Thanks for writing, Mike. Mr. Beast is a fascinating case study, but my question with "new media" sensations is staying power and crossover potential. "Traditional" media and entertainments draws usually do well in new media, but the inverse is not often true. Social/new media stars sometimes see their influence wane overnight, as when a platform disappears (Vine) or when monetization is crippled due to an algorithm change (YouTube et al). To be fair, Mr. Beast is more diversified than some who have succumbed to those industry whims. And the more social/"new" consolidates, the less volatile those pursuits will be. None of this is a challenge to your post, which I agree with. I'm just curious what long-term short-form content creator success looks like. I once heard Brendan Gahan of Epic Signal say (and I'm paraphrasing, not quoting) that the less a consumer has to invest (not financially) in content (Vine), the less they'll be invested in the content creator in the long term. I'd be interested to hear what you think about that perspective.
I'm sorry to just reply now. I tend to agree with that sentiment - that the fleeting, i don't even know what I'm mindless watching right now content, like Vine back in the day, much of Reels and YT Shorts today, and FB Video just a few years ago - has very little audience connection or even brand resonance. Beast is total opposite. It is sought out and loyally watched content, like many a TV show. now does it, and Jimmy in this case, have staying power? That's the big open question I think
he made so much money
Thanks for writing, Mike. Mr. Beast is a fascinating case study, but my question with "new media" sensations is staying power and crossover potential. "Traditional" media and entertainments draws usually do well in new media, but the inverse is not often true. Social/new media stars sometimes see their influence wane overnight, as when a platform disappears (Vine) or when monetization is crippled due to an algorithm change (YouTube et al). To be fair, Mr. Beast is more diversified than some who have succumbed to those industry whims. And the more social/"new" consolidates, the less volatile those pursuits will be. None of this is a challenge to your post, which I agree with. I'm just curious what long-term short-form content creator success looks like. I once heard Brendan Gahan of Epic Signal say (and I'm paraphrasing, not quoting) that the less a consumer has to invest (not financially) in content (Vine), the less they'll be invested in the content creator in the long term. I'd be interested to hear what you think about that perspective.
I'm sorry to just reply now. I tend to agree with that sentiment - that the fleeting, i don't even know what I'm mindless watching right now content, like Vine back in the day, much of Reels and YT Shorts today, and FB Video just a few years ago - has very little audience connection or even brand resonance. Beast is total opposite. It is sought out and loyally watched content, like many a TV show. now does it, and Jimmy in this case, have staying power? That's the big open question I think