The Algorithm, Age Verification, Swear Words and What Would Rob Wilson Do?

Send us a text

Get the vidIQ plugin for FREE: https://vidiq.ink/boostplugin

Want a 1 on 1 coach? https://vidiq.ink/theboost1on1

Join our Discord! https://www.vidiq.com/discord

Watch the YouTube version: https://www.youtube.com/@vidIQPodcasts

YouTube's platform is constantly evolving, and this episode unpacks the latest updates that are reshaping the creator landscape. We dive deep into the new monetization policies regarding profanity - not exactly a "sensor update" but rather an expansion of what content can now earn revenue even with colorful language. The crew shares personal philosophies on keeping content family-friendly despite these relaxed guidelines, with Rob noting he's never found cursing necessary for his content strategy.

The conversation takes a serious turn as we examine YouTube's controversial AI age verification system. Instead of relying on user-stated ages, YouTube will now use internal signals to estimate viewer ages - raising important questions about privacy, accuracy, and content access. Dan voices legitimate concerns: if YouTube sometimes struggles with content identification for YouTube Kids, how reliable will age estimation be? We explore the international regulatory pressures driving this change and what it means for both viewers and creators.

Perhaps most exciting for data-hungry creators is YouTube's new viewer analytics categories that segment audiences into "new," "casual," and "regular" viewers. This long-awaited feature finally lifts the veil on viewer behavior patterns, showing that regular viewers typically watch twice as long and consume twice as many videos as new viewers. The team shares strategies for using these insights to tailor content for different audience segments and build stronger viewer relationships.

We wrap up with a spirited debate on the age-old question: are titles more important than thumbnails? Each team member offers unique perspectives based on their content experience. Plus, we're treated to an unexpected surprise when a 90s Celtic punk band shares custom songs they created about VidIQ and our team member Rob! Have questions about these updates or other YouTube strategies? Email us at [e-mail] - we might feature your question on our next episode.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hey, welcome back to the only podcast where Dan
thinks everything's loud and noone else does.
I'm Travis and I'm here withthe entire crew, the most
special of podcasts.
I'm here with Jen.
Say hi, jen.

Speaker 2 (00:11):
Hello.

Speaker 1 (00:12):
Rob Say hi Rob.

Speaker 3 (00:13):
Hello everybody.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
And Dan.

Speaker 4 (00:17):
Why is everyone yelling?

Speaker 1 (00:19):
See, this is the thing.
So Dan has problems with hisheadphones, but we love them
just the same.
If you're new here, this is thevid iq podcast, and if you're
watching on the main channel,hello.
We have all types of things totalk to you about.
Today we're going to go overthe updates that vid iq has
talked about on youtube, thatyoutube has lovingly given us.
Have you guys seen all theloving updates that have come

(00:40):
out?

Speaker 3 (00:41):
seen them?

Speaker 2 (00:42):
I've been making videos every freaking day
goodness goodness we'll fill youin, don't worry all right?

Speaker 1 (00:53):
yeah, in case you didn't know, uh, youtube uh
released several updates thesensor update, ai, age
verification, the titlecomparison tool, and we're going
to answer some of your emailsthat you've sent in.
If you're interested, we'lltell you how to do that a little
bit later, but let's start withthat.
What I thought was one of thefunnier updates that came out
this week.
Um, it's not really a sensorupdate, it's more of.

(01:15):
You can now make money bysaying things that previously
you might not have been able tosay before, and rob made a great
video, uh, this weekoring 70%of the words that he said.
What did you guys think aboutthat?
Let's start with Rob.

Speaker 3 (01:30):
Well, fun fact is that I didn't actually say any
curse or swear words at all.
I was just bleeping out normalwords like French and sausage
and monetization Savage, on theother hand, couldn't do anything
about him and the guy fromYouTube couldn't do anything
about him.
And the guy from youtubecouldn't do anything about him.

Speaker 2 (01:47):
he was like jeez, I mean, come on that was the best
youtube video of all time fromboth of you actually both
parties involved.

Speaker 3 (01:56):
They were probably the highest form of quality we
have today I'm a bit indifferentto the update because one of my
YouTube policies well, thatsounds a bit weird, but one of
my own internal policies is thatI don't like to curse or swear,
and maybe it's because I'mrepresenting vidIQ, but even on
my previous channel I didn'tlike to do that just because I

(02:18):
wanted a family-friendlyaudience to be speaking to.
But I guess lots and lots ofcreators welcome this and it
feels like the advertisers havekind of figured out again a
little bit more that YouTube isa more how do I put this liberal
and accepting place for alltypes of content.

(02:39):
So, yeah, I think it's goodnews for everybody that I can
think of, as long as YouTube areable to correctly, you know,
restrict the content for theright audiences so that you know
, kids aren't playing videos.
And all of a sudden there'sf-bombs being dropped in the
first few seconds do we do wethink that?

Speaker 4 (02:56):
I know we're going to get to it, but do we think that
this update was also tied tothe age verification update?

Speaker 1 (03:05):
it's funny you say that.
I was literally going tomention that when we get to that
point.
But let's real quick.
For people who didn't catch it,what is a sensor update?
It's not even a sensor update.
All it is is it now allows youto have more opportunity to
monetize your videos without theyellow monetization icon if you
do drop more F-bombs and andother bombs all throughout your

(03:26):
uh youtube videos all the bombsoh, there's one.
If you drop one of those, youstill might get monetized.
So um, rob doesn't curse, I'mpretty sure dan doesn't.

Speaker 4 (03:41):
I think in his regular everyday life he doesn't
yes, uh, in my regular everydaylife I am like a sailor, uh,
but all of my training came fromlike radio and then came over
to youtube and you don't cuss onradio, uh, and I I don't mind
it.
I don't feel like it's like mehaving to stifle any part of my
personality or anything likethat.

(04:02):
I think it literally is just achoice.
Like rob said, your contentappeals to a wider audience.
Uh, if you decide not to saythose things and not because
youtube is going to restrict it,but simply because people
watching will be like oh, I canwatch this with my kids in the
room and it doesn't have to be abig deal absolutely.

Speaker 1 (04:20):
Uh, jen, what are your thoughts on this?
I mean, in the vlogging space,I think you can kind of be
yourself, but I don't rememberseeing very many.
Well, I guess it depends on thevlogger, but it doesn't seem to
be a prevalent thing invlogging as a general rule.

Speaker 2 (04:35):
I would.
I would say probably more yeah,like I don't think it's really
that evident in the vloggingspace.
Yeah, like I don't think it'sreally that evident in the
vlogging space.
I don't think it's that I don'tknow, impactful of an update.
Like I think it answered a lotof questions that creators had
when it comes to like the rules,like can I curse, can I not

(04:59):
curse?
It almost felt like they werekind of like rumored, like oh,
you can't have it in the in thefirst few seconds.
Well, what words can't be inthe first few seconds?
So I think there's clarity onit now, but I don't know does is
it really a a big deal?
Which is really funny, becauseI'm like thinking back now and
I've opened two videos with thef word bleeped out oh, hey so

(05:22):
does that mean a littleself-reflection right there in
that moment.
I was like who would do that,who?
Would open their video cursinghave I ever done that?

Speaker 1 (05:30):
I don't think so.
I always curse, I always bleepout anything.
It's very rare that I'll ever.
I think it's more impactful.
If you like, don't do it, thenall of a sudden you do it out of
somewhere and bleep it it was a, it was like a reaction style,
so I was like that feels like agood intro.

Speaker 2 (05:43):
I think it was more impactful bleep sometimes, to be
honest, it's like I don't knowcatches your attention more than
even just cursing.
I don't even think you noticecursing when somebody is like it
slips into a video like one ortwo times, you're just like oh,
you're a human speaking like.
If that's how you choose tospeak like I wasn't like.
Oh my god, they said a bad wordon the internet speaking of

(06:06):
like bleeps themselves.

Speaker 4 (06:08):
Does anyone else here feel like the the type of bleep
you use can either hit or miss,like some bleeps are are
funnier than others?
Because I found a creator usingsometimes they would just, or
back in the day they would justkind of like silence their swear
words.
They've moved on to bleeping,but the bleep they're using it
sounds not like a bleep, it justsounds kind of like a low boop

(06:30):
and it it's very distracting.

Speaker 1 (06:32):
It's worse than just saying a curse word yeah, I had
a friend that used duck sounds,which I loved.
That was great, like wheneverhe would say something instead
of saying well, this mother, youknow, anything like that.

Speaker 4 (06:44):
But I like the duck personally, I like that I like
when it changes up, there'sducks and I don't know.
They just use different wordsand they use different images
over their mouth to just befunny.
But I think when in doubt it'sbetter to silence it.
I think you can get the bleepwrong and then it loses that
like effect.
It's more distracting.
That's just my opinion.
I don't know if anyone elsefeels that way dan I couldn't

(07:07):
agree more that's a good, that'sa good bleep, that's a funny
bleep so that's like a classicsensor, like beep, yeah yeah
like that's the one where Ithink it's the best yeah, people
identify with it.

Speaker 1 (07:20):
So, speaking of this, what dan mentioned earlier, ai
age verification first of all.
What?
What's going on with this dan?
What is this update?

Speaker 4 (07:28):
yeah.
So the way it's going to workand this has already been rolled
out in other regions.
It's just coming to us next isthat youtube is going to going
forward, ignore what you've toldthem your age is and they're
going to use their signals ontheir end to determine, like a
rough guesstimate of, whether ornot you're over 18 um, maybe

(07:49):
even more ages, for all I know.
I don't really.
You know, I don't know how muchthey'll actually tell us on the
surface.
So I I made a video about it.
I think that I I covered theupdate and then I actually added
to the video later because Iwas editing it.
I'm like I'm kind of missingpart of the thing I wanted to
say, which was do we need this?
Like people aren't liking it.

(08:10):
I see that they're not likingit, but I was so focused on
getting all the facts straightto the update that I'm like, oh,
I forgot to give my opinion onthis and I think I'm gonna get
roasted.
So I I came back and I'm likehey, uh, I don't like.
I don't think this is great,and I would say the main reason
I don't like it isn'tnecessarily well one, it's the
privacy concerns.
I don't know who I'm going tobe giving my personal

(08:32):
information to.
But the other reason I don'tlike it is that there's other
things that other friends ofmine who are parents have seen
on YouTube Kids that made themstop using YouTube Kids, for
example.
Stop using YouTube kids, forexample.
And I'm like hey, if, if thecontent itself isn't being
identified correctly acrossYouTube as it is, if that's true
, then are they going to begetting people's ages Right,
like, and?

(08:52):
And if you, if you guess thatsomeone's over 18 and you're
wrong, and now you can customvideos in the first few seconds
and all this other stuff, like,isn't this potentially going to
do more damage, more harm thangood?
And I don't know.
All we can do is speculate asusual, and as usual, I think
stuff like this rolls out.
Youtube makes a whole bunch ofmistakes.
They learn, they fix it, butthat, yeah, that's where I'm at

(09:14):
with it.

Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, according to YouTube, they've been doing this
in the UK for a while now andit supposedly is successful.
As is the case with most ofthese things, they've usually
been testing it with a group ofpeople before we ever hear about
it.
Um and I heard it explainedmultiple times and it's more
about the type of content thatyou will be suggested uh, as

(09:36):
well as like different uh guardrails they put in place for the
different age groups, and it'sreally complicated for a company
like youtube becauseinternationally, countries have
different rules, regulations andlaws regarding this stuff.
So none of this is easy andit's definitely not going to be
perfect.
They they kind of admitted that, hey, you know, maybe we'll
make a mistake, but that's whythey're rolling it out slowly.

(09:57):
Um, I don't think from acreator's perspective, this is
going to affect many people.
I certainly am not thinkingabout it.
If I'm creating something, areany of you worried about it from
the creator standpoint?

Speaker 3 (10:09):
I would imagine any creators who are worried about
this may be erring on the sideof malicious intent and bad
actors anyway, if they're tryingto target a certain audience,
although they're not technicallytrying to target a certain
audience if that makes any, nottechnically trying to target a
certain audience, if that makesany sense.
So yeah, I think generally youknow, similar to the AI

(10:30):
monetization update, I think ifyou are a morally and ethically
sound creator then you knowtheoretically you should be
pleased that YouTube is tryingto safeguard the users of the
platform.

Speaker 2 (10:46):
Gentendo what do you think?
I think that was really wellsaid.
I think if you're not doinganything wrong, like what do you
have to worry about?
Like I can't think of aninstance where this would be
detrimental to a creator who wasjust honestly making the right
content for the right audience.
So, as a viewer, I thinkYouTube's going to think I'm 80

(11:07):
years old, but that's a viewerproblem, hey yo.

Speaker 1 (11:12):
So another update that came out recently, which I
think I say update that came out.
It didn't really come out Likethe information about it came
out.
The actual feature's not out toeveryone.
It's the title comparison tool,which is similar to the
thumbnail tool.
I remember when the thumbnailtool first came out, everyone
was excited about it and thenpeople were like, well, can I do
that with titles?
And I know from a perspectiveof me and this will come up in a

(11:33):
game later on I think titlesare incredibly important.
So to now have certain peopleso far, which vidIQ is one of
them have access to be able tochange titles and thumbnails as
a package.

Speaker 3 (11:50):
Actually matter of fact.
Rob, can you tell?
Us how it works uh, based onwhat you've seen, how you use it
on a podcast, it's gonna be abit hard, right?
So you can test three variantsof titles the thumbnail remains
the same.
Three variants of thumbnailsthe title remains the same.
Or you can do three variants ofwhatever you want.

Speaker 4 (12:05):
So different title, different thumbnail but
importantly, a title is marriedto a thumbnail.
It doesn't just keep rotatingthem around correct yeah yeah
yeah, that's a good point that'sinteresting.

Speaker 3 (12:18):
It's actually an important point if you
understood that, listeners, goodjob, well done I mean it's not
that complicated to understand.

Speaker 1 (12:24):
But I think what is important is, unlike titles
which just kind of switchthrough and rotate and try to
figure out like over time what'sworking best, this you still
have.
There's still an errorpotential from the person not
understanding what a goodpackaging is between title and
thumbnail because you could putthe wrong quote, title and
thumbnail together based on whatyou have, thinking that that's

(12:48):
the connection where it would bebetter if youtube rotated them
around.
It's like oh, this title withthis thumbnail actually performs
best.
I wish I know this is askingfor too much.
Three titles, three thumbnails,and it just rotated them
through and it combined thethings until you had a winner.
How?

Speaker 3 (13:06):
would you display the results of that, though I don't
know?

Speaker 2 (13:09):
Not my problem.
One million views.

Speaker 3 (13:12):
Yes, okay, that's right.

Speaker 5 (13:15):
This is for Dan's benefit One million views.

Speaker 3 (13:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (13:19):
You win.
I have to say.

Speaker 4 (13:22):
Now that we've explained how it worked.
I've used this a little bit.
I've come to the conclusionthat I hate it, at least for me.
For me, I hate it.
So here's where I'm at with it,because I was trying to test
three thumbnails with threedifferent titles.
The decision fatigue inpackaging a video set in very
quickly, because sometimes whenwe're thinking of video ideas

(13:43):
and maybe a lot of creators outthere can relate to this we
think of like a dozen or sotitles that can work with the
video, based on different bitsof research.
Sometimes you just have one goodtitle, but sometimes, depending
on the video you're making,you're like oh, this could be
called a lot of things, andtrying to figure out which title
should go with which thumbnailwas the most exhausting
experience, just in the fewvideos I've tried this with.
I'm at a point now where, formy own mental health, I am only

(14:04):
doing one or the other.
I will either test threethumbnails or I will either test
three titles, but I will notmix and match anymore unless
it's like very clear what shouldgo where.
But if it's not clear and I'mhaving to sit there and think
about it too long, I'm justgoing to make bad decisions.
My confidence is going to shootthrough the floor in my
packaging, and that's just mypersonal experience with it.
Other folks out there might bemaking smaller changes than I'm
making and maybe it's a littleeasier for them.

Speaker 1 (14:28):
Well, so for titles, we always have advocated for
having or, sorry, for thumbnails.
We've always advocating threeway different thumbnails.
How are you using the tool?
What are you doing specifically?

Speaker 4 (14:40):
I'm taking the thumbnails that we decide for a
video, which have been prettydifferent, and I'm taking the
different title suggestions thatcome in and like that ideation
process and I'm literally havingto try and match.
Like.
So when, when we give title andthumbnail advice generally, we
say like hey, your title andyour thumbnail should work
together and they should kind oftell a little story, how do you

(15:02):
do that?
Like, imagine an author tryingto make a book and they have
like the option of three bookcovers and three titles for
their book and they're justsitting there like, okay, I'm
gonna have to put all of theseout at the same time but only
one is gonna sell the best.
It's so much more pressure,like that's like trying to sell
three books that say the samething.
I, I just that I don't know, Idon't feel like I'm, I'm, I'm

(15:25):
still learning, I think the bestway to use it.
But some folks, the advice isactually don't do three majorly
different thumbnails.
Do a thumbnail with a slightchange in each variation.
So for us, with those youtubeupdate ones, if you've seen our
main channel, it'll be like oneof our faces next to like a fake
kind of tweet from youtube or areworded one with like big,
bold text on it.
And sometimes what we'll do iswe'll keep the same face and
change all those different boxesof text in each thumbnail, or

(15:46):
we'll do the opposite we'llchange our facial expressions
and keep the text the same, andso those are really easy.
And then the titles need to beclear to the audience, and I'm
trying to feel the stress ofjust me saying all this like
just trying to explain it.

Speaker 2 (16:01):
I'm internally stressed, thank you.
I'm internally stressed.
I'm listening to this and I'mhaving like immediate flashbacks
the first time using it I'm notthe only one.

Speaker 1 (16:11):
Well, I mean, I get stressed just listening to dan.
Sometimes he says things he'slike, and then I opened the bag
of bread and the bread wasdifferent shapes.
I'm like, oh my god, this is sostressful.
Who cut this bread?
unbelievable dan makeseverything so stressful to me,
yeah, um, I get it, though.
I get what you're trying to saythere.
And then this again, this goesback to what I said.
I wish you could just havethree thumbnails, three titles

(16:31):
and let it figure it outalgorithmically, like don't put
that on me, uh, don't you putthat on me, uh, you know that's
a.
Anyone knows that movie?

Speaker 4 (16:40):
let me know, hit me up but does anyone else here
feel like thinking about yourpackaging to that degree can
have a more detrimental effect?

Speaker 2 (16:47):
yes, yeah, because I feel like it's it's taking so
much of like the decision makingand planning off of the video.
To begin with, we're like Ihave this idea, this is going to
be what the title is, it'sgoing to be what my thumbnail is
, and then I'm going to go makethe video, and then you have to
come up with these othervariants that can potentially

(17:10):
not represent the video as well,or you're trying to run all
three tests in every single way,and I completely agree with
that.
It's exhausting.
I definitely have my ownfeelings on how it works, but I
think I don't know.
I think it takes excitementaway from publishing.
Like you go to finally likepublish that video and you're

(17:33):
like I don't even know what Idid here and I don't even know
what's gonna work.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
Like yeah, by the way , for those who don't know, uh
jen publishes based on the waysomething feels, so you might
want to take her step with apinch of salt.

Speaker 2 (17:47):
Yeah, you should.
Yeah, you should not.
Listen to me, I am personally afan of doing like one test or
the other To me.
When I like knew the title testwas coming out, I did not know
you were also going to be ableto integrate different
thumbnails per title.
I thought we had separate.

(18:07):
I'm going to run a title test,I'm going to run a thumbnail
test and personally I thinkthat's how it should be done.
I don't think they should bemix and match, because if you're
trying to collect data on that,it is such an insane amount of
data and you have to do it insuch a controlled way where
you're running an experiment for, like at this point, like six

(18:29):
months.
So with the title, I would saythe first time that I used it I
went crazy.
I was so excited.
I was like I'm gonna do threethumbnails and three titles and
it was, you know, not a lot ofstrategy going into it, but just
like off the wall, like seewhat's gonna happen.
And then, the second time theyused the tool, I was like I
don't want to use thumbnails atall.
I use the same thumbnail and Ionly title tested.

(18:50):
And I intentionally did threestyles of title.
I did one meta.
I did one that works on ourchannel really well, and then I
did what I would consider like amore modern, conversational,
like minimalistic approach tosee what actual title formula
connected with the audience best.
Now I will say that videoabsolutely tanked.
It was like our worst 10 of 10.

(19:10):
So the information itself wasnot great.
So coincidental maybe, I don'tknow it was a video that had a
slow start.
But that is how I wouldcontinue to test it.
I would only test one or theother or very minimally alter a

(19:30):
text within a thumbnail to justbetter enhance the title that
you chose.

Speaker 3 (19:35):
But yeah, I just think it's a lot of information
rob, what are you thinking aboutthis, as you've heard what we
all think, yeah, I guess from aperspective of how it works, I
do describe it as it just worksin the sense that it's very easy

(19:56):
to set up.
I mean, I know it takes a lotof effort to do the titles and
the thumbnails themselves, butactually the way that YouTube
has set up these features ispretty intuitive.
But actually the way thatYouTube have set up these
features is pretty intuitive andis it nice to have, even if you
don't necessarily use it.
I'm sure there are teams ofcreators who have like thumbnail

(20:23):
designers and title experts arehaving a field day with this,
but maybe from an individualcreator's point of view it is
just more stress and paralysisof choice.
What I found with the thumbnailtesting when it came out is that
even after having it now for 18months, has it really
influenced how I make mythumbnails or how different they

(20:43):
are?
And I still can't give you adefinitive answer to that
because the results seem to beso similar A lot of the time,
like the video is a one of 10,regardless of, like, the
different variants we have.
All the videos are 10 of 10,regardless of the variants you
have, and it doesn't really movea needle enough on examples.

(21:05):
It tends to be like 34%, 32%,33%.
It's like, oh well, that wasn'tvery conclusive.
Maybe that's user error, maybeI'm not applying big enough
changes, yeah, um.
So yeah, there's kind of that.
Oh great, we've now got titletesting.
And then it's like, uh, I'm notreally getting the same

(21:26):
conclusive results as I waspreviously, and now I don't know
if I want to use it as muchyeah, I know is, and this kind
of happened with the thethumbnail uh thing which, you
know, creators for years wantedto have.

Speaker 1 (21:39):
Then we got it and then a lot of people like I
don't use it because it eitherdoesn't work or I don't like the
way it it works and, um, atleast youtube's trying to give
us the tools we ask for.
But it does beg the question,like are these tools?
Are they necessary?
I think they're.
They're helpful at times at attimes they they're helpful to
tell us we don't actually needthem.
Uh, we need to understand ouraudience a little bit better.

(22:01):
I think that's the best thingthat they've done with these
tools has made us realize thatmaybe we don't need them I will
say that during live streams weadvocate for using it and I feel
like our advice there is prettygood.

Speaker 4 (22:12):
So we'll see a channel that is doing something
with their thumbnails that wekind of collectively don't agree
should be.
They should be doing, and I'llalways say hey, by the way, if
you agree with us or you'redubious about our advice, try it
, test it.
You have the thumbnail testingability now.
It's usually something small,like take your logo off the
thumbnail and see how your nextvideo performs, and I love it
for those things.
And in my mind, as I'm givingthis advice, usually I'm

(22:34):
thinking to myself they don'teven need to use this more than
a couple times, like once theykind of like learn from it that
their logo on the thumbnail doesor does not work as well, then
they don't have to keep using it, and I think that's kind of
like the joy of having thesetools is, like we probably
shouldn't be considering usingthem for every single video.
They're probably meant reallyfor just like those small
moments of like okay, will thistype of title work for the video

(22:56):
, or will this type of title?
Oh, one time I had a video goout and it got terrible views
and I was really confused by it.
So my personal channel and Iwoke up the next morning and it
just hit me like a ton of bricks, like oh, I didn't make the
title about the audience, I madeit about me.
And so I went to my computer, Ichanged one word in the title I
think it was like from my tosomething else or whatever and

(23:19):
the video blew up the next day.
It just completely blew up.
I didn't have title testing oranything, I just had intuition,
just raw, like sleep on itintuition, and like those are
the moments where I've had likea lot of success with changing
things.
I I did not, I would not havethought to test two variants of
that title.
I just titled it poorly andthree titles would have would
not have changed that in themoment.

(23:39):
I just needed to like see theresults, come in and go oh, okay
, and learn the hard way I lovethat.

Speaker 1 (23:46):
What a great, what a great story that was, uh, one of
the last updates I want to talkabout.
It's actually really important.
It tells us more about ourviewership and finally, uh lifts
the veil of uh, of like hiddeninformation that youtube has is
the viewer updates are not evensubscriber, but our viewer
updates the regular, casual andnew.
If you haven't seen this, whatan incredible update this is.

(24:08):
It takes your audience andseparates them into categories
new, casual and regular and thenthere's definitions of each
Essentially your regular viewerswhat you would think they are.
They come and watch yourcontent kind of regularly,
casual, just every so often getsto see your content, I think
it's like once a month, everycouple of months or whatever,
and it was like someone who'smaybe never seen you before and
it shows you things like averageview duration and that sort of

(24:30):
thing, and it's been so useful,I think, in disseminating what
content works for what type ofperson.
Dan, jen and Rob, now that thatis on the vidIQ channel
especially, what type of thingshave you kind of walked away
from looking at that?
Rob?
You did an entire video on it.
What kind of things do you?

(24:51):
What do you think about this.
Is this good, bad, indifferent?

Speaker 3 (24:55):
I'm still trying to figure out the long-term value
of these metrics, but what ittells you off a bat is just how
powerful regular viewers are, inthat they watch for twice as
long typically on your videosand they watch twice as many
videos as new and casual viewers.
So ideally, what you want to dois take these new viewers on a

(25:19):
journey through to being moreloyal viewers.
What I'm still trying tostruggle and grasp with is like
how, how you actually do thatand how much these figures will
actually move and change,because it feels like they're
quite rigid, like it's going torequire a lot of effort and
testing to move the needle,especially like on regular

(25:42):
viewers Like ours is currentlyat 5%.
Like what would we do and howmuch effort would we have to put
into it to get that up to 6%,for example, and at the same
time, would that have adetrimental impact on the new
viewers coming in who maybearen't understanding the
community style content thatwe're trying to push to the

(26:02):
viewer?

Speaker 1 (26:05):
yeah, if you're watching the youtube uh video,
you can actually see what uhrob's talking about here for the
last 28 days.
Oh, maybe I'll zoom in on thisa little bit.
Um, essentially, you can seenew viewers, casual and regular.
And, to rob's point, how manyaverage views per viewer, which
is one of the most underratedpieces of uh data I think you
can.
You can come across which ishow many average views per
viewer, which is one of the mostunderrated pieces of data I
think you can come across, whichis how many times people are

(26:27):
watching your content in a giventime period and the higher this
number is.
For example, our regularviewers is four times.
That's great.
And our new viewers is 1.7,which is almost two.
In other words, someone who'snever seen this before comes
through and likes it so muchthey've come back half of
another time.
I don't know what that means,but for sure almost two times.
Dan, when you see stuff likethis, what is the first thing

(26:50):
that hits you?
Just from, like, theperspective of a creator.

Speaker 4 (27:03):
I think this is one of those things where you as a
creator kind of get to beinvolved in the decision of what
you want these metrics to looklike.
And what I mean by that is ifyou want that average views per
viewer number to go up, youwould need to make content that
is consistent and I the bestexample, just from my gaming
roots here.
The best example I could giveyou is if you were doing a
serial let's play kind of likething, like zach scott game
style, where he plays through agame from beginning to end.
Episode one is going to appealto a lot of new viewers because

(27:24):
people are just interested inthe game.
Some of those new viewers maycome back for two, three, four
and five etc.
Because they enjoyed thecontent.
Those become casual to regularviewers.
And I think if I I've asked himto see these metrics, he never.
He said, oh, I'll get, I'll getthose for you, and then he
forgot um, hopefully I get tosee them at some point because I
think they'd look a lotdifferent from ours.
Because he does that so much, Ithink he would have a lot of

(27:46):
returning viewers.
I think his hour views perviewer probably pretty high,
because there's always the nextvideo to go to.
Um, if you do a lot of shorts,like I've been doing, your new
viewer number is probably veryhigh.
In fact, I kind of went on a runrecently on my personal channel
where I did more shorts and Ididn't stream as much and my
monthly audience, the totalnumber of people, is just kind
of going down.
Overall I'm I'm getting a lotof new viewers but overall not

(28:09):
getting as many viewers.
So the other thing I wanted tosay is that it's important to
focus on all of these, but atany given moment, if you're like
, how do I get more regularviewers?
You have to sit down and kindof analyze your content and
figure out why it just keepsappealing to new people over and
over, as if you're every timeyou post.

Speaker 1 (28:24):
It's like restarting your channel a little bit jen,
if you were coaching someonewith this and these analytics
that just came out, what kind ofthings would you be focusing on
?

Speaker 2 (28:34):
I think it's so fun.
I was like I love that we havelike this on mobile too.
Sometimes we get things thatare just like so in depth only
on desktop and we have such aneasy to read.
Like I'm looking at my phoneright now and it's so easy to
see when you scroll right downthe three swipe aways where it's
popular with new viewers,popular with casual viewers and

(28:55):
popular with regular viewers andyou see those top five videos
and it's like you can veryeasily back and forth compare
what videos have made it intoall three, which videos are
specifically making it just fornew viewers, and also monitoring
this.
Like if you're doing a channelpivot in any kind of way.
Like you want to be seeingthose regular viewers kind of go

(29:17):
down, but you want to see theseanalytics look different for
different phase that you are on,for whatever you're trying to
do on your channel.
Like you're trying to buildcommunity.
Like you had a great burst ofdiscoverable content.
Now you're trying to get moreregular viewers.
Like you want to be seeing thatchart just shift a little bit
and start to see those videos.

(29:37):
Well, you also want to berewarded, like if you're
intentionally trying to makecommunity content you want to
see that fall under your regularviewer category.
So I love this.
I think this is so simple tomonitor at just like a glance,
like, oh, I made that video, wow, that's attracting to my casual
viewers but also my regularviewers.

(29:57):
Or, even better, it's like, wow, my new viewers and my regular
viewers both love that.
So we've kind of had theunicorn effect there.
I just think it's great.
I think it is such an easy tooland analytics can be just so
consuming.
This is one I think, even justsurface level, just seeing what

(30:18):
your content is doing is awesome.

Speaker 3 (30:23):
Just seeing what your content is doing is awesome.

Speaker 2 (30:36):
My cautionary counterpoint to that, jen, is
that, especially when it comes,to percentages in YouTube
analytics.

Speaker 3 (30:38):
the base question we often get is well, what's a good
percentage?
And, as you've just rightlypointed out, depending on what
phase you are in creatingcontent, you may want very
different percentages.
Like, if you're making viralcontent all the time, you want
new viewers to be like as highas possible, because that's what
you're trying to do.
You're just trying to viral hitafter viral hit but at the same
time, if you have too manyregular viewers, then that means
your content might be too nicheand it's not reaching out and

(31:00):
picking up new audiences.
So this is going to be like avery fluid number, which means
it's going to be hard to givelike general advice.
It's going to be, as you said,like really tailored for the
individual.

Speaker 1 (31:12):
Yeah, I think if I was looking at this when I was
still coaching people, I mean,first of all, I would have been
over the moon for this data.
I'd be like Holy.
I would have been over the moonfor this data.
I'd be like Holy crap.
Finally, all the things thatI've assumed and hoped are right
here in front of me goes rightexactly to what Jen said, and
Jen and I've talked many timesin the podcast about buckets,
content buckets and, dependingon what content bucket you're
using, will dictate what thesenumbers should look like.

(31:34):
And when you have thediscoverable stuff, just like,
just like Jen said, your newviewers should be high and what
you hope to see is that thatreturn viewer uh, the return
number how many views per howmany videos per review their
viewer they're, they're comingback to watch is higher than
normal.
Um, because you want to hookthem in.
Right, the whole point ofmaking discoverable content is
to bring new people into the,into the house, so to speak.

(31:56):
Um, your casual audience mightnot, uh, be as interested you.
You never know, right like youmight just be going for
something that's wide range.
I would assume some of yourcasual and your biggest fans
would want to watch everythingyou do.
But let's be real, that's nothow it normally works.
But that big number of newviewers is where your subscriber
numbers will grow.

(32:17):
It doesn't mean your averageview duration is going to look
good.
As a matter of fact, I wouldargue, if it's discoverable
content, your average viewduration is going to look good.
As a matter of fact, I wouldargue, if it's discoverable
content, your average viewduration is probably going to be
terrible comparatively.
But that's okay.
We have different buckets fordifferent reasons.
And before we move on to thenext thing, what are our buckets
?
By the way?
What is it with IQ buckets?
I don't even know, Does anyoneknow?

Speaker 4 (32:39):
Definitely YouTube updates.
Updates for sure anddiscoverable.
I I've broadly I consider it'stwo of them.
There's youtube updates andthere's like growth videos, but
I we could probably get morenuance than that small channel
bucket.

Speaker 3 (32:54):
Let's talk to small channels about something that
they're struggling with how to?
How to improve?
Yeah, and then, Then theexperimental buckets which keep
breaking because we're not surewhat to put in them.

Speaker 1 (33:08):
That's true.
We overflow that bucket.

Speaker 3 (33:11):
Sometimes Ross which comes out.

Speaker 4 (33:14):
We just drop stuff in it and it just falls through.

Speaker 1 (33:17):
The bucket has holes in the bottom, alright.
So if you're watching theYouTube video we actually have
talked more about this thanyou've seen so far a lot of it's
been edited out.
If you want to see the wholething, there'll be a link in the
description below.
And also, if you're a listenerto the vid iq podcast, whether
you're listening on audiopodcasts or on youtube, you know
that we take your emails and weanswer them.
So we got two.

(33:38):
We got one from a regular, andthe way you reach out to us is
you send us an email attheboostatvidiqcom and we may
answer it.
And today we are going toanswer two of these.
One of these just came in.
Jen and I are going to go intothe studio soon, so I have a
bunch of those already ready forthat.
This one just came in fromFrank the Dank, which is a good

(34:00):
friend of ours.
He comes in all the time.
Wait a minute, what's going onhere?
Am I sharing the right screen?
What's happening?
Oh, no, that's the wrong screen.
I mean it's right, but it'swrong.
Let me try this again.
This is the part that you'llsee on the podcast channel and
not on the main channel.
So the main channel didn't seeanything about what just
happened.
Oh, I have to do with theentire screen.

(34:25):
That's why, here we go, allright, frank, today.
What up vidi crew, my favoritepodcast that motivates me, makes
me hungry, makes me laugh andteaches me not to be a
conspiracy theorist most of thetime not, not really, but I'm
puzzled, I don't know what to do.
Lately, my videos have beenabsolutely tanking like single
digit views a bad feeling afterfinally getting to where I was
getting at least a hundred orhundreds of views per video.
To top it off, I went to myanalytics and my videos are

(34:45):
hardly getting any impressions,like not even 200 in a matter of
weeks.
I have a personal YouTubeaccount that I use just for
viewing and I subbed to mychannel with all notifications
and it's not getting any.
I decided it was time to put onmy sleuthing cap and turned on
restricted mode, which we'vetalked about on this show many
times, and cap and turned onrestricted mode, which we've

(35:07):
talked about on this channelmany times.
And, of course, none of myrecent videos are there, and a
ton of my old ones havedisappeared.
To add to the despair, not asingle one of my more than 200
live streams are visible either.
I really don't believe inshadow bands, but this one
really has me concerned andwondering what the heck is going
on.
I appealed a list of videosthat I feel should not have been
restricted.
Of course I'm reasonable.
Some of them deserve it.
I got a potty mouth, so Iunderstand that I didn't get
that anymore, yeah that shouldbe a problem.
Also, I'm am I unreasonable tothink it's horse poo that you

(35:29):
can't see restricted in youtubestudio?
Come on, it's a real son of abear figuring out what videos
have been banished from theshadow realm.
This person does not have apotty mouth.

Speaker 3 (35:37):
I'm sorry, I know right, son of no, dan, he typed
out this question and put itthrough ChatGPT to replace all
of the, but we do need to talkabout this.

Speaker 1 (35:50):
While we've definitely talked about shadow
banning, whether or not it'sreal, what he's describing is
real and we actually wedescribed it live on a live
stream once when I was showingyou guys, remember, I showed you
that one channel was that rob.
It was like a video channel.

Speaker 3 (36:04):
They were reviewing films I think horror films and
we turned on restricted mode andevery single video disappeared
from what I remember like andthey weren't getting very many
views either.

Speaker 1 (36:14):
We were like this is kind of weird, they're not
getting very many views.
Um, very much like frank.
What do we think is happeninghere and what do we think he
should do?
We definitely want to helpFrank out.
Frank's a good guy.

Speaker 3 (36:27):
Well, it feels as if they've gone for the lowest
common denominator, least pathof resistance, reason why
suddenly their videos aregetting view.
Which is to blame?
A setting, I'm not clear iftheir videos were already

(36:47):
restricted.
It feels like they starteddoing the research and then
discovered their videos wererestricted.
Maybe they have been for years,I don't know.
I mean, we obviously have to askthe obvious things like have
you had a change of topic?
Like, did you receive acopyright claim or is it like
there's been a guideline strike?
Is there something else thatcould have influenced it?

(37:09):
So, as usual, we don't have thefull picture influenced it.
So, as usually, we don't havethe full picture.
But you know, there are timeswhen we've seen on channel
audits where all of a suddenchannels just seem to lose all
of their views and like we don'thave an explanation for that.
Uh, we we like to think thereisn't a quote-unquote shadow ban
in effect, but youtube musthave some kind of controls that

(37:35):
perhaps affect channels.
But now am I being drawn intothe conspiracy theorist attitude
.
Dan jen, help me out before Isay my tinfoil hat.

Speaker 2 (37:43):
Oh my gosh, I like this.
I have a new conspiracy thatI'm dealing with.
There's nothing to do with this,but I don't.
I think this is like a reallycomplicated one and, while I
would love to have like reallyhelpful advice, this feels like
something like I would reach outto YouTube.
I would try my best withYouTube support so like they can
actually look into your channeland tell you what the issue is.

(38:06):
And I know people have issueswith YouTube support all the
time and I would just say keeptrying until you get someone
that's helpful.

Speaker 3 (38:13):
They did say, Jen, though, in the comment of it,
how they not appealed some.
They appealed some yeah yeah,how do you appeal a restricted
video?
I didn't realize that was athing.

Speaker 2 (38:22):
I have no idea either , but I do like that.
They said you should be able tosee restricted content in
studio.

Speaker 1 (38:27):
I agree with that.
Yes, I agree with that 100%.

Speaker 2 (38:29):
I brought that up to YouTube.

Speaker 1 (38:30):
I've been like what's going on?

Speaker 4 (38:33):
So just going down the conspiracy theory rabbit
hole here, I've always kind ofwondered if, once you draw
YouTube's ire and you make amistake, you end up in a
different system where my videosare scrutinized heavily, and
here's why I think this mighthappen Again.
This is me with a tinfoil haton.
Okay, I'm not trying to freakanybody out.

Speaker 2 (38:52):
I like your tinfoil hat Keep going.

Speaker 3 (38:53):
I have something to add to this, okay, so when
you're uploading a video toYouTube.

Speaker 4 (38:57):
I just did this so I could get the language exactly
right.
I'm uploading a video right now.
I've already posted, I'm goingto delete it.
So first there's the detailstab where you fill out have, if
you're monetized, you rate yourvideo whether or not it's
sustainable for ads, and there'sa whole bunch of questions.
It's inappropriate language,adult content, violence, and it

(39:18):
goes on like so you admit toyoutube that you have, uh, you
know, adult content in yourvideo or whatever.
Now, usually for me I don'tcuss or anything, so I go
through those really quickly andI say none of the above.
When I click that, youtubetells me at the very bottom,
before I hit next, it says yourrating accuracy is high, so
we'll monetize your video withyour input.

(39:39):
If there's a strong sign yourinput isn't inaccurate, your
monetization says, may change.
So there is a system in placefor monetization where I'm being
judged every time I upload avideo and they're saying right
now, we trust you don't screw upis how I read into this.
And so if that system exists forad suitability, could it not

(40:00):
exist for?
You know, community guidelines,like things that you bump up
against my something to add wasexactly what dan just said.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
So well done, dan.
Yeah, it's just, but there's atrust system already in the
monetization level.
So is there something that'shidden behind the scenes, or
more of a just like acceptedcontent level that we just don't
know about?

Speaker 1 (40:22):
this feels like a new segment on the podcast youtube
conspiracy theories.
Maybe we will start this in thecoming weeks, which means you
got to hit subscribe if youhaven't already or if you're
listening to the audio podcast.
Definitely make sure you'releaving us a great review.

Speaker 3 (40:34):
Can we license the x files music?
In the meantime, I'll do amanual version of it.
Speaking dan, have you watchedx?

Speaker 1 (40:48):
files.
No, no, of course he hasn'tanything that was ever popular
you.

Speaker 3 (40:54):
You have earned a television down at some point in
your life, right?

Speaker 4 (40:57):
yeah I'm building a plex library.

Speaker 1 (41:01):
Yeah, he has a television next to his dvd
collection plex um next one.
And again, you can send us amessage hang on.

Speaker 3 (41:09):
I'm sorry I need to pause this podcast.
Weird plex dan, but okay oh hey, hey, all right I love you none
of the vid.

Speaker 1 (41:22):
Iq main channel would have heard that joke anyway, uh
, if you're again, if you wantto send us a message, you and
you're listening to audiopodcast, there's a link in the
show notes to allow you to senda sex message.
Or if you're listening toeverywhere else on the youtubes
and all the other places, youcan, of course, send us an email
to the boost at vid iqcom,which is exactly what this next
person did death city mutants.

(41:44):
We were a band that was on ourway in the 90s, that had
something of a large localfollowing, but we broke up like
bands do.

Speaker 2 (41:53):
Oh, the drama.

Speaker 1 (41:55):
A fan from back then had dug up an old video and put
it on YouTube and we saw somecomments and the guys and I have
been talking about getting backtogether, so we started to load
some of our old songs ontoYouTube and create AI videos for
them, since we didn't have anyvideo footage from back in the
day.
Anyway, I have another YouTubechannel, so I've been fans of
your show for a while.
We recently got back in thestudio and we were recording

(42:15):
some new songs and riffing andjamming, came up with these two
songs for vidIQ and all you dofor us.
I hope you enjoy and we haven'tmade a video for them, but
maybe we have a unique sound.
We were a Celtic punk hair bandis probably the best way to
describe us, so it might not beyour style, but we hope you
enjoy.
We love a review of, or someideas how we can better grow our
channel, recapture our old fanbase, introduce our music to a

(42:35):
wider audience.
Our channel is death citymutant, so I have both songs.
I will play them.
I will not play the entire songbecause it'll take forever
however, uh, there are very one.
Is uh a theme, more or less atheme song uh to this show.
So let's listen to that firstis anyone familiar with celtic

(42:56):
hairband?

Speaker 3 (42:57):
I've never heard of this.

Speaker 2 (42:58):
I have an idea in my mind, what this is going to
sound like.
Well, wait until you hear it.

Speaker 1 (43:03):
Wait until you hear it.
Okay, this is the first one.
This is, uh, basically would belike the tube talk uh vid iq
podcast kind of theme song.
Here we go.
I'd like to point out this isnot ai, by the way, so that's
the other thing.
Uh, well, you say that well,they said they went back in the
studio.

(43:24):
This is the problem with this.
I am super impressed by someonemaking an actual song for us
like it overly impresses me.
But we are now in a in a timewhere ai music is so prevalent
that you almost expect it, right?
Yeah, I'm assuming none of thisis ai.
I'm just going to give themprops.
They were a 90s band.
They didn't have ai music backthen.
This is music.
I believe this is brand new.
Literally, they went to astudio.

(43:44):
I believe this with all myheart.
Here we go.

Speaker 5 (43:57):
I found my clan in the digital mist Through voices
that cut like a blade.
They speak the words I need tohear when the battles make me
afraid, tragedy, kind.
My way Through the storm andthrough the fight, we rise

(44:21):
together.
We fall as one.
In the noise, we find our voice.

Speaker 3 (44:31):
I'm just imagining you two now walking down as a
mixed tag team match atWrestleMania.

Speaker 1 (44:39):
I'm a mark for any time that someone says my name
in a song.
I'm always about that.
So that's the first one and weappreciate it.
If you're listening to theaudio podcast, maybe we'll put
it at the very end of the audiopodcast, but voices that cut
like a knife.
Now there's another song, andwhat I love about this song is
the chorus.
So if you're listening to theaudio podcast, you'll probably

(45:00):
hear more of it than on the mainvideo channel.
Probably on the main videochannel you'll probably just
hear the chorus, but here,listen to what the hook is for
this.
I love it.

Speaker 5 (45:08):
The wasteland of forgotten channels, where any
algorithm feeds on dying hope.
I watch creators fall likebroken angels, their dreams
consumed by the machine's coldthroats.
When the fuse are bleeding outand the passion turns to doubt,

(45:37):
what would Rob Wilson do whenthe platform tears you through?
Would he stand and fight thewar or accept there's nothing
left?
Rob, you just got a theme song.
What would Rob Wilson do?
Stop, tell me.
What would Rob Wilson?

Speaker 1 (45:55):
do I mean hello?

Speaker 3 (45:58):
Here's what I do.
I go to settings, advancedfeatures, delete channel Done.

Speaker 1 (46:09):
Savage, rob Wilson, death City Mutants.
Thank you so much.

Speaker 3 (46:15):
Immediately.
That song is going to be putinto Slack Live streams spot.
What would Rob Wilson do?

Speaker 1 (46:23):
We need the shirt.
Where's the shirt?

Speaker 2 (46:26):
What would Rob Wilson ?

Speaker 1 (46:26):
do with the horns.
Yeah, yeah, we need that.

Speaker 2 (46:29):
I love it so much.

Speaker 1 (46:31):
I think what you just did, uh, they were like you
know what kind of things can wedo to grow?
I think you just did it.
Uh, we have to play that songin at least one vid iq channel.
Uh as your theme song, as yourintro, like when you come on,
what would?
I agree, I can see you likeflying through skies and, like
you know, uh knocking out, um,uh, monetization the yellow

(46:53):
things and hitting them like asuperhero.

Speaker 3 (46:55):
We've also been talking about having a more
corporate end screen, so I thinkjust that for 20 seconds at the
end of every single video.

Speaker 4 (47:03):
There's a lot of YouTubers that kind of do that
kind of end screen where theyfeature a song or whatever.
You could do that.

Speaker 3 (47:10):
And you know what we should do Whenever it's somebody
else.
Like it just has the AI voicecome in.
What would Jen do I was?

Speaker 2 (47:20):
going to say I'm cutting to that song at least
once in every video I make.
From here on out, just a dark,black and white screen of
eternal struggling.
What would Rob Wilson do?

Speaker 1 (47:32):
I hope that that was edited so amazingly during the
the video here, because what anamazing song.
Thank you so much, destinymutants.
Okay, last thing we're gonna doa little game.

Speaker 4 (47:40):
Hang on they wanted some advice.

Speaker 1 (47:42):
Well, that's what I'm .

Speaker 3 (47:43):
Oh, yeah, okay well, yeah, we said delete the channel
down yeah, that is what youwould do.

Speaker 4 (47:50):
So yeah, I guess there's your answer.

Speaker 1 (47:53):
No, um, music is hard .
Not gonna, not gonna lie,that's a hard one.
Uh, anyone have any advice fora music channel trying to gain
back their?
Uh, I mean, other than doingthe obvious, which would be like
covers I.

Speaker 4 (48:05):
I have a couple things, so one I noticed in
their email.
Of course they're like well, we, we got some of our songs and
used ai visuals for them and Iwanted to just let them know
that you should pay attention tothe comments on those, see how
people are vibing with it,because if you use, obviously,
ai visuals, people might assumeit's ai music as well.

Speaker 1 (48:24):
And if you don't want that assumption you know that's
.

Speaker 4 (48:26):
That's something I would just consider, and the
other thing I was going to sayis that you already have this
talent and the writing isexcellent.
I would say you should be makingsongs for other things, even
like it's not songs you wouldnecessarily put in an album just
to gain attention in youtubeand youtube shorts like write a
song about current events, uh,you know, whatever it is that's

(48:48):
interesting you, whether it'spolitics or just like
entertainment, news or whateverit is, and the the like what
would rob wilson do is likethere's a funny song.

Speaker 2 (48:57):
I don't know if it's intending to be funny, I think
it's funny to us.

Speaker 4 (48:59):
But like the, the comedy is there in, sometimes
just pointing things out withmusic, and I think you could get
a lot of traction on yourregular stuff if you do really
off the wall stuff like thatwait, have you guys seen the
tiktok, where they make an emosong using only taco bell hot
sauce packets as lyrics?

Speaker 2 (49:18):
what wait, you guys need to get on the side of
tiktok.
I'm on.
I'll slack that to you guyslater, but it's I.
It made me think of from likewhat dan was saying, though,
because I've also seen umcreators who like make an entire
song of just like amazonreviews and like things that are
generally funny, but also likeyour musical talent is like
backing that up.
So I think there is a lot ofopportunity to have fun, since

(49:42):
the humor is there, but, ofcourse, with your own original
music yeah, I think using yourmusical talent in unique ways
gets people's attention,especially on shorts I love it.

Speaker 1 (49:53):
All right.
So final thing we're going toplay a little game here.
We are each going to have likea little hot take and see if we
can convince the other peoplethat our hot take is correct.
So I'll start, and that issuper simple.
I believe titles are moreimportant than thumbnails.
Change my mind, jen start.
Do you think you agree with me,as you should, because I'm

(50:17):
right, or do you disagree withme and tell me why?

Speaker 2 (50:20):
you said which ones are more important titles no,
I'm gonna disagree why, I usedto think this was the case until
title testing came out don'tuse YouTube against me.

Speaker 1 (50:33):
What's wrong with you ?

Speaker 2 (50:36):
I used to think that was the case.
I think that, no matter what,you have to have the best
thumbnail to grab attention andthe title is what makes somebody
watch.
But I don't think you couldjust have a title stand on its
own as the most importantfeature.

Speaker 1 (50:57):
Okay, rob Wilson, what do you think?

Speaker 3 (50:59):
I'm going to be a bit of a fence sitter here and say
that if you're very familiarwith the creator, then you just
see the thumbnail and click andwatch.
You don't really care what thetitle is.
I think if you're unfamiliarwith the creator, the thumbnail
will catch your attention andthen the title, yes, will
probably convince you to click.
But there's also theconsideration of you always need

(51:22):
a title.
You don't always need athumbnail, because that can be
automatically selected for you.
So you know, I'm kind of like51% 49.
So you know, I'm kind of like51 49, like yeah, probably the
title confirms the click, butlike the viewers got to get to
reading that title and I thinkthe thumbnail helps a long way.

(51:43):
But and also, you've gotautoplay as well.
On mobile you only see thethumbnail for like barely a
second.
Then the video starts playingas well.
So yeah, yeah, I'm convincingmyself that, travis, I think you
might be right.

Speaker 4 (51:54):
I'm firmly in your camp where I think it really
depends on the creator and thevideo.
They're certainly created todemonstrate it, neither matter.
Like I think I'm alwayscritical where he just puts
sometimes a couple words andhe's just staring at the camera.
You build up a personality likethat and the following is like
you don't really have to worryabout it or, for all we know,
he's tested a lot of things.
He stresses that stuff, justlike we do.

(52:15):
For all we really know.
I don't know the guy, um, butyeah, I I definitely can see why
a title would matter.
Uh, I could see why you couldjust use a thumbnail with the,
the title, just as like a, anempty character or something, or
period or something like that.
I've seen that work too.
So it just it's that likeanything on youtube.
I really think it depends um,but I see where you're coming

(52:36):
from.

Speaker 1 (52:36):
So my whole thought behind it is not the, the edge
cases of, like someone who's sopopular you can put whatever and
it works, or the people whonever give views, because,
whatever I think about all thethings that uh matter to a
creator, which is the, theactual view right, which is the
click and um, sometimes the thetitle does that, but we've seen

(52:57):
so many times.
Or the thumbnail does that.
We've seen so many times wherethe thumbnail is trash and the
video has millions of views andit just so happens, the title is
really interesting.
So that was my hot take on that, rob.
What is your hot take and whatshould we convince you of?

Speaker 3 (53:09):
all right.
So I I wanted to google this tomake sure I said this correctly
.
But, like creators, this is atwo creators if you love
something enough, you need toset it free, and that is
subscribers.
What am I in by that is?
Now we have this new metric,which, at the top end of it, is

(53:31):
called monthly viewers, monthlyaudience.
That is basically yoursubscriber count, because, like
it's more Well, it's kind ofit's more temporary, it's like a
reflection of where yourchannel is right now, rather
than how many people haveclicked on a red button.

(53:53):
And I think, in order to letthe subscriber button free, it
means that it could be reclaimedby viewers, because right now,
in my opinion, the subscriberbutton is trash.
You click on it and then youhave this one page of
subscriptions and it doesn't doanything else.
There are new tools that arekind of screwing things over a

(54:13):
little bit.
What I've heard a lot is thatpeople who maybe, for example,
live in the Netherlands but theywatch a lot of English contents
and now auto-dubbing isautomatically defaulting their
language to their nativelanguage, even though they
prefer to listen in English.

(54:33):
So I'm thinking about how thesubscriber button could help on
that, like you could setdefaults for channels Like I
want to listen to this channelin its default language, like
not necessarily the one thatYouTube decides through
auto-dubbing, or if I amwatching a channel and I've
watched a few videos instead ofme having to subscribe to the

(54:56):
channel, it prompts you.
I would say you've beenwatching this channel quite a
while.
Would you like to subscribe tothem?
With these options Like show me, send me notifications when is
when we go live, or send menotifications when there's a new
show or long form, like a lotmore customization other than
like the three options you haveright now, and I think that only
works if the viewer isbasically in control of a

(55:19):
subscriber button rather than itbeing this all important, not
very important vanity metric forcreators all that to say,
subscribers don't matter.

Speaker 1 (55:29):
Is that what you're saying?
Hot take, yes, yeah, all righthard.
I agree with this.

Speaker 3 (55:35):
I'm not even gonna argue oh, oh well, it's not
really hot.
Take then, is it?

Speaker 4 (55:38):
yeah, you're not very good at the game, it's a very
lukewarm.

Speaker 3 (55:40):
Yeah, I'm ready to go rob.

Speaker 2 (55:42):
I was.
That's funny.
I was gonna have one of mine belike.
Your audience is.
Who's unsubscribed not?

Speaker 4 (55:47):
your subscribers.
Hey, hey, I like that, but alsobad at the game, like it's not
controversial.
Yeah, exactly bad, I thinkmaybe listeners thanks for
taking that bullet, rob.

Speaker 2 (55:59):
Glad I didn't use that one what do you think about
, like?

Speaker 3 (56:03):
do you think the the subscribe button should be
binned, or do you think it needsto be resurrected?
Do you think it do you thinkabout, like do you think the
subscribe button should bebinned, or do you think it needs
to be resurrected?
Do you think it can be savedand used for a new purpose?

Speaker 1 (56:15):
My hot take is get rid of the subscriber number and
the view numbers on videos.
That's my hot take.

Speaker 3 (56:19):
Would you replace it with anything, because I tease
the idea of replacing it withmonthly active viewers.

Speaker 2 (56:24):
I saw that and I liked the way it looked.

Speaker 3 (56:33):
I think it would put even more pressure on creators.
Well, like if your publicnumber could move so much from
month to month.

Speaker 2 (56:37):
That feels like there'd be a lot of pressure I
think that depends on the kindof content you make, because if
I'm watching a long and it'sshowing that number and they're
a shorts creator like, that's nocredibility for their long form
content.
Like do you know what I'msaying?
Like you get, oh, you get likethree monthly million views or
something, but you just startedmaking like it's all shorts,

(56:57):
like do you know what I mean?
Well, yeah, a little bit like Idon't know family friend, now
slowly fading into a distance.

Speaker 3 (57:06):
John would have that problem, wouldn't it?
Because, like, he's had shortswhich get hundreds, what tens of
millions of views, but he'salso making long form content in
a moment and he's trying tofigure out how to, you know, get
those views from shorts to ones, and right now he's getting
thousands of views.
And so, as you say, like, thisguy gets 60 million active views
a month.

Speaker 2 (57:25):
It seems like sketchy when you look at it in that
sense, because you're seeing avideo.
Yeah, I don't know.
I I will own it all the time.
I need a little bit of socialproof because there is so much
content in the world like I as aviewer, like I will own up to
the fact, like I will take thatI will watch a video that has
more views over a new video forthe most part terrible.

(57:49):
I've been there um it's I mean,I'm not gonna not watch a video
because they don't have views,but if it's, if they're versus
each other, I'm gonna watch theone with just more credibility
like it's.
It is probably gonna be abetter viewer experience for me
than somebody's second video,and that's just like matter of
fact it proves the longevity ofthe channel in a way, and, like

(58:09):
you, assume that they've.

Speaker 4 (58:10):
They've taken their licks to get to where they are
and they are going to produce amore succinct answer to your
question, for example, orsomething like that.
It is unfair thank you greatfair to the new creators who are
working hard, but is definitelylike a passive thing going on
in my brain as I'm looking forvideos.

Speaker 2 (58:25):
I would say it's unfair, though, because those
creators have put in their time.

Speaker 4 (58:30):
They've earned that, but like well, hold on, because
then you talk about clickbaitstarts a new channel and they've
put in their time, but it's anew channel, I don't know here's
.

Speaker 1 (58:39):
Here's the answer.
This is the answer.
Listen, I'm just gonna tell you, I'm gonna solve surprise guys.

Speaker 2 (58:43):
this is my hot take.
Now I started a war, let metake advantage of this.

Speaker 1 (58:50):
You remove the views and you put in something that's
a an amalgamation of cause.
You know, youtube always tellsus that they have these, these
signals of people enjoying thecontent.
You put that there instead,either like a like percentage or
a view.
Like average viewer likes thisat 80 percent, or something like
that kind of like what netflixdid.

(59:10):
If you remember, netflix tookaway the thumbs up, thumbs down
percentage and they've they'venow changed it with something
like things you'll like and it'slike an algorithmic.
This is a percent, so give it apercentage of what you'll like
this, the chances of you likingthis like 80 percent, almost
like uh, what is it?
Rotten tomatoes.
Give me that instead.
I don't need to know the views.
Tell me how much I'm gonna likethis video this is a hotter
take no, no what damn, let meexplain something to you.

(59:35):
I can find five different?
Absolutely not I'm not sayingpeople should do hot tomatoes,
I'm just saying there are.
I can give you five videos withmillions of views you would not
interested in.
But if the percentage theresaid dan's only 10 gonna like
this, you're probably not gonnawatch it.

Speaker 4 (59:48):
No streaming service has gotten this right, though so
far netflix tries I didn't stopmy problem like I'm just saying
youtube is not gonna get thatright and, like rotten tomatoes,
judges movies so poorly, likewhether it's critic reviews or
user reviews.
I've gotten I've seen moviesthat have such amazing rotten
tomato Tomatoes scores.

Speaker 1 (01:00:03):
You see movies done.
He's actually seen them.

Speaker 5 (01:00:06):
He's on Plex, guys.
He's on Plex.

Speaker 4 (01:00:10):
Plex has Rotten Tomatoes built in.
I've stopped judging based offof it because it gets wrong for
me personally all the time.

Speaker 1 (01:00:18):
But there's no algorithm for that.

Speaker 4 (01:00:20):
I'm talking about using algorithms.
That's the problem.
I don't think an algorithm cannail it.

Speaker 1 (01:00:24):
It already has.

Speaker 4 (01:00:25):
But it doesn't know my mood.

Speaker 2 (01:00:26):
Okay, but what if I want to watch something new?
How is it going to know if I'mgoing to like?

Speaker 1 (01:00:30):
it.

Speaker 5 (01:00:30):
Look at your homepage .

Speaker 2 (01:00:31):
If.
I Google right now how to makebutter by hand.

Speaker 4 (01:00:36):
They're going to be like there's a 0% chance.
You like this, it's alreadydoing this, I know, but my doom
scroll starts at the homepage.
That's what I'm saying page.
That's what I'm saying.
Sometimes I'm not in the mood.
Sometimes I hit watch later andI come back to it later because
I'll be in the mood maybe later.
But that's the thing.
Like I just don't want to godeeper down that rabbit hole.
I already doom scroll enough.
This sounds like a you problemdan I'm probably not alone.

(01:00:58):
There's probably other peoplewho feel like I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:01:00):
I'm kind of youtube chill, I'm kind of team dan I, I
am, I, I kind of am.
I also feel like YouTubesuggestions have gotten like a
little quick to assume things Iwant to watch again.

Speaker 1 (01:01:16):
I still don't think that views answer that question
succinctly or accurately, buthaving said that, we'll hold on
to that conversation for anothertime.
Dan, what is your hot take aswe wrap this thing up?

Speaker 4 (01:01:32):
My hot take just became a little more serious.
I'm gonna go with my silly one.
Maybe we'll come back to it.
Um, I think that cat videos arethe best videos.
Oh, no, hard stuff goodbye, Ithink it's been nice to know you
, dan.
Now here's the thing anyone canmake a cat video and have it
take off.
All they need is a cat and acrappy phone camera.
It doesn't matter if they knowhow to edit, it doesn't matter

(01:01:53):
if the cat's really doinganything, it's just.
It just works.
Cats, people like cats.
However, if you've like a dogand you want to do the same
thing with a dog dogs yeah, yougot to impress me dogs.
I expect some training isinvolved.
I expect that dog do somethingcool.
Cats, oh my gosh.
It looks so adorable and that'scat videos and anyone can do it
.
You don't even need to be likea youtuber, you don't have to

(01:02:14):
watch vid iq to do cat videos.
Just do cat videos and youcould get views.

Speaker 3 (01:02:19):
The cat videos are easy cat videos are the best
videos you know, this podcastand video is going to be so
weird now because we're justgoing to have these moments of
silence where, like, all ofDan's stuff is going to be
edited out, because everythingyou've just said is invalid.

Speaker 2 (01:02:34):
Wait, wait, wait.
Okay, dan, I am not actuallygoing to argue this too much
because I think cats do like thedumbest stuff, like my dog is
quite dumb, but not as dumb as acat.
Literally like accidentallyhead-butted.

(01:02:59):
The front door this morning waslike forgot it was closed, like
I, he, but a cat will likeliterally fall down the side of
a fridge for no reason at all.
And it's funny because cats likeare always like.
Okay, I feel like I mean, atleast I have eight more lives
after that.
So I do think there's alwayssomething funny to watch about a
cat.

Speaker 1 (01:03:20):
That's interesting.

Speaker 2 (01:03:21):
I think this also kind of falls into like children
getting hurt too Like whoa what?

Speaker 4 (01:03:26):
Not what, what?
What are you?
Was that?

Speaker 1 (01:03:29):
your take.
Let's edit that out.

Speaker 2 (01:03:30):
We don't want to get canceled children getting hurt
videos are the best children aretaking over you're not gonna
have to give youtube your creditcard information to watch this
video this turned into just roband travis doing a podcast and
both we've just been age gatingyou know what this is is because
I'm watching so much like dailydose videos and there's always

(01:03:51):
like kids and cats in the samecompilation of like them falling
like off their bike in like ahilarious way, not actually
getting hurt.
Wait, you guys not watch dailydose no, I avoid content like
that oh my god, it like autoplays on my tv.
It's so funny falling off ofstuff and getting like auto
plays on my TV.

Speaker 4 (01:04:07):
It's so funny, falling off of stuff and getting
maimed and I can't.

Speaker 2 (01:04:10):
It's so funny, obviously like they're okay
Cause it's on the internet.

Speaker 1 (01:04:14):
Actually, I'm going to ask one thing before we go,
and this is something that Jenand I talked about.
I'm not going to tell you whichside of the fence we land on.
We talked about a concept ofwhen you're, if you're on your
home page and you're like, oh, Iwant to watch that, I want to
watch, I want to watch that, doyou click on it and open it into
a new tab and fill up tabs andthen go through your tabs and

(01:04:35):
watch them, or do you just watchthem and then like, go back and
go back and forth?
Do you?
Do you pop open new tabs, rob,and do you think it's weird?

Speaker 3 (01:04:50):
and do you think it's ?

Speaker 1 (01:04:51):
weird, I tend to just add it to watch later and then
okay, so you use watch later.

Speaker 4 (01:04:53):
Yeah, like an like on and off 2010, okay, uh dan, my
watch later list currently has400 plus videos, so is it useful
at that point?
Uh well, most of them I'vewatched and you can just click a
button to clear it.
But uh no, I go to it a lot.
It has.
It's useful because I can useit on TV and my phone and
everything else.

Speaker 1 (01:05:09):
But if you're like on your desktop and you're like,
you know I got lunch break here.
I'm just going to watch threeor four videos.
Do you pop them out in the newtabs or do you just watch them
consecutively?

Speaker 4 (01:05:17):
I guess I just don't use my desktop in that way, so I
probably wouldn't.
Yeah, I probably don't.

Speaker 1 (01:05:23):
As usual, dan messes up the question.
We appreciate you for watchingus here this week.
If you're watching on the mainchannel, there's a link in the
description below for theunedited version of this video.
Trust me when I tell you youmissed a lot of stuff.
And if you're listening to theaudio podcast, you know, leave
us a five-star review, eventhough we talked about kids
getting hurt.
I don't know why Okay?

Speaker 2 (01:05:43):
Why we did Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:05:43):
Okay, jen did that I didn't do that.

Speaker 2 (01:05:46):
We just had to add a little more controversy to that
episode.

Speaker 1 (01:05:48):
All these videos are going into restricted mode now
If we're in restricted mode andyou have not seen?

Speaker 2 (01:05:52):
us.
It's my fault.

Speaker 1 (01:05:54):
It's definitely Jen and Dan's fault a little bit.
Definitely, make sure you hitthis button right here where you
can subscribe to our podcastchannel and watch the full
unedited episode right here.
We'll see you in the next one.