• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • Without knowing much my initial reaction to the Instagram announcement about their new IGTV is it's going to be great way to get us to spend more time on the app but it won't replace YouTube. If anything it will just be another tool creators use to build an audience that they'll eventually want to send to YouTube...

      My thinking here is that YouTube PAYS it's creators, something neither FB/IG or Snapchat really do. Build an audience on IG but send them to YouTube to to pay the bills. Or in Logan Paul's case, buy a house and car(s).

      What was everyone else's reaction to the announcement?

    • *EDIT "Instagram is planning to offer direct monetization, potentially including advertising revenue shares, but hasn’t finalized how that will work."

      That changes the question. Will it monetize as well or better then YouTube does for creators?

    • That's pretty fascinating. First, that it's portrait mode like SnapChat and the way you use your phone when talking on FaceTime. It seems to me that if they share profits with creators, they have an enormous upside.

      I don't know how I feel about Instagram becoming an everything app. Facebook did that and I guess they have the data to prove that it worked but sometimes I wonder why it worked.

    • YouTube has persevered through the rise of streaming, facebook video, and the demise of cable television, and I think that's attributed to the ad share with individual creators. It's unlike any other major video platform in that way. It continues to produce massive amounts of unique content.

      Individual content creators' videos often get far more views than big-time TV shows, like 60 Minutes for example. Casey Neistat's loyal 10 million subscribers dwarf primetime television active viewers.

      IGTV can't even start to compete until there's ad share. And historically Kevin Systrom has been against paying for content creation, so I wonder where his thinking is.

      Even with ad share, they have a hard act to follow, with 100 million hours viewed on YouTube a day. And YouTube runs on everything from my Sony TV to my phone. Both their mobile and desktop experiences are wonderful for viewing fullscreen content, unlike Instagram's app-first approach. I think IGTV will just become another commodity, like Facebook video.

      This is a different beast. I think Instagram going to lose this one as Google Plus did to Facebook.

    • Thanks for your thoughts I concur. "I think IGTV will just become another commodity, like Facebook video."I think we'll see creators use this aggressively but with the sole purpose of growing the audience to maybe sell some sponsored posts or merch after. The real money is in YouTube for creators like Casey. They've built entire teams and businesses around that monetization.

      The app first vs. desktop is a huge part of it too. YouTube will essentially be the future comcast. They're the platform empowering other channels and networks to monetize and grow with them.

    • I think Instagram was forced to do this. Increasing the video usage was growing and they need to keep that area growing. Youtube can impliment vertical video on mobile phones when and if they choose. And like you pointed out Youtube has monetization already. It will be interesting to see if Instagram splits revenue with creators. Plus, its not like a phone can't do horizontal video :) Vertical is still seen as niche.

    • Apparently YouTube has has support for vertical video for a while. I've never actually seen it.

      Most if not all of the serious vloggers that are actually making money on YouTube have pretty serious camera setups and seem to spend a lot of time color grading, mixing music, editing, etc in Adobe Premiere or Final Cut Pro. I wonder how appealing it will be to them to start using their phones when they've already invested so much time and money on their production quality.

      Assuming they will have simple editing tools, I can see how this may be a way to attract the more casual crowd who have a slight interest in vlogging, but I can't imagine this taking away any major market share from YouTube.

    • After what I just said, I went on Instagram and got an alert about a new video from Chris Burkard.

      Looks like they are just re-edits of previous videos to make sure that credits and subjects are in view due to the vertical format.

      I must say that it kinda works and might keep me in the app longer. Although since Chris Burkard's work is mostly about beautiful landscapes, the vertical format left so much detail out.

    • What's so beautiful about YouTube is that they've found a way to let individuals rise from the masses to become powerhouse content creators while filtering out the noise. Great content rises to the top, boring content dies, and toxic content is well moderated. That's a hard act to follow.

    • Yeah, looks like a big deal for creators. They're starting a Patreon-like program on YouTube:

      Most notably, YouTube is expanding a program over the next few weeks that lets creators and channel owners start their own fan clubs, where membership costs $4.99 to join and fans can pay for additional perks and exclusive content

      Pretty cool for content creators! Do you think the timing of this news is in reaction to IGTV's announcement?

    • I think Instagram timed their release to be before Vidcon. Vidcon is planned in advance. I also bet each company knew what the other was doing, I like to think there are spies everywhere :p

    • I also bet each company knew what the other was doing, I like to think there are spies everywhere :p

      Yes. For many large companies including FB/Google, that, and then some, most definitely happens.

    • So, now that I've been consuming content on IGTV for a few days now, my opinion has changed. A few takeaways:

      - A huge strength of theirs is that it's immediately interesting to most Instagram users because IGTV caters to what those users follow. I follow a lot of climbers, so my first experience with IGTV is with people I'm familiar with climbing cool things. It feels maybe a bit more frictionless compared to YouTube. YouTube still relies on search to get interesting videos. A new YouTube user has to start searching before YouTube can serve interest-targeted content on the homepage. But who's a new user on YouTube? Just about the entire connected planet uses YouTube.
      - The UI is super slick. Swipe gestures make it easier to get from video to video.
      - There's some really high production value content available already, but it feels like they're skimping on streaming quality. The bitrate seems lower or maybe their compression is just not as good as YouTube's.
      - Big Instagram public figures are really embracing it. A lot of these IG people don't have a prominent YouTube channel. Maybe there's going to be a rise of new IG video creators that will live solely live on IG. The Casey Neistat's on YouTube and Chris Burkhart's on IG can coexist as video distributors on their respective platforms.
      - It seems clear that IGTV is another monetization channel for IG influencers. These folks have business models optimized for monetizing Instagram posts/stories. It's common sense to take that one step further on IGTV. A key tool for monetization on IG is product placement, and they're already taking that with them into IGTV.

      I love YouTube and really don't like vertical video, but I'm kinda liking IGTV. Perhaps it'll rise from the commodities and become something great.

    • I’m having the opposite experience as I use it more.

      The icon/notification is super annoying and aggressive. For the users I follow, the content is mostly a rebroadcast of their stories, except edited to be less jumpy.


    • This is a general Instagram problem users are faced with: how do you show your content and how do you prefer to consume content? You can post in stories, add those stories as collections on your profile, post a traditional photo, video, or a set of photos/videos as one post, and now also share on a channel in IGTV. And each of those IG "channels" is not unique for sharing specific types of content. For example, IG influencers often abuse stories, something meant to be captured in the last 24 hours, to push their polished content taken some time ago, the same content seen in traditional posts. It makes stories ambiguous and not genuine.