Status Killer is a response. A defacto manifesto, perhaps. A place to vent your frustrations on the hollowness of American culture. It seems that there are so many websites, blogs, and publications out there either praising or ripping apart American culture, from an outside perspective for monetary gain.

We are different.

Our goal is not to praise or rip apart American culture for the sake of turning a profit. We are hear to address dangerous contemporary issues which have captivated American society and pushed us down a very slippery slope.

Status-driven consumerism, celebrity fanaticism, environmental degradation, abuse of political power, and the financial exploitation of the masses are just a few of the problems we face here.

At no time will we advocate one political party over another. All will be criticized equally. If there are good things to be said, so be it. If not…too bad.

The same goes for corporations. In order to turn a profit, a level of deception must occur somewhere along the way. It is the responsibilty of all Americans to uncover these deceptions and share them with all.

At one point in American history the media served as a whistle-blowing organization dedicated to the well-being of the public.

Let’s bring those days back.

I may be proven wrong, but the momentum, community, and data behind last.fm will be tough to quell. Many people (myself included) use it as others use MySpace. Surpassing last.fm would require a serious commitment to that end, and a degree of specialization that seems uncharacteristic of Google.

Then again, maybe I’m just bitter about the potential fate of a service I’ve been with for so long.

I hear the guy is not too crazy about his new career as a sanitation worker.

All YouTube has created is a strong brand with a lot of awareness (with at least people who don’t pay for things). Ultimately, it comes down to how much value a brand name is to an acquirer. A billion for just a brand? No thanks.

@Zack: YT gets “bashed” because it’s loosing money at a crazy rate and therefore becomes the poster child for a Web2.0 “bubble”. There is *no* demand from advertisers whatsoever for pre- or post- roll advertising for user-generated content. Zero. Zilch. That is why YT is saying that they are not seeking in-stream advertising based on tags. Also BTW, YT is not the biggest Video Network, it’s actually ranked 3rd.

In any case I think it’s a great idea. The old music vids seem to be pretty popular on YT.

Honestly now. Do you really have to question that?

So when YouTube becomes simply another distributor of downloadable mainstream videos, what will keep it from becoming a company with no differentiation from another one offering movie or TV downloads? This is a risky move base upon that alone.

http://www.philipaustin.co.uk

Hope you guys like the news we get, soon we will be producing podcasts/ video reviews. Also notice no advertisments, its all out of pocket for our love of everything IT

Cheers guys, hope it’s not that bad it’s classed as ‘delete’

We

$1,000,000 a month is a CHEAP investment considering the prices being thrown around for social networking sites and otherwise.

What are eyeballs truly worth these days? Google just forked over $1,000,000,000 to MySpace for eyeballs, and regardless of all the hype about PPC search-based advertising, when YouTube finally stops pandering to people with the “no commercials” policy and unleashes an awesome format for rich-media I’ll be the first in line to purchase to promote my projects.

YouTube is serving 100,000,000 videos a day right now. They are JUST getting started here!

Even if they inserted a “blink” commercial format of 5 – 15 seconds in front of content, and a banner at the end of video content most users would still watch and love the brand, especially when you have big music & entertainment lining up.

Slap together a nice content / secondary site “affiliate” fee of some nature and you have a ton of valuable real estate.

Somebody check my math – if they have 100,000,000 videos watched a day, at let’s say an average watch time of 1 minute (and get to pepper in 15 seconds of advertising per) doesn’t that mean 100,000,000 commercial plays a day?

Right now I “pay” 2 minutes of commercial time for each 8 minutes of traditional or cable TV that I watch, or 6 minutes of ads per 30 minutes of programming.

If YouTube really does = 1 minute average clip and 15 second programming format they will wind up matching that format exactly.

So $1,000,000 a month to own the biggest video network in the world with the added benefit of real-time user interaction & metrics to please advertisers, zero-cost (so far) content fees, etc? Not to mention tie in deals, sponsorship, and the YouTube property itself?

I’d take it. And you know that “substantial” revenues may actually be catching up to support their growth. Keep in mind sites like “plentyoffish” that pull $100k+ a month on adsense alone without a real media sales dept. pulling money from cash rich Madison avenue firms.

Am I missing something? Why is YouTube such a bad aquisition? Sure there will be some content squabbles but it looks like “big media” learned their lesson - crushing napster was a mistake that only made it harder to consolidate and monitor file sharing. Why not pick a dark horse this time in yahoo (which things like this article turn into a plausable solution w/partnerships to distribute video content in exchange for shared ad dollars).