<story><title>The sad economics of being famous on the internet</title><url>http://fusion.net/story/244545/famous-and-broke-on-youtube-instagram-social-media/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>kriro</author><text>&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;Van Gogh didn’t have to shill for Audible.com to pissed-off fans of his art.&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Pretty sure many artist of that day had to paint wives&amp;#x2F;daughters of rich folks that they&amp;#x27;d rather not have painted to get by. And most artists that sell for millions today were pretty poor unless they had a random rich person and were their &amp;quot;pet artist&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ll sound pretty heartless but the post sounds entitled. There is no grantee of riches just because you&amp;#x27;re &amp;quot;famous&amp;quot;. Actually turning that fame into money is a skill and not something that happens automatically. If you think it&amp;#x27;s unfair and you deserve more because you have so many fans...charge them directly and not through indirect means like adds, branding or product placement and see how many stick around.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;The most Allison and I have made combined on one deal is $6,000, and 30 percent of that went to our multichannel network&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;And despite that they started a company to make it a full time gig?&lt;p&gt;I also don&amp;#x27;t buy the implied sentiment that telling the truth about being more or less busto despite all the followers is seen as whining. Sure by some but you don&amp;#x27;t want those as followers. Transparency is usually valued very much in communities.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>vinceguidry</author><text>From Wikipedia:&lt;p&gt;He moved in November 1885 to Antwerp and rented a small room above a paint dealer&amp;#x27;s shop in the Rue des Images (Lange Beeldekensstraat).[69] He had little money and ate poorly, preferring to spend the money Theo sent on painting materials and models. Bread, coffee, and tobacco were his staple intake. In February 1886, he wrote to Theo saying that he could only remember eating six hot meals since May of the previous year. His teeth became loose and painful.[70] While in Antwerp, he applied himself to the study of color theory and spent time in museums, particularly studying the work of Peter Paul Rubens, gaining encouragement to broaden his palette to carmine, cobalt, and emerald green. He bought Japanese Ukiyo-e woodcuts in the docklands, and incorporated their style into the background of some of his paintings.[71] While in Antwerp, Van Gogh began to drink absinthe heavily.[72] He was treated by Dr. Amadeus Cavenaile, whose practice was near the docklands,[note 9] possibly for syphilis;[note 10] the treatment of alum irrigation and sitz baths was jotted down by Van Gogh in one of his notebooks.[73] Despite his rejection of academic teaching, he took the higher-level admission exams at the Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerp, and, in January 1886, matriculated in painting and drawing. For most of February, he was ill and run down by overwork, a poor diet, and excessive smoking.&lt;p&gt;Once Van Gogh broke through and gained some success, he shot himself after &lt;i&gt;two years&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;p&gt;Yes, it&amp;#x27;s tough to make it on YouTube, but comparing yourself to famous painters isn&amp;#x27;t going to win any sympathy.</text></comment>
<story><title>The sad economics of being famous on the internet</title><url>http://fusion.net/story/244545/famous-and-broke-on-youtube-instagram-social-media/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>kriro</author><text>&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;Van Gogh didn’t have to shill for Audible.com to pissed-off fans of his art.&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Pretty sure many artist of that day had to paint wives&amp;#x2F;daughters of rich folks that they&amp;#x27;d rather not have painted to get by. And most artists that sell for millions today were pretty poor unless they had a random rich person and were their &amp;quot;pet artist&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ll sound pretty heartless but the post sounds entitled. There is no grantee of riches just because you&amp;#x27;re &amp;quot;famous&amp;quot;. Actually turning that fame into money is a skill and not something that happens automatically. If you think it&amp;#x27;s unfair and you deserve more because you have so many fans...charge them directly and not through indirect means like adds, branding or product placement and see how many stick around.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;The most Allison and I have made combined on one deal is $6,000, and 30 percent of that went to our multichannel network&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;And despite that they started a company to make it a full time gig?&lt;p&gt;I also don&amp;#x27;t buy the implied sentiment that telling the truth about being more or less busto despite all the followers is seen as whining. Sure by some but you don&amp;#x27;t want those as followers. Transparency is usually valued very much in communities.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>blisterpeanuts</author><text>I didn&amp;#x27;t detect entitlement in the article. It seemed to me that she was just describing the cold economics of being a vlogger.&lt;p&gt;Thousands of people see you on social media and many of them mistakenly assume you&amp;#x27;re making a decent living. They&amp;#x27;re so ignorant.&lt;p&gt;What&amp;#x27;s more, it&amp;#x27;s those opinionated viewers with their snarky comments about selling out who are entitled. They expect free, adless entertainment by selfless, sharing Internet personalities.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m grateful to this vlogger for having the courage to speak out on a painful and embarrassing topic. It&amp;#x27;s given me a lot to think about.</text></comment>