Nineteen years after Jawed Karim uploaded the very first YouTube video, the awkward, 19-second clip in front of San Diego Zoo’s elephant enclosure is memorable today only because of what it represents: the start of a multibillion-dollar juggernaut that defines so much of what it means to be an online creator.

Today, YouTube is the most dominant social media platform by a sizable margin, especially among teenagers. Its influence is so vast it feels almost impossible to define. The service has birthed thousands of memes and internet personalities. Its recommendation algorithm has been credited with supercharging bizarre trends and viral misinformation.

But one of the most powerful ways YouTube has wielded its influence is through its Partner Program. The revenue sharing arrangement has generated billions of dollars for its most popular users and helped define the multibillion-dollar industry we now call the creator economy. Today, there are dozens of platforms and business models for making money via content creation, but it’s difficult to imagine any of them existing without YouTube’s Partner Program.

While YouTube is hardly the only platform that has made becoming an online creator feel like a viable career path, it has played an outsized role in creating and fueling the industry. When Google first introduced the Partner Program in 2007, there weren’t many ways to make a living from online content. The blogging industry was well established, but online media dynamics were already shifting away from independently run operations in favor of established platforms and brands.

YouTube, on the other hand, was a rising upstart in online media. Google had acquired the video service in 2006, before it had ads or even a mobile app. And when it announced it would make some of its most popular creators “partners“ in its business, it promised some of Google’s ad money could flow directly to the people making content.

It would take several more years for the Partner Program to grow into the money-printing machine it is now. But the Partner Program arrived, in 2007, when there was a growing demand for online video. Between 2006 and 2009, the audience for online video doubled, according to Pew Research, and YouTube was the biggest beneficiary. By the fall of 2009, YouTube was seeing more than one billion views a day.

That same year, YouTube made another important change to its monetization policies. It decided to spread the wealth so any single viral video could be eligible for revenue sharing, even if the creator wasn’t a partner, affirming that YouTube was the place to make money from viral content. In 2012, the Partner Program officially opened to everyone, and by 2014 there were one million creators making money from YouTube, according to The New York Times.

The flood of creators looking for a payout (and the sometimes scammy tactics that drove them) eventually led YouTube to again tighten its requirement for partner status in 2017. But YouTube had already cemented itself as the platform for amateur creators to turn their videos into a steady income. Today, there are more than three million channels with partner status, and the company has paid creators more than $70 billion in the last three years alone.

Of course, creators starting out now have many options available besides YouTube. Nearly every social media app offers some kind of monetization opportunity, though few have generated anything close to the eye-popping eight-figure sums made by YouTube’s top talent.

Other companies' creator funds, in which all creators draw payouts from the same pool of money fronted by the platform, have been underwhelming. YouTube star Jimmy Donaldson, better known as Mr. Beast, regularly tops the lists of YouTube’s highest earners. In 2022, he shared that he was making less than $10,000 a year from TikTok’s creator fund. And other apps’ monetization features, like tipping, subscriptions and virtual gifts, are difficult to scale.

Unsurprisingly, the number of YouTube-made multimillionaires has drastically changed teens’ ideas for career paths. In 2005, the year YouTube came online, teens said their top career aspirations were to become teachers or doctors, according to a poll conducted by Gallup. By 2021, YouGov found becoming a YouTuber or streamer was the top aspiration for Gen Z. In 2023, Morning Consult reported that 57% of Gen Z would like to pursue a career as an online creator “if given the opportunity.”

Polls like this often prompt a lot of eye rolls and snarky headlines. But it’s never been easier or more lucrative to be an online creator. At least one university offers a major in content creation and social media. Whether we like the idea of influencing as a career path, the industry of independent streamers, vloggers, newsletter writers, podcast producers, VTubers and others is worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

Is it really possible to keep anything hidden on the internet anymore? It seems very unlikely, with the latest example coming from Glassdoor, which published people's real names without their consent, ArsTechnica reports. That's right, the site specifically designed to allow anonymous, often unfiltered posts about users' employers is now tattling. 

Glassdoor's long-standing policy was that users could sign up with their name or anonymously. However, things changed when the company bought FishBowl in 2021 and later integrated it. Now, Glassdoor users get signed up for a FishBowl account and, as a result, must be verified (a Fishbowl requirement). This shift gives Glassdoor access to users' information to either display without consent — as is being done — or potentially get revealed if there was a leak or subpoena.

ArsTechnica spoke with two individuals whose data was populated on their Glassdoor profiles, including Monica, who noticed the change after actually asking for the company to remove some of her public-facing information. In an initial blog post, she claimed to have repeatedly not consented and that one Glassdoor employee told her that all profiles are now required to include a name.

Monica reported that a Glassdoor manager then added, "I stand behind the decision that your name has to be placed on your profile and it cannot be reverted back to just your initials or nullified/anonymized from the platform. I am sorry that we disagree on this issue. We treat all users equally when it comes to what is eligible to be placed on the profile and what is not, but we know that there are times our users, such as yourself, may not always agree with us." However, a Glassdoor spokesperson told Ars Technica that users could remain fully anonymous — contradicting the manager and leaving the truth unclear.

Then there was Josh, who claimed that Glassdoor not only added private information without permission but that some of it was inaccurate. Glassdoor listed him as living in London when he's based in California and spelled his employer's name wrong. Both Monica and Josh removed their accounts and sent Glassdoor requests to delete their data.

Many companies and platforms are wrangling with how to handle AI-generated content as it becomes more prevalent. One key concern for many is the labeling of such material to make it clear that an AI model whipped up a photo, video or piece of audio. To that end, YouTube has laid out its new rules for labeling videos made with artificial intelligence.

Starting today, the platform will require anyone uploading a realistic-looking video that "is made with altered or synthetic media, including generative AI" to label it for the sake of transparency. YouTube defines realistic content as anything that a viewer could "easily mistake" for an actual person, event or place.

YouTube

If a creator uses a synthetic version of a real person's voice to narrate a video or replaces someone's face with another person's, they'll need to include a label. They'll also need to include the disclosure if they alter footage of a real event or place (such as by modifying an existing cityscape or making it look like a real building is on fire).

YouTube says that it might apply one of these labels to a video if a creator hasn't done so, "especially if the altered or synthetic content has the potential to confuse or mislead people." The team notes that while it wants to give creators some time to get used to the new rules, YouTube will likely penalize those who persistently flout the policy by not including a label when they should be.

These labels will start to appear across YouTube in the coming weeks, starting with the mobile app and then desktop and TVs. They'll mostly appear in the expanded description, noting that the video includes "altered or synthetic content," adding that "sound or visuals were significantly edited or digitally generated."

YouTube

However, when it comes to more sensitive topics (such as news, elections, finance and health), YouTube will place a label directly on the video player to make it more prominent. 

Creators won't need to include the label if they only used generative AI to help with things like script creation, coming up with ideas for videos or to automatically generate captions. Labels won't be necessary for "clearly unrealistic content" or if changes are inconsequential. Adjusting colors or using special effects like adding background blur alone won't require creators to use the altered content label. Nor will applying lighting filters, beauty filters or other enhancements.

In addition, YouTube says it's still working on a revamped takedown request process for synthetic or altered content that depicts a real, identifiable person's face or voice. It plans to share more details about that updated procedure soon.

LinkedIn, a platform that surely everybody associates with fun, may soon offer puzzle-based games to give its users something to do besides networking. App researcher Nima Owji posted a series of screenshots on X this weekend showing some of the games LinkedIn is working on, and the company has since confirmed the plan to TechCrunch. Employees’ scores will reportedly affect how the companies they work for are ranked in the games.

Per TechCrunch, the titles LinkedIn is working on so far include “Queens,” “Inference” and “Crossclimb.” LinkedIn provided the publication with some newer images of the games, but for everyone just anxiously awaiting their rollout, there’s no timeline yet for when they’ll be released. It’s unclear if games will be available in full to free users or reserved for LinkedIn’s paid subscribers.

Starbucks is pulling the plug on Odyssey, its Web3 rewards program that gave members access to collectible NFTs. The company updated its FAQ on Friday to let members know that the beta program is closing on March 31, and they have a little over a week left to complete any remaining activities (called journeys). Those will shut down March 25. Users won’t lose their Stamps (Starbucks’ NFTs), which are hosted on Nifty Gateway, but they’ll have to sign up for Nifty using their Starbucks Rewards email to access them there, if they haven’t already.

Starbucks was late to the NFT game with Odyssey, which launched in beta in late 2022 — well after interest in the digital collectibles peaked. Unlike some other NFT ventures from major brands, though, it seemed to be aiming for more than a quick cash grab. It gamified the rewards system, offering activities and coffee-related mini-games that encouraged members’ ongoing participation.

In a conversation with TechCrunch published just last month, Odyssey community lead Steve Kaczynski emphasized the community element, saying, “I’ve seen that people who live in California in the Starbucks Odyssey community are really good friends with people in Chicago and they have met up in real life at times. This never would have happened if not for Web3.” But it’s 2024, and brands and consumers alike have long since moved on from NFTs. (Naturally, Forum3, which worked with Starbucks on Odyssey, seems to have pivoted to AI).

Starbucks says the Odyssey marketplace, where members could buy and sell their stamps, will move over to the Nifty marketplace. They can also withdraw their Stamps to trade them on other platforms.

CrowdTangle saw its team disbanded in 2021, new user registrations cut off in 2022 and now the site will officially shut down on August 14, the Wall Street Journal reports. Journalists and academics alike have used CrowdTangle to study the flow of content on Facebook and Instagram, including conspiracy theories and fake news. Meta, which bought the company in 2016, choosing to shutter the company is an entirely unsurprising move given it has been the source for many of the social media conglomerate's failings.

A tool called Meta Content Library will replace CrowdTangle, but only academics and nonprofit researchers can use it. That's right — for-profit news organizations can't apply for access to what sounds like a watered-down version of CrowdTangle. Meta claims that its Content Library — which is the company's answer for the European Union's Digital Markets Act — has new features like data on public comments and searching content based on views. However, early testers found it lacked geography-based activity data or the ability to download data from public posts.

Meta and CEO Mark Zuckerberg certainly benefit from limiting how much people — especially reporters — can view about their doings. We recently published a deep dive into Zuckerberg's dangerous decisions, including going against warnings from experts and personally intervening to block a ban on Instagram's plastic surgery filters. Other horrors under his watch include Instagram's recommendation algorithm promoting content featuring child sexual exploitation and regularly dismissing requests from top lieutenants to further prioritize safety. Then, in court, his lawyers have claimed he should hold no responsibility for the lawsuits involving harm caused by Meta's platforms.

YouTube just announced that it’ll be rolling out a redesign for its TV app over the next few weeks. Concrete details are scant, but the streaming platform says the new design will “open the door for a broad range of new experiences such as shopping for your creators’ favorite products.”

Beyond the pivot to shopping, the update should also improve existing features, with easier access to “video descriptions and comments.” To that end, both the descriptions and comment feed will take up a larger amount of room, when selected, with the actual video shrinking in size. YouTube says that users regularly request a smaller video feed and a prioritization of comments. As it stands, the comment feed lays over the video, so this refresh will allow users to engage with comments without covering up the actual content. 

I use the YouTube app on my TV every single day, and I want improved search, an easier way to refresh my personal feed and, most importantly, the ability to look for what I want to watch next as the current video plays. You know, just like with a phone. YouTube acknowledges that the push and pull between the TV-based “lean back” experience and the smartphone-adjacent “lean in” experience was at the heart of this redesign, but there’s no mention of anything I just brought up. You will, however, be able to buy a shirt someone is wearing in a video with a simple click of the remote.

YouTube did tease that sports fans will be able to check on live scores without interrupting a video, but didn’t get into the how of it all. We reached out to the platform and will update this post when we hear back. It also said that the redesign will make it easier to both see and access video chapters, which should be useful.

It’s worth noting that these updates are for the standard YouTube app for TVs, and not the live-service YouTube TV platform. However, the latter is getting its own update in a few days, with the ability to peruse Views without interrupting live content like sporting events.

Journalists, creators and long-winded VCs on X now have a new way to be exhausting on main. X now allows verified organizations and Premium+ subscribers to publish long-form “Articles."

The feature adds a basic text-editing interface that includes embedded media and some text formatting options, like the ability to make bulleted lists. It also appears that articles can be longer than the 25,000-character limit currently in place for premium subscribers’ “longer posts” feature. According to my initial tests, I hit the character limit for articles at just over 100,000 characters or about 15,000 words.

Here’s what the editing interface looks like:

Screenshot via X

Notably, Twitter began working on longer form posts long before Elon Musk’s takeover of the company. The company showed off an early version, originally called “Notes” in 2022, as it looked to lure newsletter writers and other creators to the service. Musk confirmed last summer that the publishing tools were still in the works.

The rollout of publishing tools is notable as Musk has often been hostile to journalists on his platform. Last year, Musk directed a change to X’s recommendation algorithm so that links to newsletter platform Substack would not appear in users’ “For You” feeds, which has throttled many independent writers’ reach on the service. X also stripped headlines from news stories shared on the platform last fall (headlines eventually returned, in a much smaller font).

Meta is revamping how Facebook recommends videos across Reels, Groups, and the main Facebook Feed, by using AI to power its video recommendation algorithm, Facebook head Tom Alison revealed on Wednesday. The world's largest social network has already switched Reels, its TikTok competitor, to the new engine, and plans to use it in all places within Facebook that show video — the main Facebook feed and Groups — as part of a "technology roadmap" through 2026, Alison said at a Morgan Stanley tech conference in San Francisco.

Meta has made competing with TikTok a top priority ever since the app, which serves up vertical video clips and is known for its powerful recommendation engine that seems to know exactly what will keep users hooked, started exploding in popularity in the US in the last few years. When Facebook tested the new AI-powered recommendation engine with Reels, watch time went up by roughly 8 to 10 percent, Alison revealed. “So what that told us was this new model architecture is learning from the data much more efficiently than the previous generation,” Alison said. “So that was like a good sign that says, OK, we’re on the right track.”

So far, Facebook used different video recommendation engines for Reels, Groups, and the Facebook feed. But after seeing success with Reels, the company plans to use the same AI-powered engine across all these products.

“Instead of just powering Reels, we’re working on a project to power our entire video ecosystem with this single model, and then can we add our Feed recommendation product to also be served by this model,” Alison said. “If we get this right, not only will the recommendations be kind of more engaging and more relevant, but we think the responsiveness of them can improve as well.”

The move is a part of Meta’s strategy to infuse AI into all its products after the technology exploded with the launch of OpenAI’s ChatGPT at the end of 2022. The company is spending billions of dollars to buy up hundreds of thousands of pricey NVIDIA GPUs used to train and power AI models, Zuckerberg said in a video earlier this year.

Amid complaints that its search results have declined in quality, Google is tweaking its algorithms to do a better job of weeding out spammy or automated content. The company says the ranking updates, arriving in May, will “keep the lowest-quality content out of search.” Of particular note, Google says its engine will be better at eradicating today’s automated (read: AI-generated) content that’s harder to spot.

Google says it’s taking what it learned from a 2022 algorithmic tuneup to “reduce unhelpful, unoriginal content” and applying it to the new update. The company says the changes will send more traffic to “helpful and high-quality sites.” When combined with the updates from two years ago, Google estimates the revision will reduce spammy, unoriginal search results by 40 percent.

“This update involves refining some of our core ranking systems to help us better understand if webpages are unhelpful, have a poor user experience or feel like they were created for search engines instead of people,” Google product management director Elizabeth Tucker wrote. “This could include sites created primarily to match very specific search queries.”

Google sounds like it’s targeting AI-generated SEO spam with its notes about scaled content abuse. The company says it’s strengthening its approach to the growing problem of sites that generate garbage automated articles (as well as zeroing in on old-fashioned human-created spam).

“Today, scaled content creation methods are more sophisticated, and whether content is created purely through automation isn’t always as clear,” Tucker said. Google says the changes “will allow us to take action on more types of content with little to no value created at scale, like pages that pretend to have answers to popular searches but fail to deliver helpful content.”

AI-generated content farms shotgun-blasting content to game the system are an increasing problem, so Google’s changes — if they’re as effective as promised — will be welcome. Although sites spamming that content exclusively may be easier to spot, it will be interesting to see if scenarios where once-reputable outlets experimenting with AI-generated spam (CNET and Sports Illustrated are recent examples) will be affected.

Another change to the algorithm will tackle the practice of otherwise reputable sites hosting low-quality content from third parties designed to leech off the site’s good name. Google provides the example of an educational site hosting a third-party payday loan review. “We’ll now consider very low-value, third-party content produced primarily for ranking purposes and without close oversight of a website owner to be spam,” Tucker wrote.

Finally, Google’s updates will allegedly do better at rooting out expired domains bought by someone else and transformed into click mills. The search engine will begin treating those websites as spam.

You won’t see the improvements immediately as Google is giving site owners a two-month notice to adapt accordingly. The search engine changes will take effect on May 5.