In this debate that originally appeared in Kidscreen‘s Q1 2026 issue, children’s media experts Jo Redfern and Peter Robinson weigh in on whether YouTube is still the best place to build long-term success for a kids IP.

Yes

By: Jo Redfern

Jo Redfern

YouTube isn’t perfect, but in my view, it is the cornerstone platform on which to build long-term content success.

I don’t say it’s the only platform, because long-term success comes with a multi-platform strategy, where content is distributed across many media touchpoints. But YouTube is the best place for kids content creators and producers to start to build. Why? Because as it stands, traditional commissioning has failed most creators, and that distinction matters now more than ever.

For kids, YouTube is more than entertainment. It’s their search engine, creative outlet and fandom hub. According to the PARK USA Summer 2024 report by Precise TV, 84% of kids ages 10 to 12 engage with YouTube regularly. And other research pegs their average time spent watching YouTube at around two hours per day.

To them, it isn’t just another platform; it’s their media infrastructure.

Algorithm vs. opportunity
Many argue that YouTube’s algorithm is unpredictable. That’s a fair point. But unpredictable compared to what?

Traditional commissioning currently offers zero predictability for most creators. If those making kids content think they can trust TV gatekeepers to do right by their IPs, building them an audience and supporting their business models, then I have a bridge to sell you.

I heard first-hand at MIP Junior how brutal it is out there for creators and producers. ScreenSkills even said that last year was “the most challenging in decades, with as many as three-quarters of freelancers out of work, prompted by a significant downturn in commissioning.” No wonder creators are taking matters into their own hands.

While YouTube’s algorithm is fickle, it’s also meritocratic, in theory. At least on YouTube, creators can build audiences through strategic use of metadata, testing, learning, showing up consistently and making the best-quality content they can. And the reach opportunity is undeniable. YouTube is the first place kids go to for video content, whether it’s to watch sports highlights or see what their favorite creator has uploaded since last time. To ignore YouTube is to ignore your audience, and there’s no excuse for that.

The new tube
What else has changed that makes YouTube super-attractive to those making kids content? YouTube has become TV.

There’s a heated debate around what that actually means, but if we take it to mean that kids are watching YouTube in their living rooms on the biggest screen in the house—then yes, YouTube is TV to kids.

What they watch may not look like the TV-level storytelling we grew up with, but it’s made for an audience that uses YouTube by default, and it reads as “native” to that generation.

Additionally, to engage more quality creators, YouTube is supporting content where production values and narrative are higher. This means fewer low-nutrition cat videos and more opportunity for quality kids storytellers whose creations will end up on the living room screen.

This kind of empowerment is tangible. At a time when production costs are falling and traditional commissioning remains inaccessible to all but a few, YouTube offers actual access.

Creators can build IPs without permission, they can test and iterate without needing a commissioner’s notes, and they can find audiences faster than any previous generation could dream of.

YouTube’s barriers are low, giving storytellers who would have spent years pitching gatekeepers a chance to build their businesses. Not every creator will succeed, but the opportunity exists—which is more than the traditional system is offering.

Nor does YouTube exist in a vacuum; it is part of the youth media flywheel that powers everything else. No other platform offers distribution, community, discoverability and fandom engagement simultaneously. Even Roblox builders rely on YouTube for marketing and referral, and in turn, players share their gameplay videos and avatar outfit creations there.

A Minecraft Movie (pictured) would not have been the massive success it was without YouTube. Fact. It’s true that there are navigation challenges, but to me those are not deal-breakers, because every platform has trade-offs. Traditional TV came with commercial breaks, inflexible scheduling and cancellation/decommissioning risk.

The question isn’t whether YouTube is perfect—it’s not—but rather: Can you afford to develop your audience elsewhere when kids live there? We can debate whether YouTube should be the infrastructure layer of kids entertainment, but we cannot debate whether it is.

NO

By: Peter Robinson 

Peter Robinson

More than 10 years ago, at a very snowy Kidscreen Summit in New York, I stood on stage talking about Charlie Bit My Finger and LEGO stop-motion shorts—grassroots hits that proved creators didn’t need TV to find fame.

Five years later, in a much warmer Miami, I was back, arguing that we had to redefine “quality”. Kids saw authenticity as polish, personality as production value, and YouTube as the new TV guide.

YouTube remains one of the richest, most diverse sources of entertainment and education. And quite honestly, it’s hard to argue against its virtues. So today, there are compelling reasons why YouTube is the best place to build long-term content success.

But I’m not so sure the platform that built a generation of fandoms will serve the next one as well.

YouTube used to feel like discovery. You could stumble across a LEGO animator from Poland, a singing family from Utah, or a slime experiment that became a craze. But serendipity has been replaced by sameness. Algorithms now favor retention over curiosity.

Kids don’t choose what to watch; the feed chooses for them. And while creators can still find audiences, they’re finding it harder to keep them. That’s not a creativity problem; it’s a platform design problem.

The algorithmic chokehold
Over the past decade, YouTube has perfected the art of keeping audiences watching—including kids. But watching is not necessarily enjoying. Watchtime metrics continue to rise, but not always in line with satisfaction.

I call this Algorithmic Decay, when repetition beats originality and volume trumps value. “Quality” creators are incentivized to churn out more, not better.

The result is an ocean of mid-tier content, sprinkled with some excellent content standing tall and ensuring that YouTube remains a staple.

But I believe that quality does matter. Kids content has always been a pipeline for storytelling craft. And the magic of YouTube has always been its serendipity and diversity. (I remember being obsessed with Charlie the Unicorn more than 15 years ago, and Oats Studios’ early work nearly a decade ago.)

But when attention is the only metric that matters, stories can lose their rhythm; humor can lose its timing; and experimentation can disappear, replaced by sameness.

And it’s hard to argue that AI is not about to supercharge this sameness. We’re already seeing a flood of synthetic kids content: nursery rhymes generated at scale, character voices cloned, thumbnails optimized by machine. The coming years will test whether we can still tell the difference between something made for children and something made for the algorithm.

The money problem
Then there’s the economy. Yes, the market is hard on all platforms for kids content. Monetization on YouTube Kids is inconsistent—and Shorts, while wildly popular (especially in my house), has not had an obvious economy for many creators. The result is a platform that rewards instant hits and burns out long-term builders.

In research I presented at Kidscreen Summit 2025, I argued that kids IPs should be measured by cost-per-fan in the future—and by that I mean how efficiently a piece of content builds lasting affinity, not how many minutes it traps.

But that’s hard to achieve on a platform where sustainability depends on a single line of code. One algorithmic tweak can erase years of audience-building. For small studios, that’s existential. Without a functioning economy, quality declines, audiences disengage, and the algorithm—starved of good content—spirals further.

What’s being lost
We’re seeing a widening gap between what’s viewed and what’s valued. The IPs and channels that built long-term trust—including Bluey, Ms. Rachel, MrBeast’s philanthropy arcs, and even legacy brands like Nickelodeon—are now struggling to sustain attention without algorithmic reinforcement.

Kids want and need stories, but they’re being trained to expect them in 20-second bursts.

Parents feel it, too. The YouTube Kids app segmentation is confusing, ad policies are pressured by legislation, and the discovery experience is chaotic. YouTube was once where families bonded around shared fandoms. But increasingly, it’s where they negotiate screen-time rules.

What needs to change
If YouTube wants to remain the backbone of kids media—something I still believe it could be, and that we certainly need it to be—it has to rediscover its soul. Here are three shifts that could help:

1. Elevate curation over automation. Build human-led editorial layers—especially within YouTube Kids—that are led by educators and trusted creators, not code. In fairness, this is practiced now to an extent.

2. Reward narrative completion, not just watch time. Value stories that end well. Developing minds need lessons and resolutions, not loops that never end.

3. Invest in creator sustainability metrics. Track community return and repeat engagement, not only retention curves. Reward creators who build lasting audiences.

Ultimately, I don’t think YouTube’s biggest opposition is TikTok or Roblox. It’s trust erosion. When creators can disappear overnight, audiences learn that nothing lasts, and that’s a challenge for an industry built on fandom and care.

Someone—maybe YouTube (because this isn’t just a YouTube problem), or maybe the next platform—needs to make long-term engagement financeable through both content paydays and product sales.

Kids and families still crave great stories. They just need a system that believes in them as much as they believe in the screen.

—

Jo Redfern is the founder of Futrhood Media and a leading kids media strategist. Through her company, she specializes in platform-first audience strategies for Gen Z and Gen Alpha across sports and entertainment—particularly YouTube, Roblox and short-form social media video. Her recent clients include ITV Studios, 9 Story Media Group and The Premier League. 

Peter Robinson is the founder of Gone With, a research and strategy agency focused on kids & family audiences. With two decades in media consulting, he helps global brands grow reach and relevance by building fan bases, engaging early adopters, and ensuring audience insight drives content and strategy.

This story originally appeared in Kidscreen‘s Q1 2026 magazine issue.