Olivers last post here cites users who are annoyed that Youtube makes money with the videos thy uploaded there.
Well, for the moment letâ€™s not talk about selling those videos. I would not like that either. But isnâ€™t it a bit weird to complain about Youtubes advertising revenues? Letâ€™s go back from where Youtube started not so long ago. This site provided a free (and user-friendly) platform where everybody could publish and share his videos. That was a real value for the users: You had made a video but you didnâ€™t have own webspace to publish it. And even if you had â€“ who would find your video there. Youtube was the solution to your problem. A place from which you could reach an audience as large as possible and at no charge!
I guess in those early times users didnâ€™t mind some ads around their videos. A platform like this surely is expensive and if the ads helped to cover those costs. That was probably seen as the better solution compared to taking fees from users. If anybody wasted a thought on Youtubes costs at all.
Somebody who publishes his video there has probably had a look at the site before. So he must be well aware that Youtube places ads beside and around the videos. Chances are good that the same thing will happen to this persons video. So he knows what he is up to and he is free to take his video elsewhere.
In the end of the day, a fact that was widely accepted earlier on has suddenly changed into a fact that is much harder to accept. My personal feeling is that the Internet- and Web 2.0-community is still so exited about the idea of â€œeverything is freeâ€ that they tend to forget that everything on the web causes some costs. Even this blog does. Somebody has to pay these costs. Often this is an enthusiastic private website owner, or a large corporation that sees the web as a marketing medium or a sponsor or â€“ users who click on ads.