Independent creators finally found a level playing field online. Now the Government is considering tipping it back towards the biggest media organisations
For more than thirty-six years I’ve made my living in the media. I’ve written for newspapers, edited magazines, presented television programmes, hosted radio shows, produced online content, attended hundreds of international launches and interviewed some of the biggest names in the automotive industry. I’ve seen the media world from almost every angle imaginable. Then, six years ago, I started BrownCarGuy on YouTube, not because I had to, but because I genuinely believed something remarkable had happened. For the first time in the history of broadcasting, ordinary people had finally been given a chance to compete with the biggest media organisations on the planet.
Think about that for a moment.
For decades, if you wanted to become a broadcaster, you had to persuade somebody to let you in. You needed expensive cameras, expensive editing equipment, expensive studios and, above all else, the blessing of an editor, a commissioning executive or a television network. Gatekeepers decided who was worthy of being heard. The rest of us simply consumed whatever was placed in front of us.
Then along came YouTube.
Suddenly the gates disappeared.
It didn’t matter whether you were the BBC or Bob from Birmingham. If you could produce something people genuinely wanted to watch, the algorithm would, at least in theory, give you a chance. You didn’t need a broadcasting licence. You didn’t need shareholders. You didn’t need a production company. You just needed an idea, a camera, determination and an audience willing to give you a few minutes of their time. It was, quite genuinely, the greatest democratisation of media the world has ever seen.
That is how BrownCarGuy exists today.
Nobody commissioned me. Nobody funded me. There wasn’t a corporate board writing cheques or a taxpayer footing the bill. It has been built through thousands upon thousands of hours of filming, editing, writing, travelling, researching, replying to comments and constantly trying to improve. Like every independent creator, I’ve invested not just money but years of my life into creating something that people choose to watch.
And that’s the important word: Choose.
Because YouTube has never been perfect, but at least it gave viewers the opportunity to decide. If my review was better than somebody else’s, perhaps it would do well. If somebody else’s review was better than mine, fair enough. That’s competition. That’s exactly how it should work.
Which is why the Government’s new Media Green Paper worries me so much.
The consultation asks whether public service broadcasters should receive greater prominence on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. It sounds harmless enough when you first read it. After all, who could possibly object to trustworthy journalism? Of course we all want reliable information online. Of course misinformation is a problem. But hidden inside that apparently innocent proposal lies a question that should concern every independent creator and every viewer.
Why should organisations that already dominate traditional broadcasting also receive additional help on the one platform where everyone else finally had a fighting chance?
Let’s look at the reality.
The BBC already has multiple television channels watched by millions every single day. It has national radio stations. It has BBC Sounds. It has BBC iPlayer. It enjoys one of the most recognisable brands in the world, backed by a compulsory licence fee that every television-owning household has to consider paying. ITV has ITVX. Channel 4 has its own streaming platform. Sky has its own ecosystem. Collectively, these organisations already possess audiences, budgets, infrastructure, archives and marketing power that independent creators could only dream about.
Meanwhile, creators like me are sitting at home wondering whether this week’s video will satisfy an algorithm that nobody outside Silicon Valley truly understands.
We’re already living in a world where discovery has become dramatically harder than it used to be. Remember the old YouTube homepage? It was full of thumbnails, recommendations and rabbit holes that encouraged you to discover somebody new. Today the experience feels very different. Discovery has narrowed, recommendations seem increasingly repetitive, and creators spend half their lives trying to second-guess algorithms that appear to change as often as the British weather. One month longer videos are rewarded. The next month Shorts dominate. One week click-through rate is king. The next it’s retention. Then AI arrives and everyone has to learn a whole new set of rules. It’s exhausting, but we adapt because that’s the game we’ve signed up to play.
Now imagine trying to play that game if the Government decides certain publishers should start every race several metres ahead of everyone else. That’s what concerns me.
Every recommendation given to one organisation is a recommendation that cannot be given to another. Every extra slot occupied by an established broadcaster is one less opportunity for an independent journalist, reviewer, educator, specialist or creator. Algorithms only have so much space. Attention is finite. Viewers only have twenty-four hours in a day. If Government policy nudges millions of viewers towards organisations that already dominate television, inevitably somebody else gets nudged away. That somebody is us.
Independent creators are already balancing on a knife-edge. Contrary to popular belief, most YouTubers aren’t making fortunes. Many are simply trying to survive. Advertising revenue fluctuates wildly, sponsorship is harder to secure than ever, production costs continue to rise and audience growth has slowed dramatically across the platform. Many of us are already teetering on the brink of extinction. Giving legacy broadcasters preferential visibility on YouTube won’t merely make life a little harder. For some creators, it could be the final straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back.
What frustrates me most is that this proposal seems to ignore the fundamental beauty of YouTube in the first place. It doesn’t matter who you are. It matters whether people want to watch you.
If BBC content is genuinely more relevant to me, I’ll watch the BBC. If BrownCarGuy produces a review that’s more useful for somebody researching their next car, perhaps they’ll watch me instead.
That decision should belong to viewers, guided by relevance, quality and personal preference, not by Government policy deciding which publishers deserve an extra helping hand.
Ironically, I actually agree with one of the aims behind the consultation. Trust matters. Credibility matters. Expertise matters. I’ve spent my entire professional life trying to earn those things. But trust isn’t something Governments should simply award to particular organisations. It should be earned every single day through accuracy, transparency, evidence and accountability. Independent creators are perfectly capable of doing that too. In fact, because many of us answer directly to our audiences rather than shareholders or executives, I’d argue we have an even greater incentive to protect our reputations.
Ultimately, this isn’t really about the BBC, ITV or Channel 4 at all. It’s about preserving the greatest opportunity independent voices have ever been given. Social media tore down barriers that had existed for generations. It allowed anybody with talent, passion and persistence to compete alongside institutions that had enjoyed decades of dominance. That wasn’t just good for creators. It was good for audiences, because suddenly viewers had genuine choice.
And choice is the point. If you value independent journalism, independent reviewers, independent educators, independent commentators or simply your own freedom to decide what appears in your feed, then I would urge you to read the Government’s Green Paper and complete the consultation. Whether you agree with me or completely disagree, your opinion matters because these decisions could shape the future of British media for years to come.
I’ve already submitted my response.
Now I’d encourage you to submit yours.
Because once the greatest democratisation of media begins to disappear, getting it back again may prove far more difficult than any of us imagine.
If you found this useful, interesting or fun, consider supporting me via Patreon, Ko-Fi, or even grabbing a copy of one of my books on Amazon. Every bit helps me keep creating independent automotive content that actually helps people.
Support independent car journalism 🙏🏽☺️ grab my books on Amazon, take up membership to BrownCarGuy on YouTube, or join me on Ko-Fi or Patreon.
👉🏽 Channel membership: https://www.youtube.com/browncarguy/join
👉🏽 Buy me a Coffee! https://ko-fi.com/browncarguy
👉🏽 Patreon – https://www.patreon.com/BrownCarGuy
MY BOOKS ON AMAZON!
📖 Silent Ruin – A Jamshed Khan Thriller. This international espionage novel is an action-packed page-turner!
📖 Want to become an automotive journalist, content creator, or car influencer? Check out my book: How to be an Automotive Content Creator
📖 Quantum Races – A collection of my best automotive sci-fi short stories!
📖 The ULEZ Files – Debut novel – all-action thriller!
https://browncarguy.com/2026/04/15/browncarguy-books/
Discover more from Brown Car Guy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Leave a Reply