On Tuesday, Twitch announced some massive changes to its branded content guidelines, which it now claims will be rewritten, amidst much furor. These were another set of fresh policies — set to come into effect on July 1 — that did not sit well with its popular content creators, who promptly criticized and threatened to boycott them, apart from vowing to leave the live-streaming platform and head to pastures anew.
Here's a recap of what happened, the backlash, Twitch's response, the feedback from its rivals, and more.
What did Twitch announce?
As the purple platform has stated itself, branded content relates to "any content produced by streamers featuring products or services based on an exchange of value." This means that any broadcaster promoting any brand and getting paid for the same falls under this category.
Examples of branded content on Twitch include:
- Product placements
- Endorsements
- Sponsored gameplay
- Paid product unboxings
- Channel sponsorships
- Branded channel panels
- Brand logo stream overlays
However, branded content is not to be confused as:
- Wearing your favorite t-shirt that happens to feature a brand or product
- Showing off a new piece of equipment you bought for yourself
- Talking about your favorite restaurants within your community
However, Twitch still reserves the rights to "sell, serve, and display advertisements on the Twitch Services." As a result, it is aiming to control how any branded content will be presented on the site. That is why the new restrictions have been announced, meaning certain kinds of branded content will no longer be permitted, and they will implement a stricter rule for permitting any content of this nature.
For now, there are three categories for what will be allowed and what won’t on the Amazon-owned platform in terms of brand sponsorship formats:
Non-authorized formats as per the new branded content guidelines
Another issue that was raised was the fact that Twitch would now charge affiliates $25 for terminating their contracts, which was seen as a bit too exorbitant. As per the updated Affiliate agreement terms and conditions:
“If you or we terminate this Agreement, a maintenance fee will be deducted from your remaining balance. The maintenance fee will be the lesser of the accrued Program Fees for your Twitch channel or $25.”
This again led to the platform’s users and watchers voicing their frustrations. Many claimed that this was another step in Twitch's simply not willing to help its creators and coming up with rules that alienate them.
Why are these changes considered harmful for streamers?
Many, including Twitch streamers themselves, felt that these alterations were being driven by a motivation to cap the earnings on the massively-popular streaming site. They sparked an immediate backlash from content creators due to their potential impact on revenue generated through brand sponsorships.
This concern became even more significant following the contentious implementation of the 50/50 revenue split in late 2021. Prominent streamers voiced their dissent, some even considering a shift to alternative platforms rather than continuing their support for Twitch.
Critics also highlighted the broader ramifications of these changes, particularly on charity streaming. Many broadcasters rely on banners and overlays provided by charitable organizations to promote causes and raise funds.
Additionally, esports events and major productions like The Game Awards would experience significant disruptions to their sponsorship earnings as a result of these modifications. Another aspect to consider was the effect these branded content guidelines would have on disabled streamers. Blind content creator Steve Saylor raised a key point that relates to the new logo sizing parameters, saying:
“The 3% logo size rule isn’t accessible for low vision users as it is too small for overlays and even smaller on mobile.”
Reactions from the community and streamers
Most content creators on Twitch, including some massive names, have called out the platform over these new "suffocating" guidelines, going as far as to call for a boycott of the site and threatening to leave it for competitors like YouTube Gaming, Kick, and Rumble.
It all started with renowned broadcaster Zach Bussey, the man who flagged these new content guidelines in a tweet that quickly went viral and became the focal point for critics. He then shared his views, saying:
"I'm honestly going to have to re-evaluate if Twitch is the place I want to create content on moving forward."
There was Asmongold, perhaps the biggest gaming creator on Twitch, who criticized the new policies and asked his colleagues to “consider boycotting Twitch or moving to other platforms."
Soon after, the streaming organization that he co-owns, One True King, released a statement where it noted that the shows and exhibitions it produces “cannot exist under the suffocating canopy” of the new Twitch policies. It added that alternatives to Twitch have been on the rise recently.
Fellow OTK co-owner Tips Out then put out shared a statement on Twitter. He opined that if Twitch goes through with its proposed changes, “OTK network will be leaving Twitch. This is a direct attack on our business, staff, and all of the hard work we have put into our organization.”
Another prominent name, Alex Jebailey, the founder of the fighting game hub CEO Gaming and the face of Twitch's iconic Jebaited emote, jokingly said that he "will give up being the Global Emote known as Jebaited as a peace offering to not move forward with these new Ad Guidelines that hurt all creators big or small."
Apart from supporting the above statements, another OTK bigshot, Mizkif, tweeted that the organization will go to YouTube, Rumble, or Kick, while the Streamer Awards will not be possible.
One smart Twitch streamer, PaladinAmber, even came up with a way to solve its 3% rule, and it has taken over the internet.
Moist Esports founder MoistCr1tikal argued that the site is “completely lost as a platform” while laying into its “geriatric policy decision.”
StudyTme, who attended a meeting between the beleaguered streaming company, its staff, and Twitch ambassadors, clarified that "you can still have branded streams with graphics on stream, as long as you're aware of the specific ad that's running. The goal is to prevent third-party providers from showing random ads." He added that Twitch was open to raising the 3% screen share for logos.
Karl Jacobs was another to share his opinion, suggesting that "this is Twitch directly trying to force the hand of streamers into allowing their sponsorships to go thru them, giving them a cut of the payout. Another brain-dead attempt at becoming profitable at the expense of the streamer. Was firing hundreds of talented people not enough?"
Nihachu was another to question this sudden move, asking why Twitch pushes ads so much on its platform but then disallows streamers from advertising in their own ways.
Replying to her was Schlatt, who said that Twitch's next step would be banning off-site donation links, making everyone use bits.
BeefStew felt that this means streamers are just not allowed to make money on Twitch anymore. This is because they have to resort to sponsorships as the site is paying a fraction of what it should, but creators can’t actually advertise those sponsorships, meaning they earn even less money.
Smashley asked the company to see how it is driving away the people who make it the most money. She added that this might be the straw that makes many leave the platform.
What rival organizations and their creators had to say
Adin Ross, a former Twitch streamer who now works with Kick, was quick to get a shot in at his former employers, claiming that Twitch is done and that numerous content creators were in his DMs asking about moving over to Kick. He controversially added that Mizkif and HasanAbi were banned from his site and that they would not be allowed to join up with Kick.
VShojo's Zentreya, a major name in the VTubing community, was of the opinion that "this is genuinely ridiculous as many sponsors have different ways of making us promote products and brands."
Projekt Melody, another VShojo VTuber, added that Twitch didn't say anything about how 'many' sponsors they could have, further raising questions about the reliability of its workings
There was also a statement from Ludwig, the former Twitch megastar and current YouTube-exclusive streamer. He claimed that Twitch "suffers from having no relationship built with its viewers/streamers.”
Adding to Twitch's woes, Kick put out a tweet stating that it would "cover the $25 fee for anyone willing to break their contract and move to Kick." After all, the platform has been in the news this year for poaching a lot of disgruntled former Twitch content creators.
The same was true of Trovo, which informed Twitch streamers that it’s happy to cover the $25 fee if they want to get on board. As a post note, the company added that it doesn’t care if they multi-stream.
Not to be left behind, Rumbe, too, got in on the action, first tweeting a meme about Twitch’s content sponsorship guidelines being way too many compared to its own Terms of Service. The organization then tweeted out in support of Asmongold and OTK, asking them to join it if they do leave its more successful competitor. As a parting shot, Rumble also retweeted Zach Bussey’s tweet with the quote:
“As we build a creator marketplace for brand deals, out of touch companies are looking to hand us the W.”
The exclamation point to the indignities hurled towards the purple platform came from none other than MrBeast, the iconic YouTuber who does not even stream on Twitch. He said in a now-deleted tweet that "I’m not even a Twitch streamer and now I want to stream on a competitor just to spite them for you guys," making clear his show of solidarity with his peers.
What’s next?
Looking at the mostly negative reactions to its plans to introduce these new branded content guidelines, Twitch came out with a brief apology on Twitter. It claimed that these proposed changes were "overly broad" and added that:
“This created confusion and frustration, and we apologize for that. We do not intend to limit streamers’ ability to enter into direct relationships with sponsors, and we understand that this is an important part of how streamers earn revenue. We missed the mark with the policy language and will rewrite the guidelines to be clearer. Thank you for sharing your concerns, and we appreciate the feedback. We’ll notify the community once we have updated the language.”
Many have been asserting that the purple platform has for months been in a state of self-sabotage and alienated its own streamers. This latest controversy is only going to add to these claims while also providing more to the speculations that Twitch is on its dying legs as we speak.
Only time will tell if that's the case, but for now, the organization will do well to coordinate with its community to roll back any unwanted changes and slowly start bringing content creators back on its side before they decide to up sticks and head to its rivals.
