I always find it disturbing how many people follow channels like MrBeast's. I mean, what he's doing has no long-term cultural relevance. None, zero. Nothing he makes will be relevant 30 years from now. Maybe not even 1 year from now.
His content is just completely hollow of any cultural value. A total waste of time. Pure entertainment.
I just wish people wanted better for themselves than to be entertained.
My test of merit is if a video is rewatchable. Lots of YT videos I've watched I will rewatch months or years later because there is some genuine value in them, or I learned something from them that I want to re-up/refresh myself on. But when the only goal of a video is simply to get you to watch it, then there is inevitably not going to be any reason to rewatch it. Something new will always be put out by MR Beast that is "aggressively watchable" that folks will watch instead, but really - who wants to watch things just because they are watchable?That's like choosing a place to get lunch from not because the food is delicious, but because it is edible.
Entrepreneurship and art have both always required that a person follow their intuition and risk to see how the world will respond to their creation. This requires courage in the face of uncertainty. There was always a sense of adventure, of casting off into the unknown guided only by what you wanted to create and what you believe the world needs. It's Robert Persig's classic quandary of "what is quality?" Now that algorithms drive distribution, creators of every kind are fooled into a believing that there is much more concrete definition of what "good" is. Both consumers' taste and artist/entrepreneurs' taste are being tuned to line up more with what algorithm rules the day.
One other issue is that the reward cycle has become shorter, which shortens time horizons. I have an older relative who is a professional artist. He makes a few commissioned pieces each year, but most of his output goes into annual gallery shows. These shows lead to a few sales, and the sales put him in touch with collectors who then commission works. That time allows him to experiment and try new things - he's always changing up his technique - on a one-year cycle.
YouTube content creators, particularly those who are pursuing it as a primary career rather than a sideline (think MrBeast versus creators making videos promote their other services), cannot act in this way. A video that gets few views after initial release will never get surfaced by the algorithm, while videos that do succeed will produce immediate rewards. A creator can log into his channel account and see the payments stacking up in a real time.
It's rapid iteration, which is good for quickly optimizing in a search space, but as we know it is for the wrong metric. The creator can find the global minimum, but then its hard to metaphorically climb out if you want to do something else.
This suggests an interesting counter metric or measurement: quality as a function of reward cycle time.
Yes great point. The rapid iteration cycle is driving this change even faster. The algorithms have taken over both the steering wheel and the gas pedal. Thinking of Youtube even 6-7 years ago feels like an eternity ago. I suppose in the terms of internet age it has been several generations.
thanks - appreciate your thoughts on this document and how it relates. I agree that MrBeast lacks any goals other than "making good Youtube videos' as you say to appease the Holy Algorithm. And that is sad and means he will never create a real business.
Bezos -- even if you hate him -- you have to admit he did create an incredible business that has changed the world.
MrBeast isn't going to be doing that anytime soon. And the problem with being an "influencer" is it pigeonholes you into
As Venkatesh Rao of Ribbonfarm has put it, in the online economy you work above the API (manager, developer, data analyst) or you can work below the API (Uber driver, Doorash delivery guy, Amazon warehouse picker, YouTube content creator). Above the API, you determine how the system works. Below the API, the system determines how (and if) you work.
It’s Interesting contrasting him to Besos and Jobs, I think the main difference is that Mr Beast doesn’t seem to be looking at changing the rules of his game, they’re taken as fact. Besos played the monopoly game and won, Jobs played the tech-ecosystem anti-competitive game and won. But they both also heavily influenced lawmaking and manipulated/dodged tax law, played with and modified global trade, etc. mr beast doesn’t seem interested in re-coding the youtube algorithm, he just learned it, which to me speaks to a younger mindset of “I will game the system, I will not Change the system”. Besos especially would love a system void of labor rights and antitrust lawsuits, and he might get it. Johny just wants to make videos for the existing algorithm.
Funny how Gen Z is turning out to be *exactly* like every gen before it. It's about life stage.
Part of being young is believing your group (Gen Z...) is special. Part of being young is hating bureaucracy because you don't realize what it's for: it kills a lot of great ideas, but it also kills a LOT of terrible ideas, and when EVERY grandma needs to get her Social Security check EVERY month, you don't want stuff to break. Part of being young is believing in "results" over "hours"...mostly because who's against great results? Who likes boring hours? The only problem is that young people are too young to realize what "great" is and how long things take. Of course there are exceptions! But note they're not thinking about results vs. hours, they're telling YOU to think about results over hours because they want to further their own projects. Part of being young is not quitting smoking even as you whine a lot about smoking. TikTok is smoking.
And part of being young is having nothing to lose, in part because you're not there yet, and in part because nearly all of your choices will seem misguided or terrible in thirty years but are The Natural Thing to Do right now, mostly because you chose them. Flattened hierarchies and speed are great when you're a kid. And admittedly, some people live there all their lives (and if you make it past your mid-30s, it's working for you and you belong there). But most find that kids of their own, stability, and reasonable expectations of the future win (and if you don't think so, be VERY careful about who you date, since they probably do). Bureaucracy doesn't look so bad. We're starting to see this now as Gen Y moves painfully into its mid-30s.
Given the structural failures of the economy, where later generations have significantly less wealth than generations before, and all that potential inherited wealth is being sucked into the bank accounts of the ultra-wealthy, they're stuck in a state of having nothing to lose. That's why the common assumption that people become conservative as they age isn't holding true.
The reality is people become conservative when they feel like they have something to lose.
When you cannot imagine a world in which you can afford a house, and know that having a child would be an unmitigated financial disaster, why not just do whatever and spend all your free time on whatever amuses you?
I'm ahead of my time on getting screwed by the economy (GenX who did everything right and got shafted by life) and as I explained to my father: "Yes of course I saved at least 5% of all my earnings for retirement, but 5% of fuck-all is still just fuck-all compounded."
Seems like the older one is the more untrue that statement sounds. I'm GenX, and financed my first property at 7-5/8%, then my second house in the mid 6's. When I got 30-year money with a 3-handle a few years later, I thought I had hit the jackpot.
So...I disagree with that particular assertion about rates. But the main article was great!
I agree, it’s nuts to say that 5% is extraordinarily high, when the historical norm is closer to 7%, and we had rates in the high teens just one generation ago.
Also, Zero Interest Rate Policy is bad! That’s what created all this mess of social media and attention algorithms and everything else that made no sense except when too much money had nowhere better to go.
It’s sad and unfortunate that our economy is so fundamentally frail that we can’t even sustain 5% interest anymore. That’s a senescent economy.
I've tried! For whatever reason, I actually find myself clicking OFF them before I get to the 15 second mark. It's like, "Dude, no. I'm not watching this." I am obviously in the minority though. Ha.
Sadly, as a results oriented GenX worker, I can confirm the hours over results work culture of my generation. It's why so many of them are desperate to return to the office, because they conflate hanging around in the office talking about sports and having meetings about meetings with doing a good job. Apart from a few outliers like me, they've lived through automation being able to reduce our hours of work without being able to wrap their brains around what that actually means.
I have been fired or laid off so many times with these exact words: "Your technical accomplishments are excellent, and the customers/users love you, but you're just not a good fit."
TRANSLATION: You only do your job, but we want to spend time hanging out with someone like us, not some weird tech nerd with no interest in popular media or sports.
I think most people miss the point. Value doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It is only defined by making/doing something that is wanted by somebody. AND you must appease that somebody. This has never changed throughout history.
The Renaissance-era works of art we consider transcendent today and imbue with meaning, were mostly created to appease patrons. Indeed, any artist no matter how talented, who didn’t find a patron is either long forgotten, or never got rewarded (read money, status, recognition) for their work in their lifetime.
The reconnaissance artist appeased the patron; Jobs and Bezos, the customer. Beast, serves an algorithm.
You can either pontificate about meaning, quality, legacy etc, or crack the value code. Apparently, the latter is very difficult so most people would rather wax poetic about the former…
Boomer here, so take my comments with as many grains of salt as you wish. Have only watched a couple of Mr Beast videos to understand his appeal. How does his business model differ from those who create television shows except the feedback cycle is faster and each episode is a separate product (vs. being part of a series). Both seek to attract and retain viewership in order to increase ad revenue.
As regards to management style and communications preferences, each needs to fit the needs of the business you are in. Bezos believes, correctly in my opinion, that long form writing forces the writer to think more deeply about the topic and explain the logic/data that supports the opinion. Beast favors informal comms because the pace of his video production is faster and I suspect his team is more comfortable with that style.
I was going to post something similar. This is not a new phenomenon. Ask any aspiring Pop musician from the 50s or 60s how long the studio told them their song should be (no longer than 3 minutes).
There is a formula that those responsible for monetizing these types of things require so that eyeballs, ears, whatever are maximized. Heck, it’s in the definition “popular music”. It’s really hard to be popular and creatively authentic. The Beatles achieved it. Willie Nelson. More recently, Sturgill Simpson.
But I don’t totally agree with the sentiment below that it’s unique to Gen Z. Maybe it’s more concentrated but not wholly unique.
“Gen Z has grown up in a world dominated by mathematically-driven attention recommendations, prioritizing (SOMETIMES!) what does well over creative expression.”
Literally telling you he’s a beast in his name.. one of his sidekicks transitioned in real time for all kids to see… and has now been found to be much more of an evil human than first thought. You don’t rise to the top by playing it clean anymore
I always find it disturbing how many people follow channels like MrBeast's. I mean, what he's doing has no long-term cultural relevance. None, zero. Nothing he makes will be relevant 30 years from now. Maybe not even 1 year from now.
His content is just completely hollow of any cultural value. A total waste of time. Pure entertainment.
I just wish people wanted better for themselves than to be entertained.
My test of merit is if a video is rewatchable. Lots of YT videos I've watched I will rewatch months or years later because there is some genuine value in them, or I learned something from them that I want to re-up/refresh myself on. But when the only goal of a video is simply to get you to watch it, then there is inevitably not going to be any reason to rewatch it. Something new will always be put out by MR Beast that is "aggressively watchable" that folks will watch instead, but really - who wants to watch things just because they are watchable?That's like choosing a place to get lunch from not because the food is delicious, but because it is edible.
Well said
If you're keeping up on all the coffee spilling it's pretty fitting... he seems pretty hollow.
The content might feel hollow, but I think it’s unfair to say it has no value. Entertainment is personally valuable to some people.
Entrepreneurship and art have both always required that a person follow their intuition and risk to see how the world will respond to their creation. This requires courage in the face of uncertainty. There was always a sense of adventure, of casting off into the unknown guided only by what you wanted to create and what you believe the world needs. It's Robert Persig's classic quandary of "what is quality?" Now that algorithms drive distribution, creators of every kind are fooled into a believing that there is much more concrete definition of what "good" is. Both consumers' taste and artist/entrepreneurs' taste are being tuned to line up more with what algorithm rules the day.
One other issue is that the reward cycle has become shorter, which shortens time horizons. I have an older relative who is a professional artist. He makes a few commissioned pieces each year, but most of his output goes into annual gallery shows. These shows lead to a few sales, and the sales put him in touch with collectors who then commission works. That time allows him to experiment and try new things - he's always changing up his technique - on a one-year cycle.
YouTube content creators, particularly those who are pursuing it as a primary career rather than a sideline (think MrBeast versus creators making videos promote their other services), cannot act in this way. A video that gets few views after initial release will never get surfaced by the algorithm, while videos that do succeed will produce immediate rewards. A creator can log into his channel account and see the payments stacking up in a real time.
It's rapid iteration, which is good for quickly optimizing in a search space, but as we know it is for the wrong metric. The creator can find the global minimum, but then its hard to metaphorically climb out if you want to do something else.
This suggests an interesting counter metric or measurement: quality as a function of reward cycle time.
Yes great point. The rapid iteration cycle is driving this change even faster. The algorithms have taken over both the steering wheel and the gas pedal. Thinking of Youtube even 6-7 years ago feels like an eternity ago. I suppose in the terms of internet age it has been several generations.
"The Fed met yesterday and hiked rates by 50 bps, and the entire industry tuned in."
I think you meant lowered rates.
Yes i did! Thank you. I promise i knew that 😅 even made a video on it yesterday
thanks - appreciate your thoughts on this document and how it relates. I agree that MrBeast lacks any goals other than "making good Youtube videos' as you say to appease the Holy Algorithm. And that is sad and means he will never create a real business.
Bezos -- even if you hate him -- you have to admit he did create an incredible business that has changed the world.
MrBeast isn't going to be doing that anytime soon. And the problem with being an "influencer" is it pigeonholes you into
1. appeasing the Holy Algorithm,
2. not being too controversial, and
3. not doing anything else of any substance.
As Venkatesh Rao of Ribbonfarm has put it, in the online economy you work above the API (manager, developer, data analyst) or you can work below the API (Uber driver, Doorash delivery guy, Amazon warehouse picker, YouTube content creator). Above the API, you determine how the system works. Below the API, the system determines how (and if) you work.
It’s Interesting contrasting him to Besos and Jobs, I think the main difference is that Mr Beast doesn’t seem to be looking at changing the rules of his game, they’re taken as fact. Besos played the monopoly game and won, Jobs played the tech-ecosystem anti-competitive game and won. But they both also heavily influenced lawmaking and manipulated/dodged tax law, played with and modified global trade, etc. mr beast doesn’t seem interested in re-coding the youtube algorithm, he just learned it, which to me speaks to a younger mindset of “I will game the system, I will not Change the system”. Besos especially would love a system void of labor rights and antitrust lawsuits, and he might get it. Johny just wants to make videos for the existing algorithm.
Funny how Gen Z is turning out to be *exactly* like every gen before it. It's about life stage.
Part of being young is believing your group (Gen Z...) is special. Part of being young is hating bureaucracy because you don't realize what it's for: it kills a lot of great ideas, but it also kills a LOT of terrible ideas, and when EVERY grandma needs to get her Social Security check EVERY month, you don't want stuff to break. Part of being young is believing in "results" over "hours"...mostly because who's against great results? Who likes boring hours? The only problem is that young people are too young to realize what "great" is and how long things take. Of course there are exceptions! But note they're not thinking about results vs. hours, they're telling YOU to think about results over hours because they want to further their own projects. Part of being young is not quitting smoking even as you whine a lot about smoking. TikTok is smoking.
And part of being young is having nothing to lose, in part because you're not there yet, and in part because nearly all of your choices will seem misguided or terrible in thirty years but are The Natural Thing to Do right now, mostly because you chose them. Flattened hierarchies and speed are great when you're a kid. And admittedly, some people live there all their lives (and if you make it past your mid-30s, it's working for you and you belong there). But most find that kids of their own, stability, and reasonable expectations of the future win (and if you don't think so, be VERY careful about who you date, since they probably do). Bureaucracy doesn't look so bad. We're starting to see this now as Gen Y moves painfully into its mid-30s.
Given the structural failures of the economy, where later generations have significantly less wealth than generations before, and all that potential inherited wealth is being sucked into the bank accounts of the ultra-wealthy, they're stuck in a state of having nothing to lose. That's why the common assumption that people become conservative as they age isn't holding true.
The reality is people become conservative when they feel like they have something to lose.
When you cannot imagine a world in which you can afford a house, and know that having a child would be an unmitigated financial disaster, why not just do whatever and spend all your free time on whatever amuses you?
I'm ahead of my time on getting screwed by the economy (GenX who did everything right and got shafted by life) and as I explained to my father: "Yes of course I saved at least 5% of all my earnings for retirement, but 5% of fuck-all is still just fuck-all compounded."
"Rates are extraordinarily high..."
Seems like the older one is the more untrue that statement sounds. I'm GenX, and financed my first property at 7-5/8%, then my second house in the mid 6's. When I got 30-year money with a 3-handle a few years later, I thought I had hit the jackpot.
So...I disagree with that particular assertion about rates. But the main article was great!
I agree, it’s nuts to say that 5% is extraordinarily high, when the historical norm is closer to 7%, and we had rates in the high teens just one generation ago.
Also, Zero Interest Rate Policy is bad! That’s what created all this mess of social media and attention algorithms and everything else that made no sense except when too much money had nowhere better to go.
It’s sad and unfortunate that our economy is so fundamentally frail that we can’t even sustain 5% interest anymore. That’s a senescent economy.
Great piece, you inspired me to read a document I’d never have read otherwise.
I find myself reading about Mr. Beast so often, especially in recent months. Maybe I should actually go ahead and watch one of his videos...
I've tried! For whatever reason, I actually find myself clicking OFF them before I get to the 15 second mark. It's like, "Dude, no. I'm not watching this." I am obviously in the minority though. Ha.
Sadly, as a results oriented GenX worker, I can confirm the hours over results work culture of my generation. It's why so many of them are desperate to return to the office, because they conflate hanging around in the office talking about sports and having meetings about meetings with doing a good job. Apart from a few outliers like me, they've lived through automation being able to reduce our hours of work without being able to wrap their brains around what that actually means.
I have been fired or laid off so many times with these exact words: "Your technical accomplishments are excellent, and the customers/users love you, but you're just not a good fit."
TRANSLATION: You only do your job, but we want to spend time hanging out with someone like us, not some weird tech nerd with no interest in popular media or sports.
this is poo
I think most people miss the point. Value doesn’t exist in a vacuum. It is only defined by making/doing something that is wanted by somebody. AND you must appease that somebody. This has never changed throughout history.
The Renaissance-era works of art we consider transcendent today and imbue with meaning, were mostly created to appease patrons. Indeed, any artist no matter how talented, who didn’t find a patron is either long forgotten, or never got rewarded (read money, status, recognition) for their work in their lifetime.
The reconnaissance artist appeased the patron; Jobs and Bezos, the customer. Beast, serves an algorithm.
You can either pontificate about meaning, quality, legacy etc, or crack the value code. Apparently, the latter is very difficult so most people would rather wax poetic about the former…
Sweet jeebus, what an erratic article.
Get some sleep dude.
Boomer here, so take my comments with as many grains of salt as you wish. Have only watched a couple of Mr Beast videos to understand his appeal. How does his business model differ from those who create television shows except the feedback cycle is faster and each episode is a separate product (vs. being part of a series). Both seek to attract and retain viewership in order to increase ad revenue.
As regards to management style and communications preferences, each needs to fit the needs of the business you are in. Bezos believes, correctly in my opinion, that long form writing forces the writer to think more deeply about the topic and explain the logic/data that supports the opinion. Beast favors informal comms because the pace of his video production is faster and I suspect his team is more comfortable with that style.
I was going to post something similar. This is not a new phenomenon. Ask any aspiring Pop musician from the 50s or 60s how long the studio told them their song should be (no longer than 3 minutes).
There is a formula that those responsible for monetizing these types of things require so that eyeballs, ears, whatever are maximized. Heck, it’s in the definition “popular music”. It’s really hard to be popular and creatively authentic. The Beatles achieved it. Willie Nelson. More recently, Sturgill Simpson.
But I don’t totally agree with the sentiment below that it’s unique to Gen Z. Maybe it’s more concentrated but not wholly unique.
“Gen Z has grown up in a world dominated by mathematically-driven attention recommendations, prioritizing (SOMETIMES!) what does well over creative expression.”
This guy is all over the place, doesn't talk much about the topic itself
https://open.substack.com/pub/fandompulse/p/former-mrbeast-employee-gets-second?r=u16ew&utm_medium=ios
Literally telling you he’s a beast in his name.. one of his sidekicks transitioned in real time for all kids to see… and has now been found to be much more of an evil human than first thought. You don’t rise to the top by playing it clean anymore