Tuesday, April 17, 2018

YouTube Part Deux - Narrowcasting

Thanks to commenter Ratus to yesterday's post about YouTube, a picture seems to emerge to me.  Ratus points out that Chris Bartocci, of the Small Arms Solutions Channel has been a victim of YouTube. Chris writes:
On March 23rd we received our first strike on YouTube for our Caracal CAR816 A2 video. Someone in the comments section said they were reporting the video for "promotion of terrorism" because Caracal's main hub is in the UAE. Obviously, it could not be deemed as any such promotion of terrorism and it has been appealed. However, more than 2 weeks later and we have not heard anything. Then on April 1st we received our 2nd strike for a video that was posted months ago on the Glock 19x for "violence". Again, that has been appealed. Because of the 2nd strike they will not allow us to post on YouTube for two weeks.
Chris goes on to say he's in the process of moving all of his video content to other platforms:  GunStreamer.com, DailyMotion.com, and BitChute.com

One of the obvious issues with what Chris says is that his videos were reported to YouTube.  Which tells me some anti-gun nut saw the video and complained.  I think that's how it's going to work.  For all the channels I mentioned yesterday that seem intact and seem to not have been affected, some SJW is going to see something and complain.  Maybe someone saw him before and was stalking his channel for something to complain about.  Maybe they're being paid to search YouTube like Soros' Media Matters pays people to watch Fox News to find something to complain about.  Maybe not.  Regardless, someone is going to see a Ruger video for the Precision Rifle and decide it's too scary because it's black.  Or they're going to see a trick shooter like 22 plinkster shoot through a string of marshmallow Peeps and complain about the violence against Peeps. There's always something to complain about. 

In the 1980s, I read a book called, The Media Lab (long out of print), about the institution at MIT by that name.  The book introduced me to the concept of narrowcasting, in direct (deliberate) contrast to the idea of broadcasting that everyone grew up with from the dawn of TV until the mid-90s or so.  Narrowcasting is just that: aiming your TV program (and the advertising that sponsors it) to a narrow audience, and not trying to reach the entire country. 

In the era of hundreds of TV channels, the idea is obvious; it was less obvious in the '80s.  Programming like that found on the Outdoor Channel or World Fishing Network, to name a couple, will never have an audience the size as the major networks get for their big shows.  Last week, for example, the top rated show on the networks was the rebooted Roseanne series with 13.8 million viewers, while the last of the top 25 drew 5.9 million viewers.  It's difficult to get these numbers for shows on the small networks because they're so small, but I think tens of thousands instead of millions.

That's what I see YouTube dissolving into.  The attraction of YouTube, the good part was (note the past tense) that it was a vast reservoir of information - like the biggest library ever imagined.  If you wanted to learn how to troubleshoot your laser printer, it was there.  If you wanted to learn how to play some song on your guitar (or piano, or ukelele or...) it was there.  It's where I learned most of what I know about how to fix my sprinkler system.  If you wanted to learn how to take apart your new gun to clean it, with better visuals than the line drawings in the owner's manuals, that was there, too. 

What made YouTube worth hanging out on was the variety of content.  I have 25 videos on YouTube; 16 are related to converting my milling machine to CNC, and of the other 9, two are gun related and the rest are videos from Cabin Fever Expo trip in '15.  Now, if I want to watch videos on a new machining tool or technique, I'll go there; to learn how to clean my new gun I'll have to go somewhere else.

Instead of being a place people will tend to aggregate, their audience will drop as people interested in (what I can only conclude will be) a continually diminishing content follow their favored content, YouTube will diminish in importance in people's lives. 

We have several alternatives to YouTube for gun related videos.  Narrowcasting.  What we don't have is several alternatives to what YouTube used to be, and that's what we need. 

My built up GB-22 (last year).  Mark Serbu's videos of his were still online last night.


  1. What makes you think it wasn't YouTube that reported the Small Arms Solutions channel videos to YouTube? Based on there actions, I find that the most likely situation.

    I ask again:
    How much government money does Google get?
    Same question for Facebook.
    Same question for Twitter.
    Same question for Apple.
    Same question for Microsoft.

    Be sure to include the "black" money for the work they do under the table for "Law Enforcement".

    Why are they not held to the same standards as colleges and universities which ALSO take government money, and are thus subject to the Constitution, including its amendments? Couldn't have anything to do with the abject corruption of this country's "Law Enforcement" and its "Legal" system, could it?

    The stench is overwhelming. And it smells like pig.

  2. This is a feature of left wing "rule". They create what seems like a reasonable procedure where anonymous people can "tattle" on something they don't like and that puts an entire bureaucracy into high gear to crush the offending comment/book/video/etc. It all can be made to appear above board and "democratic" but it is by intent that it allows the accused no recourse and the Tattler no consequence regardless of their motive or intent.

    In Oregon a judge is actually facing a trail and jail time and it all stems from his decision to not perform same sex marriages. He was targeted by mostly anonymous complaints and clandestine attacks by the left/LGBTQ crowd. He was/is punished for his Christian views.

    Beware the hate from the left.