It is difficult to produce a television documentary that is both incisive and probing when every twelve minutes one is interrupted by twelve dancing rabbits singing about toilet paper.
There are a few YouTubers I really like to watch — Dave Rubin, Ben Shapiro, Lauren Chen, among others. Unfortunately, many of them have included sponsored content in their messages. Even worse, some try to (or have to) weave them into their normal content. There are “smooth” transitions, references to their own usage, and the like. For something, that is — essentially — advertisement.
And yeah, if you do political commentary full time you have to get funded. But I wonder whether they do not lose their credibility this way and whether there aren’t other ways to make a living (which is easy to say for me, I am not dependent on donations).
Regarding the loss of credibility, it’s clear that it’s advertisement and that they are paid to say something. How does that jive with the actual content. After all, people listen to commentators to hear what they think, not what lobbyists told them to think. If they promote products for which they are paid (using the credibility they have for the product), doesn’t this also in turn weaken their credibility over all? Whether deliberate or accidental, I wonder whether these advertisement gigs aren’t poison that will kill them off. Not to mention they might become dependent on them — that they are people who are mainstream enough to promote products.
Regarding the other ways of making a living — ads are so … last century. There is Patreon (don’t like it, and a weakness giving its lack of viewpoint neutrality) or other community supported platforms (like https://locals.com). Or even the “No Agenda” model which turns fans into producers.
I don’t know … just a feeling that these advertisement models are not only annoying (although you can simply skip them if you download the video first or turn it into a podcast) but also detrimental to … listen-worthy people.