This article mentions that a troll is getting ad revenue. Which makes me assume that the author would like to benefit from ad revenue themselves.
Do any alternatives exist in that space? Facebook's revenue share and copyright detection algorithms are even worse; Patreons work for existing fanbase. Youtube is probably your only choice for public viewing monetisation.
Firstly, it’s not a given everybody wants to monetise everything.
Secondly, advertising is only one form of monetisation. As a classical music fan myself, I am not going to enjoy any video that takes that route - I’d be happier with a sponsorship route or a “click here to buy on music services” (or even “click here to buy tickets for our upcoming performances”), link.
Lastly, yes, other video platforms offer advertising, and they will only get better if content producers make them more competitive with YouTube.
It’s such a crazy small pittance that a creator gets from ad revenue. I watched a video recently of a YouTube channel with 3 million subscribers doing a breakdown of how they make money, and they make $700 a month off the advertising. Luckily they have a Patreon that they make $30,000 a month off of, which they’ve used to make some really amazing content. It’s sort of bizarre that they even run the ads on their videos, honestly, as you’d think not running them would increase appeal leading to more Patreon subscribers.
I watched a video recently of a YouTube channel with 3 million subscribers doing a breakdown of how they make money, and they make $700 a month off the advertising.
What's the channel? This doesn't sound right. At all.
Copyright trolls are parasites, I would have a huge problem with them benefiting off my stuff even if I myself wouldn't make a dime on it. You can easily make arguments in favor of rental housing, usury and such, but there is absolutely no defense for this kind of behavior, I just find it immoral.
