Do youtubers contribute positively to railway modelling?

[Nick C]

Just caught up with this thread...

 

I, personally, see YouTube primarily as a source of entertainment - it has replaced broadcast TV for me. I find that it allows me to find content that appeals directly to me, rather than the mass-market that traditional media needs to cater for. I am subscribed to rather a lot of channels, though only actively follow a couple of dozen or so.

 

I don't get the negativity towards YouTubers making money. They are providing a service - creating the content for us to consume, just the same as the traditional media are, just on a smaller scale. Just because they presumably enjoy the subject they're covering doesn't make it any less of a job than anything else - as others have said, there's a lot of time spent doing highly unglamourous stuff like editing, uploading (several of the channels I watch are travel related - this one can be something of a challenge in less-connected parts of the world!), dealing with accounts, sponsors and other paperwork, and so on. They also have to keep to a schedule to keep the YT algorithms happy. Doing all that on top of a normal 9-5 must be pretty onerous. Plus they also have to buy cameras, storage, and other equipment - for even a moderate size channel it is not much different to running a small business. 

 

A couple of the channels I watch have done videos showing the 'behind the scenes' aspect of being a YouTuber (perhaps 'Videographer' would be a more appropriate title), which have been quite informative. 

 

So yes, I do 'like and subscribe' to those channels I enjoy watching, and let the ads run (as long as they're not too long!), so that the creators can get something in return for the time and effort they've put in to entertaining me - but equally I agree that there's a huge amount of dross on there, and it can be a challenge to find the good stuff - all the more reason to support the latter when you do find it!

[Flying Pig]

30 minutes ago, HonestTom said:

Certainly I can't criticise the presentation, writing or production values.

 

A lot of what I don't like about the television style of documentary is those very three things.  They are unbearably formulaic and false in many respects, however polished and confident they may appear superficially. I don't think it matters what medium they are viewed on.

[westernviscount]

21 hours ago, HonestTom said:

” I’m trying to be civil here, but can you understand why I’m finding it difficult to assume good faith?

 

No, and I am sorry to read that. 

[rob D2]

8 hours ago, Legend said:

He doesn’t claim to know much about the prototypes and makes that quite clear . What he does do is investigate the mechanism and we see how the model runs .  You get the faults .  People take magazine reviews as accurate  but they seldom mention any issues with a model . Take the W1 as an example .  Is that any better ? 

You obviously never read “ rail express modeller “ then !

 

I don’t really give a  …if it runs Under water or on his carpet. Or even can pull a man sitting on a chair .

 

But I do care that it looks like a class xxx loco .

 

I think this is where the internet gets dangerous - anybody can spout garbage as fact .

[colin smith]

53 minutes ago, westernviscount said:

 

No, and I am sorry to read that. 

 

There are a few reasons to question your good faith. First, you start a thread with the leading question, Do youtubers contribute positively to railway modelling? Then it becomes apparent that your experience of YouTube (and other social media channels) is limited. Then you state Yes, I would rather youtube ceased to exist. Then you start describing YouTubers as 'choobers' which does suggest some degree of contempt.

 

It feels as though you posed the question on the assumption that most people would confirm your prejudice against YouTube rather than as a genuine inquiry into its value for the model railway hobby.

Edited January 21, 2022 by colin smith

[rob D2]

The OP posed the question , but that doesn’t mean he can’t pick a a side - It’s clear he’s not a great fan of YT, but using words like prejudice and contempt are way over the top.

[Andrew D]

YouTube is very important to me, as are RM Web and to a lesser extent the mags. Tutorials such as OO Bill’s revival of old stock have encouraged me to buy old locos off The Bay of Fleas and do them up myself - saving me a stash of money, teaching me new skills, and instilling me with confidence and satisfaction. 

 

Mouldy Raspberry’s videos are visual poetry, and his weathering/scenery tutorials helpful. Likewise Bunters Yard, our own @Phil Parker’s excellent tutorials on World of Railways, and many others. Watch a few, choose the technique you feel more comfortable with, and off you go. What is not to like? 

 

Sam’s Trains reviews are the best ever. That man has saved me hundreds if not thousands of pounds from not buying dud locos. I appreciate that many folks on here value detail over performance, but I don’t. Very much the other way round. Magazine reviews absolutely DO NOT speak to me. I want to see if an 0-4-0 tank engine can crawl over insulfrog points without stalling on my shunting layout - something Sam’s Trains does consistently but rarely mentioned in the mags. Mind you, the YouTubers who just get a loco out of its box and talk about it without running it? Nah! 

 

I’ll watch Richard of Hornby Mag/New Junction and Tris of OO Neal just for their personalities and enthusiasm - better than TV. And I enjoy Oscar Paisley and the other grown adults who just play trains on a train set. 

 

I still fail to see why people get shirty at YouTubers earning a crust from all that work. I see the content that Sam’s Trains puts out and wonder when the man ever sleeps. FYI, a quick internet search will reveal that a YouTube video needs one million - ONE MILLION - views to earn its creator US$2000 in ads. So even something with a huge amount of views like 100,000 will only earn the YouTuber about £160 for what could amount to a week’s work. Most if not all of them would earn way more if they put those hours into working at Lidl - and what a HUGE loss to us that would be! 

 

I had a quick flick through my brother’s Model Rail Mag, and it  gushed all over the new Hornby releases. I didn’t see one mention of the obscene quality/price ratio.

 

-Magazine contributors (generally) know what they are talking about and are better at seeing the bigger picture. But their contribution needs to go through an editorial process to ensure it is accountable. 

 

-YouTubers rely on the algorithm and clicks so their content has to grab attention, but I feel they are more able to tell it ‘like it is’ in the consumer’s interest. Lack of editorial process and accountability can be both good AND bad. 

 

-Individuals (RMWeb) on the whole are extremely kind and helpful, but one or two CAN BE opinionated, can be defensive of making a bad purchase, can be brand loyal, and can sometimes lack empathy and fail to understand that we all have different wants and needs. 

 

 

Take a balanced view of all three and there is your decision process! 

Edited January 22, 2022 by Andrew D
New info

[PMP]

27 minutes ago, Andrew D said:

 

 

-Magazines rely on advertising so are biased towards the advertiser. I know. I worked for a newsstand magazine. But their contributors (generally) know what they are talking about and are better at seeing the bigger picture. 

 

 

I’ll just add that this is rubbish. You only have to look at a railway modelling magazine, any one, and it’s blatantly obvious the above statement is pure fantasy. It’s one of the biggest rolled out tropes/cliches  of the hobby.

Edited January 22, 2022 by PMP

[Andrew D]

11 minutes ago, PMP said:

I’ll just add that this is rubbish. You only have to look at a railway modelling magazine, any one, and it’s blatantly obvious the above statement is pure fantasy. It’s one of the biggest rolled out tropes of the hobby.

 

What, that the contributors know what they are talking about and see the bigger picture?

 

I guess you have worked for a variety of newsstand magazines like I have then and had your work go through an editorial process that waters down any criticism so as not to upset the advertisers. 

 

I struggle to recall any sales-hitting criticism of a product from a large manufacturer in a mag. 

 

But obviously I’m talking rubbish. Because you said so, so I guess that makes it true. 

[PMP]

12 minutes ago, Andrew D said:

 

What, that the contributors know what they are talking about and see the bigger picture?

 

I guess you have worked for a variety of newsstand magazines like I have then and had your work go through an editorial process that waters down any criticism so as not to upset the advertisers. 

 

I struggle to recall any sales-hitting criticism of a product from a large manufacturer in a mag. 

 

But obviously I’m talking rubbish. Because you said so, so I guess that makes it true. 

I assumed your contributors reference was to youtubers, if I missed that point my apologies.

 

However the bias to advertisers comment is rubbish. And yes I’ve done reviews for all the mainstream railway modelling mags except BRM. So having experience in that field as well as contact with all the editorial teams, I’m confident I’m correct.

 

You only have to listen to the editorial team comments regarding buying products to review, and my experience in providing critical reviews of products I’ve had to know that’s there’s no bias. 
 

However, I’ll save anyone the effort of the next trope/cliche, undoubtedly because I’ve been paid for this reviews or kept the completed model afterwards, I’m on the the payroll/backhanders of the magazine/manufacturers and aren’t independent.

Edited January 22, 2022 by PMP

[Andrew D]

1 minute ago, PMP said:

 

 

You only have to listen to the editorial team comments regarding buying products to review, and my experience in providing critical reviews of products I’ve had this know that’s there’s no bias. 
 

Then I humbly apologise and I shall amend my post based on your feedback, as my experience is in a different industry. I do find it incredible that publishers/contributors need to buy their own models to review… 

[AY Mod]

3 minutes ago, Andrew D said:

I do find it incredible that publishers/contributors need to buy their own models to review… 

 

In some cases yes and not in others. If you have found the comments of others offensive towards YouTube contributors then the same applies to your comments on those who write reviews for print. 

[PMP]

Just now, Andrew D said:

Then I humbly apologise and I shall amend my post based on your feedback, as my experience is in a different industry. I do find it incredible that publishers/contributors need to buy their own models to review… 

No problem. I need to emphasise not all items are bought in, there are still review samples sent in.

Sometimes though that single model does the rounds of the magazines, sometimes the models are borrowed from friends of the teams. 
Over the years there have been frequent comments online that the mags are in the ‘pocket of the manufacturer’ to generate ad revenue. A quick glance through any of the mags shows that the manufacturers don’t even advertise in every issue, s how then can they be ‘underwriting’ the magazine costs? Notably those comments frequently are prefixed by ‘I don’t buy any magazines’…

[HonestTom]

11 hours ago, rob D2 said:

You obviously never read “ rail express modeller “ then !

 

I don’t really give a  …if it runs Under water or on his carpet. Or even can pull a man sitting on a chair .

 

But I do care that it looks like a class xxx loco .

Then that's fine! The reviews that Sam does aren't for you. As has been pointed out, he makes no pretence of prototypical expertise and does not comment on prototypical accuracy. As I say, it's not like he's spouting a lot of made-up information about the prototype.

 

11 hours ago, rob D2 said:

 

 

I think this is where the internet gets dangerous - anybody can spout garbage as fact .

Print media can do that just as easily. All you need is one respected author to make a mistake and that fact will be reprinted ad nauseam. I was recently researching West Finchley station for one of my dangerous and socially debilitating YouTube videos about the Underground and time after time, I came across the completely wrong assertion that the footbridge there came from Ryhill. A quick image search on the dangerous Internet proves that to be incorrect (it's actually from Notton & Royston, the footbridge at Ryhill looks nothing like the one at West Finchley). Nevertheless, anyone believing in the incorruptible perfection of the editor's desk would have several apparently trustworthy sources asserting an incorrect point.

 

4 hours ago, rob D2 said:

The OP posed the question , but that doesn’t mean he can’t pick a a side - It’s clear he’s not a great fan of YT, but using words like prejudice and contempt are way over the top.

A judgement made without knowledge is the very definition of prejudice.

Edited January 22, 2022 by HonestTom

[PMP]

33 minutes ago, HonestTom said:

 

A judgement made without knowledge is the very definition of prejudice.

A quick look at the Sam’s trains Dapol 61xx review shows that example perfectly, and his comments regarding the Bachmann 9f mechanism.

Unlike many commenting on his reviews and him, I’ve actually met him and spoken to him face to face at an exhibition. He’s a polite individual, but I rapidly came to the conclusion that I wouldn’t trust him to review a brick. 

Edited January 22, 2022 by PMP
Addition

[Andrew D]

22 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

In some cases yes and not in others. If you have found the comments of others offensive towards YouTube contributors then the same applies to your comments on those who write reviews for print. 

For which I have apologised and amended my original post. My experience of my content being watered down through the editorial process obviously does not apply here, and it's not a dig at the contributors that I acknowledged as knowing what they are talking about and seeing the bigger picture. 

[AY Mod]

11 minutes ago, Andrew D said:

For which I have apologised and amended my original post. My experience of my content being watered down through the editorial process obviously does not apply here, and it's not a dig at the contributors that I acknowledged as knowing what they are talking about and seeing the bigger picture. 

 

We have to take into account who our readers are and what they want or need to know. There will be prototypical reference information beyond that the information the manufacturers provide (rarely found in YouTube reviews) and comparisons against that. Observations will be made and qualified. Prices may be noted but value is for the potential buyer to decide. Running observations and performance indicators given with any deficiencies observed noted. We also have the opportunity to go back to designers or other contacts to obtain further information.

 

Maybe print reviews are short on hyperbole or blood-letting that some may wish to see but, in general, they will be better considered and rounded pieces.

[JohnR]

28 minutes ago, PMP said:

I wouldn’t trust him to review a brick. 

 

For starters, he'd complain the brick doesnt come with sprung buffers.

[westernviscount]

11 hours ago, colin smith said:

 

There are a few reasons to question your good faith. First, you start a thread with the leading question, Do youtubers contribute positively to railway modelling? Then it becomes apparent that your experience of YouTube (and other social media channels) is limited. Then you state Yes, I would rather youtube ceased to exist. Then you start describing YouTubers as 'choobers' which does suggest some degree of contempt.

 

It feels as though you posed the question on the assumption that most people would confirm your prejudice against YouTube rather than as a genuine inquiry into its value for the model railway hobby.

 

Ok Colin. Again sorry to read that. Contempt and prejudice? I think we might need to preserve this language for issues and people that are deserving of them. 

 

The support for youtube on this thread is overwhelming. Wasn't a trillion views for minecraft vids alone surpassed recently on youtube?  Everyone agreeing with me is of little interest and I might suggest the desire for universal adoration is apparent on the other side of the argument. It concerns me that with the overwhelming support here, the continual expansion of youtube and other platforms whilst traditional media recedes, what it is people actually want? 

 

Anyway, thoughts on a thread re-title are welcome. I have a couple ;-) 

[HonestTom]

55 minutes ago, westernviscount said:

 

Ok Colin. Again sorry to read that. Contempt and prejudice? I think we might need to preserve this language for issues and people that are deserving of them. 

Again, by your own admission, you made your judgement based on nothing more than a feeling, and you have both admitted and demonstrated a lack of knowledge of YouTube. You may not like the word, but that is prejudice by definition.

 

55 minutes ago, westernviscount said:

 

The support for youtube on this thread is overwhelming. Wasn't a trillion views for minecraft vids alone surpassed recently on youtube?

I'm certainly not seeing overwhelming support. Posters seem to be pretty evenly divided. I don't know what Minecraft has to do with model railways.

 

55 minutes ago, westernviscount said:

 

  Everyone agreeing with me is of little interest and I might suggest the desire for universal adoration is apparent on the other side of the argument.

I don't seek universal adoration, as will be clear from posts on this thread in which I admit both to flaws in my own work and to flaws with YouTube. I'm not aware of anyone else in this thread who seeks such adoration. I just don't think it's fair that you've decided you don't like me and what I do on the basis of nothing more than an opinion that, by your own admission, is uninformed. You won't even watch the videos we talk about in our defence.

 

I also don't think it's fair that I can't defend my position without my character being called into question.

 

 

55 minutes ago, westernviscount said:

 

Anyway, thoughts on a thread re-title are welcome. I have a couple ;-) 

Go ahead.

[30801]

2 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

For starters, he'd complain the brick doesnt come with sprung buffers.

 

But on balance he'd declare it a quality model based on the weight.

[westernviscount]

11 minutes ago, HonestTom said:

Again, by your own admission, you made your judgement based on nothing more than a feeling, and you have both admitted and demonstrated a lack of knowledge of YouTube. You may not like the word, but that is prejudice by definition.

 

I'm certainly not seeing overwhelming support. Posters seem to be pretty evenly divided. I don't know what Minecraft has to do with model railways.

 

I don't seek universal adoration, as will be clear from posts on this thread in which I admit both to flaws in my own work and to flaws with YouTube. I'm not aware of anyone else in this thread who seeks such adoration. I just don't think it's fair that you've decided you don't like me and what I do on the basis of nothing more than an opinion that, by your own admission, is uninformed. You won't even watch the videos we talk about in our defence.

 

I also don't think it's fair that I can't defend my position without my character being called into question.

 

 

Go ahead.

 

The scope of the discussion has at times taken on the wider view of youtube. I thought this might be reasonable. 

 

I regret that you feel I dont like you. I don't know you. You are clearly highly intelligent and passionate about what you do. 

 

As far as I can see those who are disparaging of youtube or youtubers are in the minority here. If you say otherwise then I will take that as factual as I don't intend to analyse this. 

[westernviscount]

Incidentally, I think it is reasonable to suggest that the word prejudice has connotations beyond the dictionary definition as do many words these days. Using it in this context is cynical and its inappropriateness is compounded by the dictionary definition having to be cited. 

 

I am happy to see I am not alone in thinking its use is not quite right. 

 

This all points to a level of intwinedness between the real person and life online which I don't want to be involved with. There is little to suggest here that anyone of us is a particularly loathsome person...me included I would hope. 

 

I shall be rattling about elsewhere on the forum as ever but I am done with this thread. 

 

Enjoy. 

[colin smith]

2 hours ago, westernviscount said:

 

I might suggest the desire for universal adoration is apparent on the other side of the argument.

 

In 1978, at age seventeen I decided to write a novel. Several of those I mentioned this to replied with variations of "So you want to be the next Frederick Forsyth?"

 

Forsyth was, at the time, in many people's eyes, the epitome of the very successful novelist and there have been many iterations of this line in the years since, with JK Rowling and Dan Brown, among others, replacing Forsyth, but the assumption that what every writer wants is fame and mega-sales is a constant.

 

I dare say the same kind of comment has been heard by every neophyte entrepreneur, singer, actor, artist, or whatever, with the same assumption that what the person really want is vast money and adoration and the thing they are doing is simply a vehicle to that end.

 

Perhaps for some of them that was their real desire (mine is to be shortlisted for the Booker) but any suggestion that the desire for universal adoration is either a new thing or necessarily a bad thing is wide of the mark.

[colin smith]

1 hour ago, HonestTom said:

I don't know what Minecraft has to do with model railways.

 

I think I mentioned Minecraft as an example of a virtual world-building game requiring many of the skills, and giving the player many of the pleasures, as a real-world world-building game like model railways.