YouTube Scraps Video Responses…Why YouTube Why?

September 18, 2013 12:14 pm

Hello World,

The YouTube team announced on their blog on Aug, 27th, 2013, that YouTube will officially scrap the “Video Responses” option and that work is in progress for an improved mode of engagement possibly allowing video-links in the comment sections.

YouTube Declaration for Scrapping Video Responses

This is has taken the YouTube community by storm and the avid YouTubers have turned emotionally ballistic while preparing to bid adieu to their beloved YouTube Feature that they feel made them connect with YouTube and with their friends they made over YouTube.

The YouTube team took a stand quoting the click-through rate for videos as video responses as 0.0004% and based on the weakness described by the metric, the decision of scrapping the Video-Response feature has been taken.

It’s Elementary Watson!!!! It’s Freakin Elementary!!!!

The media analytics term click-through rate usually refers to the percentage to the viewing audience that clicks/engages with the displayed content. In this case, as per The YouTube team, only 0.0004% of the total audience who viewed the video responses clicked them.

This might seem absolutely sensible from a few light years away but a closer look would scream “Apples and Oranges!!!” The video response feature has been extensively used by YouTubers to respond to each other’s videos in a secluded section of the online media where the response is intended for the creator of the video to which the video response is submitted. The video response is just made publicly viewable so as to add the transparency in the video-conversation YouTubers engage in.

The video responses, although are visible to everyone, are but essentially a direct response offered to the creator of a video, with the response not getting buried under the barrage of argumentative, sometimes completely unrelated comments submitted below the video. This way, the Youtubers have an option of having a clear line of communication, irrespective of the spamming trend rampant in the YouTube comments section. It is therefore obvious that the idea of applying the click-through rate for video responses is a fallacy in style. The video is visible to everyone but it is not intended for everyone. The video creators are the ones who would click the video responses to see what they’ve got in response to what they have uploaded earlier. How on earth would a working brain expect to use the “click-through rate” as a basis for the assessment of effectiveness of such a feature, where there is no significance for the number of viewers watching a displayed video response. Any Plonker, high on crack-cocaine who would beat a wally in a contest of mathematical logic would understand such an elementary thing!!!!!

Besides standing protected from spam-comments, the video responses allow YouTubers to record a longer response that may otherwise translate into too many words beyond the character-limit imposed by the YouTube comments feature. So if a video creator wants to respond to another video creator, where he or she can convey more information that what could be typed in the comment box in text form, all they have to do is record their speech, upload the video and submit it as a video response.

I am a Youtuber and I have used the video response feature to connect with fellow Youtubers as recent as today. The video response is not a traffic-routing, sneaky web-design tactic that can promise revenues to website owners but it is a rather essential feature in place for video producers to interact among themselves without getting crowded by spam comments, which if I am not wrong is one of the primary functional requirements of YouTube that got it, its share of users!!!

The promised new feature of allowing video links in the comments section would only worsen the already rampant spamming culture on YouTube. Now spammers can respond to each other with videos and the actual video responses intended to be presented to the primary video uploader would get lost under the pile of angry, spam comments, complimented by unnecessary video links.

To YouTube, With Love

YouTube, let me break this down for you…..read carefully…..How will a Youtuber differentiate a video response submitted in the comments from the other comments with video-links as proposed in the “New Engagement feature” that you are boasting of?????? What is the specialty of the new feature that will help genuine video responses aimed at the actual uploader stand out from the video links submitted by the spamming Comment Warriors????

Please don’t bring “In-Video Programming” as part of your explanation. We are already bearing with your “Compulsory Advertisement” nonsense that you impose on us, only because we have a need for the video that may follow the 30 second commercial you spit on us. You are officially taking Youtubers’ patience to its elastic limit by scrapping the “Video Response” feature. If Coca Cola can bring back its Classic Coke, so can you YouTube, for old times’ sake if not for anything else. There are a million ways to evolve without hurting the communication lifeline held high by your patrons, us YouTubers. Well, we can only ask you not to remove Video Responses. It is up to you to respond YouTube.

Regards,

Signature

Tags:
%d bloggers like this: