Comment by supernova87a | Hacker News Reader

Comment by supernova87a | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

You know, I've been interested to observe why some YouTubers succeed hugely and others just stay specialty channels. For example, Tom Scott assembles stories that you possibly could find elsewhere, but what is it that makes his videos special to have gotten so many views in the 10s of millions?

Is it that his videos are relatively short and digestible in 5 min, and have some off-the-beaten path / uncommon / eye catchy subjects?

Does he just make the right combination of detail and high level takeaway?

Is it that he actually goes to the places to get live footage (versus those Youtube regurgitaters who explain a topic never having left their desk, with 200 ADD-style stock footage clips in a single video)?

Is it that he frames each video with a larger more philosophical question?

Is it because he has a friendly face?

I watch a channel with some quirky British/London guys on weird things about the city (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTLCfl01zuE, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na9iO_HEe14) but it has never taken off like Tom Scott (-- and this is amusing, despite Tom Scott having initially been the guy who designed their intro clip). Maybe it's just too local (no so-what for me) to feel like it's broadly interesting, or they don't lead out to the bigger theme so-what?

Maybe there's just some confluence of x-factors that propel certain people to fame.

I've been trying to pin down the formula Tom uses for a while now, and I've identified at least a few common factors.

Tom sticks pretty strongly to an upload schedule, for a start.

His videos also tend to be in the sweet spots for watch time.

His videos all follow a formula, with no start/end padding of note, so viewers tend to remain engaged for the whole duration and not click away or terminate the video early.

His scripts, delivery, fucking clothing choice, everything are all super consistent - which makes his content "familiar" for viewers (even, as one friend said, "comforting"). Tom Scott, the British chap in the red T-shirt, is a pretty solid and recognisable "brand".

Its also worthy of note that his videos entirely dispense with a lot of the "YouTube meta" (soyface thumbnails, YOU WONT BELIEVE..., clickbait, etc), which makes them feel more trustworthy and you never feel like you wasted your time watching some BS.

One of the things I do find interesting though is how Tom has mentioned a few times that production cost on those videos has grown - he has a crew, editing people, video folks, etc. Its no longer just Tom and a camera phone or gopro. However the end viewer sees fuck all difference between early and later videos, barring slightly better camera work (which could be natural learning over time), and better video quality (cameras got better).

Map Men definitely took off. Over 1M per video for the past few years. They (he?) just don't make enough videos to grow as fast as Tom's channel. YouTube rewards consistency A LOT.

Yes, I'm sure that's a factor too. Also, one of my first reactions was, unless you have an explicitly comedy kind of channel, maybe somehow audiences don't seem to reward British-style quirky humor that Map Men is full of. I love it, but maybe it causes people to feel it's not "professional" or professor-ly enough? Tom Scott definitely doesn't do humor, at most only wry ironic suggestions. The Map Men sponsorship endings themselves have been hilarious (Surfshark, NordVPN, Audible, etc).

> Tom Scott definitely doesn't do humor, at most only wry ironic suggestions

Tom absolutely does humour, but its the dry British variety as opposed to the quirky British variety.

Jay Foreman, the Map Men guy is actually an extensive collaborator with Tom Scott. I seem to remember Tom Scott did some video titles for him.

Also interesting is that Jay's brother is Beardyman the beat boxer that was a YouTube sensation some years ago with his cooking show!

https://youtu.be/K7NIxKseRus

I think it's because he records his videos in one take :)

Does he? I hadn't noticed. And do you think that's something people do notice and draws them in to watch?

He's always been the "one take" guy for me. And it's not as easy as it looks--he'll spend 10 minutes wandering seemingly-aimlessly around London, and pass by a certain landmark within 5 seconds of mentioning it in his script (which he also memorized). It's bananas and I don't think many people even consciously notice. That's why he's so happy when he nails it. I think it's cute! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgRRFRaMFcc

With a bit of practice, you can nail this too. The trick is to have a few seconds you can add or remove with some comment/fact which you can leave out for timing.

You'll often do it in regular conversation with people - if you're in a hurry for some reason, you can explain something to someone quicker by leaving out some less important details.

Does he still record in one take? I'm pretty sure that's changed over the last few years as his production has changed from "guy with phone camera" to "actually having a semblance of a a crew".

There's also changes in camera angle, cuts to other views, etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com