It has been a long time since I've read Anderson, but think the main difference between his imagined communities and TH-cam communities aside from the nation-state business is that his communities were imagined, as it were, from the top down and TH-cam communities, I believe, are the other way around. I don't mean creator communities, I mean the communities made up of people who consume content and support creators.
It's interesting this idea of community. Derrida talks about how he really doesn't like the word because he thinks it is necessarily predicated on exclusion and violence (he notes how community comes from the same root as munitions) the idea being that for a community to have any meaning whatsoever there must be people who are excluded from it. He says he prefers the idea of hospitality (the idea of giving aid to those outside of community) as a more inclusive term I don't know if I have any greater point to make, just thought it was an interesting connection to what you were talking about
Idk, I'm not an etymologist, I'm just pulling from what Derrida said since I thought it was somewhat relevant to what Olly was talking about (admittedly, Derrida has a tendency to butcher language or just make up his own etymologies and then call it "deconstruction" if it gets him to his point, so I would absolutely not put it past him to have pulled that etymology out of his ass, though I think the point he makes in the essay is still a good one even if the method by which he reaches it is a dubious one)
I mean, you just hit the nail on the head of the problem Derrida outlines in The Gift of Death. Abraham cannot help Isaac lest he rob God, and he cannot help God lest he rob Isaac. Derrida says that this is the human condition
I feel a part of the TH-cam community without making videos, because simply by watching videos like this one (especially commenting), I feel that I'm participating in the TH-cam community
Kings and Generals It can be argued that all communities are imaginary because they are based on how we relate our identity to other people and their identities. But I think here he means that there are communities solely based on physical location rather than an imaginary identity based on how we perceive ourselves and others in relation to an agreed upon community.
Good point. The thing is, I think that even if there is a common physical location, without a set of ideas that unites the group, it is not a community. Speaking from a personal experience, in the army, you are basically confined to communicate with a limited group, but that doesn't make it a community, unless there is an idea or a vested interest that glues people together.
Exactly. He's sort of playing fast-and-loose with what communities he applies the term "imaginary" to. A more interesting topic for this series would be a dissection of the youtuber's relationship to their audience, and what youtube lets people get away with in that regard.
I feel like some are more imaginary than others. Residents in a certain area could well constitute a community and have a lot of interests/experiences in common--they might even all have met one another at some point. Residents in a village might have even more in common, and even all know each other by name. And as the members of the community become closer it becomes odd to say they're imagining that they have these things in common--in the village, the idea of what everyone has in common could be (doesn't have to be) far more concrete and based in observation. Consider also a group of people united by a common cause: members of a certain union could consider themselves a community, and the criteria (membership in the union, being a steelworker, supporting other members of the union) might be highly accurate.
No, he just used a stupid word in the title to talk about something more profound. And he meshed it with social construction, because of course our problem isn't people taking "imaginary" to mean "fake" and of course people aren't taking "socially constructed" to mean "made up and not real". It was a stupid video title. =8/-DX
It's interesting to think about this in terms of the anime community as there is CONSTANT debate about this and there are subgroups within subgroups XD
This was really heartening. Recently, I feel like I've become less part of The Community, even though I'm still making videos and friends on this platform. There's a growing distance between large and small creators, which has made a big difference, but this reminded me of the beautiful moments where I've really felt like a part of the community. Thank you.
I’ve always thought that when people say they’re bored with TH-cam nowadays, they’re not looking hard enough into finding new creators. Sure it’s common to feel disillusioned with those that are at the top, but there are always great people making stuff on TH-cam. I’ve never felt like there were less people doing amazing things on this platform.
All sorts of questions on my mind after this one... does the algorithm look unfavorably on TH-cam videos that discuss the possibility of unionization, or are critical of TH-cam or Google? Do such videos get deemed "not advertiser friendly"? Have you personally gotten any backlash for speaking of such things on your channel? Do the physical gatherings of "TH-cam community" try to influence creators, subtly or not-so-subtly, not to view other creators as fellow workers, or the company as a potential target for negotiation (etc)?
Hi. When you spoke of the London trip and how nice it was to feel part of the gang, I thought of "team members" at Whole Foods. No union there, but they get to dress how they want and listen to good music while working. But, if putting on a program on TH-cam is what you would do whether or not you were making money for Google, it seems more like a win-win situation for the presenter and Google. Anyway, I love your program. Thanks and Happy New Year1
Just gonna take a passing little moment in this video and run with it: I hate how the current...bunch of people took the name "skeptic" and ran away with it. It used to be a word I'd sometimes use to describe people like Carl Sagan and whatnot, but that doesn't quite feel applicable anymore. Way to ruin a perfectly good word, racists. Not that that's my main problem with that sub-community, of course.
Sometimes climate change deniers are referred to as "climate change skeptics." That sort of nonsense. Like, David Hume is a skeptic; you're just ignorant.
Some parts of the conspiracy-minded alt right like to call themselves "skeptics". I assume most of them started out on youtube mostly talking about atheism, which is where they adopted the term from.
Robert Baillargeon: to be fair, they aren't just racist, there's a lot of misogyny in the mix as well! I prefer 'shitlords' which was used in a video to describe a group of 'skeptics' and just really resonated with me :)
It's an interesting concept that I never heard of before but got me thinking about another thing: fanbases, more specifically fanbase names. I've always considered them kind of useless. It's a way for someone to identify with a certain group, and I do understand that, but you are also a part of many other communities which have their own names, that is a trend on TH-cam that doesn't make sense anymore, and that appear - in my opinion - to compensate for the creator not being able to keep a real connection with his viewers. I might be wrong, this is just a developing thought, but being a philosophy TH-camr myself, this is a topic I'd like to explore!
King Peppy It's probably a trivial thing to think about, but it did relate to the topic (kind of), so I thought to mention it. That's certainly a valid point, it can be used as a "tool for recognition" inside said fanbases, but it doesn't have a unifying value people often think it has. That's what imaginary community is, essentially.
King Peppy Yes but they act like they are a community and would refer to themselves as such even though most of the individuals that make up said communities have probably never met each other. I believe that's the point being made.
King Peppy Again, I think that's the point being made. It _feels_ like a community but is actually far too shallow to be one. I feel like we're in agreement here.
and here is thumbs up for the idea of youtube work union from our channel .... you might not get what we are saying in arabic despite the english CC but ours is all about political philosophy in the arabian context so count us in for any action related to such union
A TH-cam Unión? That sounds like an interesting idea! I can think of a couple of moments where TH-camrs could’ve used one when bullied by the powers that be. Out of curiosity Philosophy Tube, does the book you reference mention anything about those who never feel like part of a community/nation?
It being more than a week later, and so you will not see this comment, as a fan I feel a part of your community. (Not in a creepy way, in case anyone is worried on that score.) Micro-fandom is a shifting community... to put it in older terms, who is at the Dead show in what town interacting with who is at all the Dead shows.
I think this could be something for you to address if you want to think about our interaction with robots/A.I./machines (along with increasing automation) - whether it means we'll value humanoid 'objects' over 'people' I don't know? A significant problem all communities have is what to do with the 'out casts'? - this could be the Socrates types, or, like for example the poor individual who got attacked by that shark in the Danny Boyle film "The Beach" who was denied professional medical help in order to keep the communities location a secret. (having travelled myself, I got pretty fed up with quite a lot of backpackers who just wanted to one-up other people's travel experiences - I just wanted to get out of the crappy UK for a while, that was my excuse). Does social media benefit those who need it the least (and harm those who need it the most)? Do we put reward/leisure ahead of work/(whatever the opposite word for 'leisure' is?)? - as in does it really matter what social construct you fall under (philosopher or blogger or lawyer or shop worker) as long as you are a sexy beast with a lucid mind? I guess I am not a believer in utopias. I just don't think - in my experience - that we value someone who struggles to do something for us as much as someone who finds it easy... As in, the more effort it takes someone to do a particular agreed universal task for example (that it is taken for granted that everyone does) - even if they could do this consistently - the less the struggling person is valued.... So in this respect, I don't think we value the subjective over the objective - even for tasks that on the face of it have a purely subjective value... For they are just a means to an objective. The subject is object dependant (the subject cannot exist without the object). I guess this is how we can become blind to curruption, because we tend to think that someone who has an easier ride (in a rigged system) has more value (more natural ability).
I think someone is working on a trade union. It's called the Internet Creator's Guild. I think they imagine a future where they have the same power and services of the Screen Actor's Guild.
Please I wonder if you've ever had the chance to read Jameson's or Fisher's takes on postmodernism? I loved your series on liberalism and would be really interested to see how you understand the relationship between pomo and neoliberalism
Considering I tend to overwrite, and then don't edit down like I would do for my fiction or videos, or any other thing I happen to be working on, I fully support this pay rise.
I feel disillusioned and alienated coming to terms with this. It also partly ruined my VidCon Australia experience, it was like who are these people I heard of. Also. Going hard on that "University Professor" look. Kinda indifferent to it, it's just different to image of you in my head.
I'm not sure I understand this use of "Imaginary" 1:02 If Anderson doesn't intend "imaginary" to mean "not real" but "socially constructed" instead, what is a _real_ community?
Can people confuse the conditions of a community with how people in a community feel towards each other? - for example if the community isn't in control of it's resources or enforcement of laws if they are administered cruelly? I can see how it would be easy to blame the community for anything bad that happened - especially if the faces of the community was the only ones they saw. Live Long and Prosper.
The TH-cam "community" is a granfalloon, to borrow the Vonnegut term, like most other "communities" -- and nations, for that matter. "If you wish to examine a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon."
I am in a small community of TH-camrs that support each other besides our random viewers.😊 We help each other's channels by continually watching everyone's videos, & giving each other the views & watch time a channel needs, especially since we are small TH-camrs... we need each other to be successful, not like the channels that have millions of suubscribers, that don't need the interaction we need. Hope that helps in the way we think😊
You seem to define "TH-cam community" as "the community of lagrer TH-camrs". Which tbf, is fair, people seem to flock to other people similar to them. But that also means if you don't have the means or influence to visit/be invited to big events/TH-cam HQ itself, you can still well be part of a real 'unimagined' community. Small TH-camrs also like making friends on here lol. And by feeling connected to this smaller community you can extend that to the rest of YT. We might not moan about videos getting demonetised (cause our channels are demonetised), but everything else will be similar. Also it seems that the whole YT 'community' is a lot smaller than it seems, quite a few times I heard about a YTer and then find out another friend knows them personally. The world is a village haha.
I could be way off base here, but I feel that broadly speaking, since the internet became commonplace there's been a shift in how we understand the concept of "community": Nowadays, participating in any kind of activity is almost by default enough to be considered part of "the community" and I don't think people used to talk that way even as recently as a decade ago. When Anderson wrote Imagined Communities, a community would've been something you were either unavoidably part of - your local community which you were naturally enmeshed with - or something you sought out and actively chose to participate in - a community formed around an activity on a local level. Nations as "Imagined Communities" were an exception because they did invoke this sense of communal belonging without either active engagement or inevitable contact. You could never leave the town you were born in and still be just as much a part of the nation as someone who'd visited every major city and historical site. Since the advent of internet forums facilitated much greater communication between isolated communities of hobbyists and people who had no local community based around their interests to participate in, we've shifted from having "a community" to "the community"; we're more aware of what other people who share our interests and activities are doing regardless if we actively engage with it. At first we would call these "online communities" but the internet is so omnipresent in much of the world that the distinction no longer holds. So it's not just TH-cam: "communities" in a general sense are becoming less tangible.
Especially since online communication (like this) provides very little sense of true interaction like that of IRL conversations. Yes information is conveyed, but via very impersonal methods.
I don't consider reluctant involvement or "enmeshment", as you call it, a form of community forming.. It could be a dysfunctional community, but usually you don't feel a particular sense of comfortable belonging in a dysfunctional group, or not for long, do you?
I'd argue that being part of a community and feeling part of a community are different things, especially in the more expansive sense of the term we use now, but even in the more limited sense. Someone is part of "the local community" by virtue of living in an area, even if they don't engage beyond the minimum of using the same shops, services, public spaces etc as everyone else. That might not hold much personal meaning necessarily - god knows I've never felt much attachment to that aspect of any of the places I've lived - but I think that in the most neutral sense they would still be considered part of said community.
This makes me think of and wonder about how humans are social animals and therefore maybe have a biological need to feel belonging. Maybe that's why we create communities with idiosyncrasies, mores, in-groups and out-groups?
I think there are communities which are facilitated by youtube which are very much real communities, not imagined. There are are people who met because they share a profession, a language, and have some similar aspirations, similar interests, similar political or religious philosophies. The community which organises Sumer in the City is made up of real friendship networks. I think the only imagined part in "the youtube comunity" is "the", because there are multiple communities facilitated by youtube, many of which I will probably never be aware of.
I think the subjective: social constructs, politics, philosophy, questions of spirituality (even religion), Identity - have become cool again. (I mean - don't ask me). I reckon in a more genuine way than in previous incarnations (especially "cool britannia".... though "Fake News"?). I think for a time the Stephen Hawking's and Professor Brain Cox's and Jim Al Khalili's and Richard Dawkins' had captured a wave a disolusionment perhaps surrounding subjective values? (Jim Al Khalili pretty much even said physics could replace philosophy, and Hawking's came out with "(M-Theory) means there is no need for god"). Having learnt a lot about the objective world, I can appreciate the need for subjectivity to balance things out... But at the same time I am weary of society (Brexit etc...). The 'format' is the barrier to entry. 01001100 01001111 01001100 (LOL)
I think all communities are imaginary since none of us can experience precisely the same thing as another. It's not that we can't form groups but, in the end, we all must confront life and eventually die very much by ourselves no matter how many other people are there with us. Perhaps we create communities to avoid the existential dread that comes with knowing that, for a very brief time, we will be here in the midst of others but never really be able to understand fully what they are going through, just as they will never be able to truly understand what we are going through.
You mentioned the need for a youtuber's union. Are you aware of the Internet Creator's Guild, founded by Hank Green? I think it aims to fill the gap you were talking about, with an awareness than many people who earn money from TH-cam also earn money from other online creative platforms. It makes sense for those people to have a single union which represents all of their creative endeavours collectively rather than having separate unions for creators on youtube, twitch, instagram, facebook ect.
I believe hank green has been very clear that the TH-cam creators guild is not, nor will be a Union. It seems the people who comprise the guild don't feel there is a need for it. also I believe it's structured much like a corporation, no voted positions, hank has control that sorta deal.
I don't think country of origin doesn't matter at all when defining a nation. In Boris Johnson's case, the US and the UK are similar countries. However, I would imagine that a person who was born in a nom-western country, and grew up in an immigrant community of the UK would likely be seen as different from the rest.
Im not even a creator but I have been wondering why there are no unions for youtubers for ages!!!! Especially when it comes to events outside of youtube, there are some incredibly exploitative tales that should not be happening.
Can you tell me books ABOUT philosophy to start my interest. It must give me the idea of what philosophy is and language should not be so complicated. My age is only 13 but don't underestimate me.
Globe Grills GG It depends on what your interests are. I am currently studying for my MA in philosophy. My interest is primarily education, existentialism, theatre, and culture. I usually recommend Existentialism for Dummies, Montaigne’s Essays are good. Dewey is a good American pragmatist with work in education. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics or Plato’s Symposium are classics. Again it is very much personal and sorta trial and error, from my experience
The guy has something like a channel page, there you can find the videos he uploaded - in that video list, you can find many videos (who would have thought), about philosophy. I would try there first.Good luck :-)
A youtube union would be awesome, but tread lightly with the trade union structure. It often gives too much power to union bosses and contracts can be detrimental to your status as a worker and you relation in the union. Gotta stay democratic.
You said you're the workers capital equation is not really true. On social media, the users; so in the case of TH-cam: both the creators and the prople who whatch the videos, are the product. The client in the equation, are the advertisors.
Yeah, the advertisers are the clients - we're the workers who create the videos on which they advertise though. We create the true product, which is advertising space.
all communities are imagined communities. our inherent 'us' vs 'them' mentality is evolutionarily useful and has therefore been retained while having no objective 'truth'.
I agree with your video, but I think your terminology is a bit confusing. When I originally saw this video as _imaginary_ the term itself made me jump to _it's not real_ . However, in the end, I still don't like the term _imaginary_ but the concept does remind me of Henri Bergson's and Gilles Deleuze's conception of _the Virtual_ and _the Actual_ . What I mean to say is that the community you speak of is real, but they remain virtual (not in the computer virtual reality appropriation of the term) as in they are the parts are there, especially in regard to Unionizing, but they have not actualized this aspect of themselves, they have not brought the material conditions to be. From my perspective, this is what I've ascertained from this video.
I had some of the same thoughts...I like postmodernism actually, it's another valid idea like communism that was co-opted by meatheads. The part where you mention the parts are there but not actualized, is that because Google has deliberately structured things in such a way to circumvent organization? Not thru rules so much as maybe appealing to that sense of pleasure of being productive in a larger group that Ollie mentions. That same sense of pleasure has been used for all kinds of enterprises, both good and bad, and on larger scales makes me uneasy.
So social constructs exist as means of affecting social cohesion, that being said, is there any worry about platforms for individuals proposing, let's say for example, a partisan preference, or even a racial one? Almost as to say, is it dangerous to let corporations influence social construction in a way which solidifies a racial or ideological echo chamber? Or is that a violation of its founder/owners freedom to do as they wish with their property since people ought to be aware of confirmation bias anyways?
After thinking about it I began feeling a bit sorry for the founder/owner class, Google in this case, as I started to see flocks of communities circling around trying to peck its eyes out. Perhaps this is the next danger in store, where "communities" are taking the place of hierarchies, in effect a different structure but the same power lust.
So niche groups are born out of necessity via an existing audience being catered to. And what makes them 'dangerous' is their relative proportion. So what needs to happen is, the people need to seek out competition to Facebook and Twitter, something open source. But since bias is often unknown or borne by necessity, hopefully all three of us can agree that bias is unavoidable with a centralized power of any kind. Personally I think that in order to do this, we ought to loosen up taxation and regulations on small business and stop stealing from the lot of people, so they can have the gall to take the risk in starting up a business as mentioned above.
It's not so much that hierarchies are bad, it's certain powers they have. For governments it's restricting freedoms. For corporations it's invasion of privacy. Let's not forget that larger structures like this are more efficient and as such are a natural outcome of our economic philosophy. Another thing is that these large structures can be easier to regulate. However, the hierarchy of our economic system has led to economic disadvantage that is very hard to overcome. Both governments and corporations have a weak spot...income. This is where the individual has the power and why data mining has become so important. Instead of seeing it as "big money invading our privacy" maybe we should see it as our means of control. In other words, changing our consumption of goods gives us back the reins. I agree with Anon about small business. This helps to overcome economic disadvantage and makes for a more resilient economy, raises the standard of living by reducing the cost of living. Reducing the cost of living could mean less government through less revenue from taxation. Albert Whisker, doesn't enforcing global standards require another hierarchical setup? I really like your idea about taking the technical route, this strikes me as the way to go.
Albert Whisker My point on individuals being empowered thru their buying decisions is based on companies selling goods or services that individuals buy. Data mining is only a link in the product output chain and the cost is folded into the cost of the product, so the only concern to the individual is the cost increase. They still have the choice in whether to buy the product or not...this is their power. Privacy concerns is a different issue and one I don't really understand. Of course, I don't want my passwords or bank info accessible, but aside from that, people in today's world should live their lives like it was an open book. Downloading child porn, sexual misconduct, bullying or other such behavior should be a matter of public record, and if a person doesn't like that then don't do it. These days everyone is accountable for their actions. If companies want my buying habits to make themselves more efficient that's another story, one I don't have a problem with, mostly because I buy very little, but also because I don't see anything evil in it. I understand most people do buy a lot of 'things' but that is the way they've arranged their lives, and they do actually have a choice whether they realize it or not. You're right about it needing to be a collective action to be effective, but this has to come from an individualistic perspective. I see a path to take and i make the decision to take that path: what others do doesn't concern me, none of their perceived advantages make me envious. I'm only responsible for myself. The thing is, if the top 1% is winning all the time then their days are numbered anyway, because people will walk away from a system like that. See Jordan Peterson's take on the meta game. I've already walked away and the choice is yours too. I think the role of governments should be be one of administration, maintaining infrastructure and enforcing environmental regulations. Regulations aren't being enforced, in fact the taxpayer provides the loans to big business and pays for the cleanup afterwards. Cutting the amount of tax revenue by changing buying habits would reduce a top heavy admin and be a way to control big business. In my country, up to $30k income from a small business is exempt from tax, and if the cost of living is reduced then that amount is plenty. This plus reduced buying of goods is the way to reduce tax flow to the government and therefor its size. This is non violent change that depends on individual action and a move away from the current economic philosophy, which is based on taking and not giving.
Albert Whisker Actually my comment has everything to do with Anon's post. Our economic system is a social construct that is like you say "built on mindless consuming" and like so many before it operates at someone else's disadvantage. I understand where you're coming from though because it is very hard to stand outside the system we're in and view it objectively, then come up with different ideas to fix it. The echo chamber indeed. I have no wish to destroy anything, quite the opposite, most governments just need reducing in size. The more money they receive the larger they become and the more money they waste. Reduce their revenue stream and force the government to be efficient. Is this so hard to understand? Let's examine a large government cost, health care, and see how it fits into the social construct created by big business. Health care goes hand in hand with the processed food industry, another huge market segment. Ask yourself why there is so much obesity, heart disease, and other preventable illness. Could it be that it's big business? Is it a problem solving approach instead of a problem prevention approach? Who is losing here and why? Compare this reality to the rather mild threat of privacy concerns because someone wants your shopping info. Having money doesn't guarantee being able to buy stuff, including food. There was a time not long ago when a wheelbarrow of money couldn't buy a sack of potatoes. I've heard all that alarmist stuff before about without jobs and money people can't exist lol. What we need are new ideas and perceptions, not people repeating the same echoing phrases of what was. Of course there will be large companies, governments and religions, they just need a little tweaking to address new concerns. I still like your idea of decentralized internet providers though :)
You-nionise! To see our greatest technological feat dominated by capital rather than creativity is truly depressing. The fetishisation of information and interpersonal communication is something even the most pessimistic worker would never have imagined. The dystopia of corporate messages forced between genuine human interaction and the option to pay to listen 'freely' is all too real. Unionisation will be hard, an uphill struggle, it will require those who make the largest revenue refusing to allow ads, there may be viewership throttles, cuts to ad revenue, the atomization of channels and communities. The anger of the fanbase may be used against creators, some creators will side with TH-cam out of fear or reward. Ultimately content may be removed and creators banned from the site. Only threats of downing tools(refusing to publish on TH-cam) will gain their attention, unless the fanbase and outside TH-cam community also acts. Boycotts encouraged by creators, exterior funding (Patreon but this too may side with Google). But have hope that this action will be the first of many, the unionisation of TH-cam shall show the world the non-benevolent nature of the internet age, Google may finally Do Evil in the public eye. Have hope that your struggle will bring change. Good Luck, Comrade Olly!
This has bothered me for some time now, TH-camrs saying they have a "strong community". What on earth is that supposed to mean? Unless you're actually, in real life, contributing something tangible to the world in which all members of your community participate, calling that a stron community is like calling your potted cactus a farm.
Can I ask why you chose not to teach philosophy in a school/college / universety? I know teaching is not for everyone and just wondering why it isn't for u.
I'd have had to become an adjunct professor studying for a phd, which is not only incredibly expensive but the job itself is really precarious and they're massively exploited. Plus I wanted to become an actor!
Your video title is nonsense. Because the "community" has never been one community, and all of the communities have been very real, with real-life consequences. Good luck if you can fix your crappy title in the video =P
(of course I watched the video and ... lots of things to talk about. But you have no editors choosing your video title, and your title is bad: because "imaginary" in current YT discussion is taken to mean "nonexistent". There is not, has never been a single "TH-cam Community", but multiple communities. Your use of the singular "YT community" is your own real problem with YT. There was not "an atheist community" on YT. There's not a "philosopher" community on here. Therer are thousands of communities and some of them felt the same effects during some periods. You're right that any unified TH-cam = One community is imaginary, but you make the same mistake when trying to talk about worker's rights/ unions in the YT/google worker model. THERE IS NO ONE YT COMMUNITY. Not of creators, not of fans or viewers. I've been and am currently part of multiple TH-cam communities, which fall outside your stupid approach. You did this video wrong.
My first point was that the word he talked about and used in the title, "community" should be always only broken down and divided. Yes I expected that, but I didn't get it.
![ร้อยพ่อพันแม่ - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XY2pNYASEbg/mqdefault.jpg)
How can communities be real if our eyes aren't real
It has been a long time since I've read Anderson, but think the main difference between his imagined communities and TH-cam communities aside from the nation-state business is that his communities were imagined, as it were, from the top down and TH-cam communities, I believe, are the other way around. I don't mean creator communities, I mean the communities made up of people who consume content and support creators.
This was a fun one, summer in the city was great this year and olly you are a sweetheart as well
It's 3 AM... but philosophy tube...
6 minutes won't hurt. ;)
It's interesting this idea of community. Derrida talks about how he really doesn't like the word because he thinks it is necessarily predicated on exclusion and violence (he notes how community comes from the same root as munitions) the idea being that for a community to have any meaning whatsoever there must be people who are excluded from it. He says he prefers the idea of hospitality (the idea of giving aid to those outside of community) as a more inclusive term
I don't know if I have any greater point to make, just thought it was an interesting connection to what you were talking about
TIL the etymology of community is rooted in warfare
I like that. I'll have to remember that one. What's it from?
an essay called Of Hospitality (by Jaques Derrida, if that wasn't clear)
Idk, I'm not an etymologist, I'm just pulling from what Derrida said since I thought it was somewhat relevant to what Olly was talking about (admittedly, Derrida has a tendency to butcher language or just make up his own etymologies and then call it "deconstruction" if it gets him to his point, so I would absolutely not put it past him to have pulled that etymology out of his ass, though I think the point he makes in the essay is still a good one even if the method by which he reaches it is a dubious one)
I mean, you just hit the nail on the head of the problem Derrida outlines in The Gift of Death. Abraham cannot help Isaac lest he rob God, and he cannot help God lest he rob Isaac. Derrida says that this is the human condition
I feel a part of the TH-cam community without making videos, because simply by watching videos like this one (especially commenting), I feel that I'm participating in the TH-cam community
That's what he's saying. It provides the sense of being part of a community without one actually being there.
Isn't every community "imaginary" in one way or another?
Kings and Generals It can be argued that all communities are imaginary because they are based on how we relate our identity to other people and their identities. But I think here he means that there are communities solely based on physical location rather than an imaginary identity based on how we perceive ourselves and others in relation to an agreed upon community.
Good point. The thing is, I think that even if there is a common physical location, without a set of ideas that unites the group, it is not a community. Speaking from a personal experience, in the army, you are basically confined to communicate with a limited group, but that doesn't make it a community, unless there is an idea or a vested interest that glues people together.
Exactly. He's sort of playing fast-and-loose with what communities he applies the term "imaginary" to. A more interesting topic for this series would be a dissection of the youtuber's relationship to their audience, and what youtube lets people get away with in that regard.
I feel like some are more imaginary than others. Residents in a certain area could well constitute a community and have a lot of interests/experiences in common--they might even all have met one another at some point. Residents in a village might have even more in common, and even all know each other by name. And as the members of the community become closer it becomes odd to say they're imagining that they have these things in common--in the village, the idea of what everyone has in common could be (doesn't have to be) far more concrete and based in observation. Consider also a group of people united by a common cause: members of a certain union could consider themselves a community, and the criteria (membership in the union, being a steelworker, supporting other members of the union) might be highly accurate.
No, he just used a stupid word in the title to talk about something more profound. And he meshed it with social construction, because of course our problem isn't people taking "imaginary" to mean "fake" and of course people aren't taking "socially constructed" to mean "made up and not real".
It was a stupid video title.
=8/-DX
It's interesting to think about this in terms of the anime community as there is CONSTANT debate about this and there are subgroups within subgroups XD
This was really heartening. Recently, I feel like I've become less part of The Community, even though I'm still making videos and friends on this platform. There's a growing distance between large and small creators, which has made a big difference, but this reminded me of the beautiful moments where I've really felt like a part of the community. Thank you.
The TH-cam community is a paper tiger - Chairman Olly
I’ve always thought that when people say they’re bored with TH-cam nowadays, they’re not looking hard enough into finding new creators. Sure it’s common to feel disillusioned with those that are at the top, but there are always great people making stuff on TH-cam. I’ve never felt like there were less people doing amazing things on this platform.
Colab with Bird Keeper Toby please
I need my pokemon ethics set straight
I second this motion!
All sorts of questions on my mind after this one... does the algorithm look unfavorably on TH-cam videos that discuss the possibility of unionization, or are critical of TH-cam or Google? Do such videos get deemed "not advertiser friendly"? Have you personally gotten any backlash for speaking of such things on your channel? Do the physical gatherings of "TH-cam community" try to influence creators, subtly or not-so-subtly, not to view other creators as fellow workers, or the company as a potential target for negotiation (etc)?
This was very thought intriguing and makes me see TH-cam in a different light. And, undoubtedly, you are one of the gang, Olly.
Hi. When you spoke of the London trip and how nice it was to feel part of the gang, I thought of "team members" at Whole Foods. No union there, but they get to dress how they want and listen to good music while working. But, if putting on a program on TH-cam is what you would do whether or not you were making money for Google, it seems more like a win-win situation for the presenter and Google. Anyway, I love your program. Thanks and Happy New Year1
Just gonna take a passing little moment in this video and run with it: I hate how the current...bunch of people took the name "skeptic" and ran away with it. It used to be a word I'd sometimes use to describe people like Carl Sagan and whatnot, but that doesn't quite feel applicable anymore. Way to ruin a perfectly good word, racists. Not that that's my main problem with that sub-community, of course.
Who is in this sub-community, anyway? I've never heard of thia "skeptic" community.
Sometimes climate change deniers are referred to as "climate change skeptics." That sort of nonsense. Like, David Hume is a skeptic; you're just ignorant.
MrPtrlix
Thanks for clarifying.
Some parts of the conspiracy-minded alt right like to call themselves "skeptics". I assume most of them started out on youtube mostly talking about atheism, which is where they adopted the term from.
Robert Baillargeon: to be fair, they aren't just racist, there's a lot of misogyny in the mix as well! I prefer 'shitlords' which was used in a video to describe a group of 'skeptics' and just really resonated with me :)
It's an interesting concept that I never heard of before but got me thinking about another thing: fanbases, more specifically fanbase names. I've always considered them kind of useless. It's a way for someone to identify with a certain group, and I do understand that, but you are also a part of many other communities which have their own names, that is a trend on TH-cam that doesn't make sense anymore, and that appear - in my opinion - to compensate for the creator not being able to keep a real connection with his viewers. I might be wrong, this is just a developing thought, but being a philosophy TH-camr myself, this is a topic I'd like to explore!
Like calling yourself a "gamer".
King Peppy It's probably a trivial thing to think about, but it did relate to the topic (kind of), so I thought to mention it. That's certainly a valid point, it can be used as a "tool for recognition" inside said fanbases, but it doesn't have a unifying value people often think it has. That's what imaginary community is, essentially.
King Peppy
Yes but they act like they are a community and would refer to themselves as such even though most of the individuals that make up said communities have probably never met each other. I believe that's the point being made.
King Peppy
Again, I think that's the point being made. It _feels_ like a community but is actually far too shallow to be one. I feel like we're in agreement here.
B. Anderson is a very valuable read! Completely agree.
and here is thumbs up for the idea of youtube work union from our channel .... you might not get what we are saying in arabic despite the english CC but ours is all about political philosophy in the arabian context
so count us in for any action related to such union
Another amazing video. You rock, Olly!
I mean...y'all can join IU 630 in the One Big Union if you want. Just throooowin' that out there.
A TH-cam Unión? That sounds like an interesting idea! I can think of a couple of moments where TH-camrs could’ve used one when bullied by the powers that be.
Out of curiosity Philosophy Tube, does the book you reference mention anything about those who never feel like part of a community/nation?
“Imagined communities” such as states, stirner approves👍
It being more than a week later, and so you will not see this comment, as a fan I feel a part of your community. (Not in a creepy way, in case anyone is worried on that score.) Micro-fandom is a shifting community... to put it in older terms, who is at the Dead show in what town interacting with who is at all the Dead shows.
I read all the comments, man! I'm glad you feel part of it!
I think this could be something for you to address if you want to think about our interaction with robots/A.I./machines (along with increasing automation) - whether it means we'll value humanoid 'objects' over 'people' I don't know? A significant problem all communities have is what to do with the 'out casts'? - this could be the Socrates types, or, like for example the poor individual who got attacked by that shark in the Danny Boyle film "The Beach" who was denied professional medical help in order to keep the communities location a secret. (having travelled myself, I got pretty fed up with quite a lot of backpackers who just wanted to one-up other people's travel experiences - I just wanted to get out of the crappy UK for a while, that was my excuse). Does social media benefit those who need it the least (and harm those who need it the most)? Do we put reward/leisure ahead of work/(whatever the opposite word for 'leisure' is?)? - as in does it really matter what social construct you fall under (philosopher or blogger or lawyer or shop worker) as long as you are a sexy beast with a lucid mind? I guess I am not a believer in utopias. I just don't think - in my experience - that we value someone who struggles to do something for us as much as someone who finds it easy... As in, the more effort it takes someone to do a particular agreed universal task for example (that it is taken for granted that everyone does) - even if they could do this consistently - the less the struggling person is valued.... So in this respect, I don't think we value the subjective over the objective - even for tasks that on the face of it have a purely subjective value... For they are just a means to an objective. The subject is object dependant (the subject cannot exist without the object). I guess this is how we can become blind to curruption, because we tend to think that someone who has an easier ride (in a rigged system) has more value (more natural ability).
I just came upon Andersons work in an article 5 mins before I saw this vid! Spooky!
I think someone is working on a trade union. It's called the Internet Creator's Guild. I think they imagine a future where they have the same power and services of the Screen Actor's Guild.
Please I wonder if you've ever had the chance to read Jameson's or Fisher's takes on postmodernism? I loved your series on liberalism and would be really interested to see how you understand the relationship between pomo and neoliberalism
Commentators are workers too!
This comment brought to you gratis, next comment costs 5p per word.
Considering the reputation youtube comments have generally (although Olly fans are very civil!) this might not be a winning business plan. . .
Considering I tend to overwrite, and then don't edit down like I would do for my fiction or videos, or any other thing I happen to be working on, I fully support this pay rise.
@5:30 union would be great
I feel disillusioned and alienated coming to terms with this. It also partly ruined my VidCon Australia experience, it was like who are these people I heard of.
Also.
Going hard on that "University Professor" look. Kinda indifferent to it, it's just different to image of you in my head.
I'm not sure I understand this use of "Imaginary"
1:02 If Anderson doesn't intend "imaginary" to mean "not real" but "socially constructed" instead, what is a _real_ community?
Can people confuse the conditions of a community with how people in a community feel towards each other? - for example if the community isn't in control of it's resources or enforcement of laws if they are administered cruelly? I can see how it would be easy to blame the community for anything bad that happened - especially if the faces of the community was the only ones they saw. Live Long and Prosper.
You are nice. A nice chap.
The TH-cam "community" is a granfalloon, to borrow the Vonnegut term, like most other "communities" -- and nations, for that matter. "If you wish to examine a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon."
I am in a small community of TH-camrs that support each other besides our random viewers.😊 We help each other's channels by continually watching everyone's videos, & giving each other the views & watch time a channel needs, especially since we are small TH-camrs... we need each other to be successful, not like the channels that have millions of suubscribers, that don't need the interaction we need. Hope that helps in the way we think😊
You seem to define "TH-cam community" as "the community of lagrer TH-camrs". Which tbf, is fair, people seem to flock to other people similar to them.
But that also means if you don't have the means or influence to visit/be invited to big events/TH-cam HQ itself, you can still well be part of a real 'unimagined' community. Small TH-camrs also like making friends on here lol. And by feeling connected to this smaller community you can extend that to the rest of YT. We might not moan about videos getting demonetised (cause our channels are demonetised), but everything else will be similar. Also it seems that the whole YT 'community' is a lot smaller than it seems, quite a few times I heard about a YTer and then find out another friend knows them personally. The world is a village haha.
I could be way off base here, but I feel that broadly speaking, since the internet became commonplace there's been a shift in how we understand the concept of "community": Nowadays, participating in any kind of activity is almost by default enough to be considered part of "the community" and I don't think people used to talk that way even as recently as a decade ago. When Anderson wrote Imagined Communities, a community would've been something you were either unavoidably part of - your local community which you were naturally enmeshed with - or something you sought out and actively chose to participate in - a community formed around an activity on a local level. Nations as "Imagined Communities" were an exception because they did invoke this sense of communal belonging without either active engagement or inevitable contact. You could never leave the town you were born in and still be just as much a part of the nation as someone who'd visited every major city and historical site.
Since the advent of internet forums facilitated much greater communication between isolated communities of hobbyists and people who had no local community based around their interests to participate in, we've shifted from having "a community" to "the community"; we're more aware of what other people who share our interests and activities are doing regardless if we actively engage with it. At first we would call these "online communities" but the internet is so omnipresent in much of the world that the distinction no longer holds. So it's not just TH-cam: "communities" in a general sense are becoming less tangible.
+
+
Especially since online communication (like this) provides very little sense of true interaction like that of IRL conversations. Yes information is conveyed, but via very impersonal methods.
I don't consider reluctant involvement or "enmeshment", as you call it, a form of community forming.. It could be a dysfunctional community, but usually you don't feel a particular sense of comfortable belonging in a dysfunctional group, or not for long, do you?
I'd argue that being part of a community and feeling part of a community are different things, especially in the more expansive sense of the term we use now, but even in the more limited sense. Someone is part of "the local community" by virtue of living in an area, even if they don't engage beyond the minimum of using the same shops, services, public spaces etc as everyone else. That might not hold much personal meaning necessarily - god knows I've never felt much attachment to that aspect of any of the places I've lived - but I think that in the most neutral sense they would still be considered part of said community.
This makes me think of and wonder about how humans are social animals and therefore maybe have a biological need to feel belonging. Maybe that's why we create communities with idiosyncrasies, mores, in-groups and out-groups?
I think there are communities which are facilitated by youtube which are very much real communities, not imagined. There are are people who met because they share a profession, a language, and have some similar aspirations, similar interests, similar political or religious philosophies. The community which organises Sumer in the City is made up of real friendship networks. I think the only imagined part in "the youtube comunity" is "the", because there are multiple communities facilitated by youtube, many of which I will probably never be aware of.
I think the subjective: social constructs, politics, philosophy, questions of spirituality (even religion), Identity - have become cool again. (I mean - don't ask me). I reckon in a more genuine way than in previous incarnations (especially "cool britannia".... though "Fake News"?). I think for a time the Stephen Hawking's and Professor Brain Cox's and Jim Al Khalili's and Richard Dawkins' had captured a wave a disolusionment perhaps surrounding subjective values? (Jim Al Khalili pretty much even said physics could replace philosophy, and Hawking's came out with "(M-Theory) means there is no need for god"). Having learnt a lot about the objective world, I can appreciate the need for subjectivity to balance things out... But at the same time I am weary of society (Brexit etc...). The 'format' is the barrier to entry. 01001100 01001111 01001100 (LOL)
The last time I was this early... oh nevermind. Great video as always!
A question that I have been asking people for years now is:
What is the difference between a community and a population?
Not shocked to hear that Abigail is in favor of a TH-cam workers union.
more philosophy!!
*This comment is imaginary.*
dude how did you do that
Imagine all the comments
I think all communities are imaginary since none of us can experience precisely the same thing as another. It's not that we can't form groups but, in the end, we all must confront life and eventually die very much by ourselves no matter how many other people are there with us. Perhaps we create communities to avoid the existential dread that comes with knowing that, for a very brief time, we will be here in the midst of others but never really be able to understand fully what they are going through, just as they will never be able to truly understand what we are going through.
You mentioned the need for a youtuber's union. Are you aware of the Internet Creator's Guild, founded by Hank Green? I think it aims to fill the gap you were talking about, with an awareness than many people who earn money from TH-cam also earn money from other online creative platforms. It makes sense for those people to have a single union which represents all of their creative endeavours collectively rather than having separate unions for creators on youtube, twitch, instagram, facebook ect.
I think he did a video about it a while ago
STATICSTATICSTATIC
In this very series actually
I believe hank green has been very clear that the TH-cam creators guild is not, nor will be a Union. It seems the people who comprise the guild don't feel there is a need for it.
also I believe it's structured much like a corporation, no voted positions, hank has control that sorta deal.
I don't think country of origin doesn't matter at all when defining a nation. In Boris Johnson's case, the US and the UK are similar countries. However, I would imagine that a person who was born in a nom-western country, and grew up in an immigrant community of the UK would likely be seen as different from the rest.
Isnt what youre referring to as imaginary what lacan would classify as symbolic?
Im not even a creator but I have been wondering why there are no unions for youtubers for ages!!!! Especially when it comes to events outside of youtube, there are some incredibly exploitative tales that should not be happening.
Can you tell me books ABOUT philosophy to start my interest. It must give me the idea of what philosophy is and language should not be so complicated. My age is only 13 but don't underestimate me.
Globe Grills GG It depends on what your interests are. I am currently studying for my MA in philosophy. My interest is primarily education, existentialism, theatre, and culture. I usually recommend Existentialism for Dummies, Montaigne’s Essays are good. Dewey is a good American pragmatist with work in education. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics or Plato’s Symposium are classics. Again it is very much personal and sorta trial and error, from my experience
ThatManinWhite I just need some videos and books to know WHAT PHILOSOPHY is then I would see what in it interests me
The guy has something like a channel page, there you can find the videos he uploaded - in that video list, you can find many videos (who would have thought), about philosophy. I would try there first.Good luck :-)
A youtube union would be awesome, but tread lightly with the trade union structure. It often gives too much power to union bosses and contracts can be detrimental to your status as a worker and you relation in the union. Gotta stay democratic.
You said you're the workers capital equation is not really true. On social media, the users; so in the case of TH-cam: both the creators and the prople who whatch the videos, are the product. The client in the equation, are the advertisors.
Yeah, the advertisers are the clients - we're the workers who create the videos on which they advertise though. We create the true product, which is advertising space.
FYI The end card says "paypal/me" instead of "paypal.me"
I belong to any community that I wish to belong to. The community may not recognise me but that is their problem.
all communities are imagined communities.
our inherent 'us' vs 'them' mentality is evolutionarily useful and has therefore been retained while having no objective 'truth'.
Is there such a thing as the Patreon community?
Yes. Some people I sponsor have very active conversations. And it's self-sorting, necessarily without the trolling.
I was wondering if you would like to come on to our podcast to discuss atheism? I want to know you're views on it, and on theism.
I agree with your video, but I think your terminology is a bit confusing. When I originally saw this video as _imaginary_ the term itself made me jump to _it's not real_ . However, in the end, I still don't like the term _imaginary_ but the concept does remind me of Henri Bergson's and Gilles Deleuze's conception of _the Virtual_ and _the Actual_ . What I mean to say is that the community you speak of is real, but they remain virtual (not in the computer virtual reality appropriation of the term) as in they are the parts are there, especially in regard to Unionizing, but they have not actualized this aspect of themselves, they have not brought the material conditions to be.
From my perspective, this is what I've ascertained from this video.
I had some of the same thoughts...I like postmodernism actually, it's another valid idea like communism that was co-opted by meatheads. The part where you mention the parts are there but not actualized, is that because Google has deliberately structured things in such a way to circumvent organization? Not thru rules so much as maybe appealing to that sense of pleasure of being productive in a larger group that Ollie mentions. That same sense of pleasure has been used for all kinds of enterprises, both good and bad, and on larger scales makes me uneasy.
new realists are becoming popular - love Deleuze's work
I am imagined therefore I'm not real
Zeroth
Why does Olly have 168k subs but only like 30k views per video?
ur good
Isn't TH-cam in some way a little bit like Uber or Airbnb?
Hellow philosophy tube can you check the philosophy on the anime youjo senki?
This anime is about God and a world war
Pateron is not a community but a coperative
So social constructs exist as means of affecting social cohesion, that being said, is there any worry about platforms for individuals proposing, let's say for example, a partisan preference, or even a racial one? Almost as to say, is it dangerous to let corporations influence social construction in a way which solidifies a racial or ideological echo chamber? Or is that a violation of its founder/owners freedom to do as they wish with their property since people ought to be aware of confirmation bias anyways?
After thinking about it I began feeling a bit sorry for the founder/owner class, Google in this case, as I started to see flocks of communities circling around trying to peck its eyes out. Perhaps this is the next danger in store, where "communities" are taking the place of hierarchies, in effect a different structure but the same power lust.
So niche groups are born out of necessity via an existing audience being catered to. And what makes them 'dangerous' is their relative proportion. So what needs to happen is, the people need to seek out competition to Facebook and Twitter, something open source. But since bias is often unknown or borne by necessity, hopefully all three of us can agree that bias is unavoidable with a centralized power of any kind. Personally I think that in order to do this, we ought to loosen up taxation and regulations on small business and stop stealing from the lot of people, so they can have the gall to take the risk in starting up a business as mentioned above.
It's not so much that hierarchies are bad, it's certain powers they have. For governments it's restricting freedoms. For corporations it's invasion of privacy.
Let's not forget that larger structures like this are more efficient and as such are a natural outcome of our economic philosophy. Another thing is that these large structures can be easier to regulate. However, the hierarchy of our economic system has led to economic disadvantage that is very hard to overcome.
Both governments and corporations have a weak spot...income. This is where the individual has the power and why data mining has become so important. Instead of seeing it as "big money invading our privacy" maybe we should see it as our means of control. In other words, changing our consumption of goods gives us back the reins.
I agree with Anon about small business. This helps to overcome economic disadvantage and makes for a more resilient economy, raises the standard of living by reducing the cost of living. Reducing the cost of living could mean less government through less revenue from taxation.
Albert Whisker, doesn't enforcing global standards require another hierarchical setup? I really like your idea about taking the technical route, this strikes me as the way to go.
Albert Whisker My point on individuals being empowered thru their buying decisions is based on companies selling goods or services that individuals buy. Data mining is only a link in the product output chain and the cost is folded into the cost of the product, so the only concern to the individual is the cost increase. They still have the choice in whether to buy the product or not...this is their power.
Privacy concerns is a different issue and one I don't really understand. Of course, I don't want my passwords or bank info accessible, but aside from that, people in today's world should live their lives like it was an open book. Downloading child porn, sexual misconduct, bullying or other such behavior should be a matter of public record, and if a person doesn't like that then don't do it. These days everyone is accountable for their actions. If companies want my buying habits to make themselves more efficient that's another story, one I don't have a problem with, mostly because I buy very little, but also because I don't see anything evil in it. I understand most people do buy a lot of 'things' but that is the way they've arranged their lives, and they do actually have a choice whether they realize it or not.
You're right about it needing to be a collective action to be effective, but this has to come from an individualistic perspective. I see a path to take and i make the decision to take that path: what others do doesn't concern me, none of their perceived advantages make me envious. I'm only responsible for myself.
The thing is, if the top 1% is winning all the time then their days are numbered anyway, because people will walk away from a system like that. See Jordan Peterson's take on the meta game. I've already walked away and the choice is yours too.
I think the role of governments should be be one of administration, maintaining infrastructure and enforcing environmental regulations. Regulations aren't being enforced, in fact the taxpayer provides the loans to big business and pays for the cleanup afterwards. Cutting the amount of tax revenue by changing buying habits would reduce a top heavy admin and be a way to control big business.
In my country, up to $30k income from a small business is exempt from tax, and if the cost of living is reduced then that amount is plenty. This plus reduced buying of goods is the way to reduce tax flow to the government and therefor its size. This is non violent change that depends on individual action and a move away from the current economic philosophy, which is based on taking and not giving.
Albert Whisker Actually my comment has everything to do with Anon's post. Our economic system is a social construct that is like you say "built on mindless consuming" and like so many before it operates at someone else's disadvantage. I understand where you're coming from though because it is very hard to stand outside the system we're in and view it objectively, then come up with different ideas to fix it. The echo chamber indeed.
I have no wish to destroy anything, quite the opposite, most governments just need reducing in size. The more money they receive the larger they become and the more money they waste. Reduce their revenue stream and force the government to be efficient. Is this so hard to understand?
Let's examine a large government cost, health care, and see how it fits into the social construct created by big business. Health care goes hand in hand with the processed food industry, another huge market segment. Ask yourself why there is so much obesity, heart disease, and other preventable illness. Could it be that it's big business? Is it a problem solving approach instead of a problem prevention approach? Who is losing here and why? Compare this reality to the rather mild threat of privacy concerns because someone wants your shopping info.
Having money doesn't guarantee being able to buy stuff, including food. There was a time not long ago when a wheelbarrow of money couldn't buy a sack of potatoes. I've heard all that alarmist stuff before about without jobs and money people can't exist lol. What we need are new ideas and perceptions, not people repeating the same echoing phrases of what was. Of course there will be large companies, governments and religions, they just need a little tweaking to address new concerns.
I still like your idea of decentralized internet providers though :)
You-nionise! To see our greatest technological feat dominated by capital rather than creativity is truly depressing. The fetishisation of information and interpersonal communication is something even the most pessimistic worker would never have imagined. The dystopia of corporate messages forced between genuine human interaction and the option to pay to listen 'freely' is all too real.
Unionisation will be hard, an uphill struggle, it will require those who make the largest revenue refusing to allow ads, there may be viewership throttles, cuts to ad revenue, the atomization of channels and communities. The anger of the fanbase may be used against creators, some creators will side with TH-cam out of fear or reward. Ultimately content may be removed and creators banned from the site. Only threats of downing tools(refusing to publish on TH-cam) will gain their attention, unless the fanbase and outside TH-cam community also acts. Boycotts encouraged by creators, exterior funding (Patreon but this too may side with Google).
But have hope that this action will be the first of many, the unionisation of TH-cam shall show the world the non-benevolent nature of the internet age, Google may finally Do Evil in the public eye. Have hope that your struggle will bring change.
Good Luck, Comrade Olly!
This has bothered me for some time now, TH-camrs saying they have a "strong community". What on earth is that supposed to mean? Unless you're actually, in real life, contributing something tangible to the world in which all members of your community participate, calling that a stron community is like calling your potted cactus a farm.
Afrika Bambaataa
I mean if you've looking for the "Youchewb" community I think I know why you haven't had any luck.
Can I ask why you chose not to teach philosophy in a school/college / universety? I know teaching is not for everyone and just wondering why it isn't for u.
I'd have had to become an adjunct professor studying for a phd, which is not only incredibly expensive but the job itself is really precarious and they're massively exploited. Plus I wanted to become an actor!
can u stop ripping off marshall macluhan
can anyone, really, ever?
waoh...
How dare you?
Create The Anarchist Federation of TH-cam. I'll join it.
Thirst
Your video title is nonsense. Because the "community" has never been one community, and all of the communities have been very real, with real-life consequences. Good luck if you can fix your crappy title in the video =P
(of course I watched the video and ... lots of things to talk about. But you have no editors choosing your video title, and your title is bad: because "imaginary" in current YT discussion is taken to mean "nonexistent". There is not, has never been a single "TH-cam Community", but multiple communities. Your use of the singular "YT community" is your own real problem with YT. There was not "an atheist community" on YT. There's not a "philosopher" community on here. Therer are thousands of communities and some of them felt the same effects during some periods.
You're right that any unified TH-cam = One community is imaginary, but you make the same mistake when trying to talk about worker's rights/ unions in the YT/google worker model. THERE IS NO ONE YT COMMUNITY. Not of creators, not of fans or viewers.
I've been and am currently part of multiple TH-cam communities, which fall outside your stupid approach. You did this video wrong.
This is a philosophy channel, expect words to be broken down and used in interesting ways
My first point was that the word he talked about and used in the title, "community" should be always only broken down and divided. Yes I expected that, but I didn't get it.
Fake news