>When you follow the money, how is any of this surprising? Murphy's Golden Rule - he who has the gold, makes the rules.

And advertising based business turns any content gradually into shit.

>So, if YT can't predict what a content creator will say or do, they can't reliably match ads to that content, and they can't reliably avoid disasters. Advertisers still want the impressions, so they have to go somewhere. As far as YT can tell, ad efficiency will be greater when associated with more predictable channels, all other things being equal.

And predictable translates into "same old".

>Another bonus is YT will even promote their content for free, in the form of recommendations.

Based on some algorithm which tries to guess what content will attract more ads.

>Some CCs are now finding they're getting fewer recommendations and views. What actions can they take?

Make their own YT and make sure they don't make it based on ads.

> Occam's Razor says that for monetized channels, it's really all about the Benjamins. But why admit that when you can frame it as a conspiracy?

"Monetized" is an ugly word, why not say "commercial"? And he can claim conspiracy when the algorithm suddenly changes. Though it's not just any sort of coup or old buddy network, this is simply two heaps of money looking for a way to enlarge themselves by cooperation at the expense of smaller heaps. They suddenly struck a deal.

>- A responsible person who wants to stay on YT can pay to promote their content on YT and/or other media. If they're monetized and want more revenue, they can also adjust their content to attract more impressions

They did, and they had millions of views. And it's not the content that's stopped attracting views, it's the algorithm that changed. They have a point there.

>- A responsible person will consider an alternative platform. Even though Google owns YT, a Google search of [youtube alternatives] brings up some mainstream examples. Or they could start their own e.g. CocoScope, ts.today
>
>AFAIC a YT pundit whining about a drop in page views is an asshole until proven otherwise.

Actually he's doing the right thing, commercially. Though I wouldn't call it whining, it's bitching about the algorithm change - and that's exactly the thing that attracts page views. Actually that's exactly what prompted some guy on a forum here to post a link so I finally heard about the guys. Smart move.