cam needs to do some heavy lifting and spend some resources.
And that's why the best solution will never gonna happen!
Life is unfair sometimes
Every Lemmino video: starts with someone whispering "just lemme know"
Every streamer saying the name: ah yes, luhMEEno
I think X’s yt rev also goes to his editor and he doesn’t really run the channel
The people who are calling him out litreally used to do transformative content. Now they all up on xqc!? Ludwig used to do transformative content so him attacking xqc for it is so stupid. People are so jealous of him.
What up big haircut. Your name is big haircut now
For me good reaction content are like gamology videos where it change the form of content. Like if you create highlight of you reaction reaction video/stream. ie there is some form of editting, tranfomantion or addition. Some form of work put into make your content not the same as the original content. Not just i sit there and watch a video and reupload it.
Also i think there are way youtube can make sure original videos get their share, one way maybe to add a new section/fill-in to when you upload a video that allow reaction content creator to fill in the link to the original video and this will allow UA-cam to give some imprestion/revanu to the original video.
X is so in the wrong and it's incredible he doesn't see it