@mrfriendhorror
This was great. I hadn't thought of it like this before. I have a LOT of people react to my content, and generally, I appreciate the exposure and enjoy watching them. But now I am wondering if it has stunted my potential views. Great video mate!
@catalystcomet
This is great, It's really refreshing to see somebody act like an adult and talk about these things out in the open. I am not a content creator, but I've seen some reaction videos from people that I actually like and well, now that I know how much more damaging they can actually be it's much less likely I'll be clicking on those reactions. I'm sorry that people are giving you hate, that's I guess to be expected but also as someone that's pretty sensitive to things like that myself, I hope that you've got friends to talk to you about it if it is something you're sensitive to as well. Remember that a lot of us really appreciate what you do and have been here for a long time. That's really exciting about your camera by the way, I hope it's as great as you wanted!
@Daosguard
I'm gonna enjoy watching your video on Asmonds channel in a few days.
@EJTechandDIY
Reaction should be allowed after the original video has been up for a minimum of 2 weeks. Reaction channels are like leaches.
@Kanthric
It's a tricky one; for YouTube to be able to identify a creator's work being re-published (e.g. as a react clip) they'd need to replicate for themselves something like the Content ID system for music, which would flag on upload that a video is using existing copyright content and therefore hand over the monetisation (or an agreed split of it) to the copyright holder; which would be tricky for channels not part of the partner programme, and something that YT doesn't need to spend money building. They could do it, but they'd need a commercial reason to do so; either a way that YT would gain from it, or to head off a credible legal threat from creators collectively threatening to sue YT for facilitating copyright infringement (similar to how the RIAA secured a deal on music monetisation). No such collective organisation exists for creators, and it's hard to see how one would come into existence. I also imagine most creators would be reluctant to launch a major lawsuit against the platform they rely on to make money.
@dirtyshubb
Reaction channels are honestly pretty worthless 99% of the time. Typically they don't provide any worthwhile commentary because the medium doesnt allow it. Either they watch in silence and comment at the end which is just stealing the content or they constantly pause it to comment and then end up judging the video on statements that haven't even been finished in the video so its wrong. Commentary channels are much better, they dont watch it live, can show relevant clips without playing the entire video and can have structured and thought out commentary on the overall package.
@adamricecracker7128
They are called Content Creators while they just watch/react to content that was created by others while they get the views. I think all the views or at least a good % from reacts shoudl go automaticly to the creator of the viewed Video.
@zaly7243
Darkviperau would like to talk
@AceBattleStorm
Thank you for explaining it in such a clear and through way! I've always felt this way about people reaction to other Youtube videos
@heyguyslolGAMING
It's flat out stealing of content and abuse of the "Fair Use" system. Asmongold runs a DayCare for ppl w/ little to no ambition bc ppl w/ ambition wouldn't have time to watch his content 5-6 hrs a day bc they'd be doing their own thing to grow their own career.
@HarvestZ
Youtube needs to share revenue with the original creator if the reaction includes more than 50-70% of the original video - really simple and easy way to fix this issue while not screwing over people who use other creators videos to talk about small parts of them.
@Wierdcrap
Nah you’re great for talking about this man. I was getting random Asmongold reacts and I’ve never even heard or watched the guy. Blocked his channel so I wouldn’t get it. I hate weak reaction channels because it only hurts the real creative people who create great videos. I hope YouTube takes some of your advice but it still seems very hard to figure out. In time I hope
@boredfangerrude8759
I appreciate the RuneScape music in the background.
@WellDoneOnTheInternetEverybody
Not sure if the osrs soundtrack Barbarism during 6:20 explaining how the clippers ruthlessly steal content was metaphorically intended, but considering my algo didnt pick this up until day 13 I'll believe it to be so anyways 😂
@Vicker9192
Great suggestions for a solution. I hope YouTube does something similar, or outright just use your suggestion!
@DaltonUber
Ayyyyyy I'm a western pennsylvanian too! Love your content dude.
@gamingformentalhealth
You got so much right ! IF YOUTUBE WANTED TO, they also have the powers to change the algorithms to be more healthy and beneficial, but you tube is also part of the GOOGLE ecosystem. I’ve had the same thing happen to me, for my first year of YouTube they had ads on my stuff and ran the, consistently, nice I was monetize, netamente dropped, nothings changed, quality got better… but nah… there is different experience in YouTube as a small channel to medium and to a bigger one. The biggest issue I see is the fact people don’t want to portray how much actual help they get to grow to those levels. There is a dream YouTube sells to small channels that you will make it bugs and all. Some even spend money on YouTube promotion, only to have a dead channel. GOOGLE MADE THIER MONEY THO; from the user that paid for that exposure, from adds and metrics that it gained to further boost ads in the audience it was shown, and now with AI, EVEN IF YOUR VIDEOS DONT GET VIEWS, THEY FEED THE AI LEARING THATS BACKING GOOGLE NOW. so google to and extent wants there to be as many dead channels as possible, it benefits them and they get paid 3 ways.
@KniveMikoto
Idk how monetization works but earnings via react content should be lower than actual creators who took time and effort to actually create something out of nothing. Quality effort should be properly rewarded.
@goodjuicewhisky
This is an incredibly well put together piece. I’m glad your channel is seeing the recognition it deserves. For me, the key concept here is “transformative.” Creators who genuinely offer an original opinion or challenge to another piece of content should absolutely be given the space to share their perspective, provided that their contribution becomes the central focus of the new work, not merely the original content. Even then, creating transformative content should never undermine or exploit the original creator, but instead benefit them. The most egregious abuse of the “react” label comes from what I would call “nodding head” videos—essentially re-uploads of someone else’s work with minimal, if any, meaningful input from the so-called “reactor.” These videos often feature nothing more than a person nodding or making expressions, with little to no actual commentary or critique, and in many cases, the original creator isn’t even credited. YouTube has all the tools necessary to manage this kind of content abuse but consistently chooses not to address it. The platform’s revenue continues to grow, and it’s clear they prioritize profits over protecting genuine creators. This lack of regulation comes at the expense of those who put real effort into producing original work, while low-effort reactors reap the benefits with minimal contribution.
@janineteneleven