Ask A Genius 1541: YouTube’s Attention Economy: Sex, Politics, and Authenticity in “Naked at Night”
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/11
In this conversation, Rick Rosner discusses the analytics and creative dilemmas behind Naked at Night, his YouTube show featuring artists, musicians, and occasional bikini-clad guests. Despite a surge in male viewers aged 30–40, audience retention remains low—most leave within a minute when the content proves more talk and art than titillation. Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen examine how thumbnails, algorithms, and audience expectations drive misleading clicks and force creators to choose between authenticity, eroticism, and politicization. The discussion reveals the friction between artistic intent and digital attention economics in an age of algorithmic seduction.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What did Adam’s data actually show in terms of audience behaviour—view time, demographics, engagement trends?
Rick Rosner: Adam helps us with our show and shares some analytics. Not for your show and mine—that one primarily exists in transcript form—but for Naked at Night, the one I do with Lance, JD, Mark, and sometimes you as a guest. For the last two episodes, Cassidy and Channing joined us—two women in bikinis being drawn by Lance during the broadcast.
We have gained more viewers, but not more subscribers. The new viewers only stay for about a minute. My theory is that our show—mostly talking, some drawing, and a bit of singing at the end from JD, and last week from Cassidy, who is a talented singer and guitarist—does not match what those new viewers expect. People see a thumbnail featuring a woman in a bikini and assume it is going to be sexually explicit. When they realize it is not, they leave.
Jacobsen: Have you considered whether thumbnail presentation or algorithmic categorization might be driving those misleading clicks?
Rosner: That is likely part of it. Our show has a lot going on, featuring women who are both interesting and articulate. Cassidy, for instance, described herself as an anarchist, which added a twist to the discussion. However, that doesn’t change the underlying problem of sexual expectations. The analytics show a 100% male audience—mostly men between 30 and 40, which is a demographic that often searches for erotic content.
Jacobsen: How does that shape your creative direction?
Rosner: Men in that age group still have strong sexual drives, while younger adults are reportedly having less sex than previous generations. Surveys from the General Social Survey and Pew show declining sexual frequency among people under 30, partly due to digital substitution and stress. Masturbation rates are mixed but stable. So, we’re attracting men who are looking for “bonerific” content—but that’s not what we’re offering.
Jacobsen: Are you tempted to lean into the erotic side for numbers, or would that dilute what makes the show unique?
Rosner: That’s the crossroads we’re at. We could make it more overtly sexual. I know how to stage spectacle—I worked on The Man Show, where we had women jumping on trampolines. I finance Naked at Night, so technically, we could hire topless models. But YouTube doesn’t allow explicit sexual content meant to arouse. Limited nudity is allowed only in educational, documentary, scientific, or artistic contexts, but even then, it’s often age-restricted and demonetized. So the “artistic disclaimer” approach doesn’t guarantee anything.
Jacobsen: Y Are you near the ad-revenue threshold yet?
Rosner: Not yet. To qualify for ad-revenue sharing, you need at least 1,000 subscribers and either 4,000 public watch hours in 12 months or 10 million Shorts views in 90 days. We’re nowhere close. Some fan-funding tools unlock earlier, but they don’t provide a scalable income.
Jacobsen: What about the show’s political component?
Rosner: Lance misses the political discussions. I’ve been trying to tone that down because the yelling wore us out, but he wants to express his right-wing views more directly. He points to someone like Doug TenNapel—the creator of Earthworm Jim—who pivoted into political commentary and found a loyal audience with his conservative show. Lance could do something like that: draw while talking politics.
Jacobsen: Does political controversy bring engagement or just polarization that drives away nuanced viewers?
Rosner: There’s an audience for it, but it bums me out. I don’t want to flood the world with right-wing nonsense without at least pushing back. I don’t want to deny Lance a livelihood—he’s a struggling artist—but I also don’t want him contributing to misinformation. So we’re at a few crossroads—caught between sexual marketing, political division, and creative authenticity.
Jacobsen: Have you considered reframing the show’s format around satire or meta-commentary, so the erotic and political themes become deliberate subjects rather than accidental bait?
Rosner: That’s not a bad idea. It could allow us to maintain humour and honesty while addressing the absurdity of the attention economy itself. It’s either that, or accept that our crossroads are paved with boobs and right-wing bullshit.
Rosner: Basically, we’re at a crossroads between boobs and Breitbart politics. That’s a good way to put it. It’s kind of interesting—we’ve seen a viewership increase of about 1,000% with Eladie and Vicky, two lovely young women.
Jacobsen: How much more on top of that increase do you need to become monetized? Another thousand percent?
Rosner: Probably, yeah. I think we could get monetized if we started getting… I don’t know. But Adam tells us it’s not just about the number of people who stop by; it’s the cumulative number of minutes they spend watching. I’m unsure about the total time required to reach monetization or the types of ad deals you receive.
Also, I’ve got another agenda—I’m trying to get a book deal. I know someone who got one, and in their acceptance letter, the publisher listed all their followers across different social media platforms. I have a decent number of followers on X, but it’s become a garbage heap, and nobody cares about it anymore. I started posting on Instagram, where I share my micromosaic work, and I’ve only got a few hundred followers. On YouTube, we have 5,400 subscribers, which is a decent number, but not a huge following. I don’t think that would help me get a book deal.
Plus, Carole tells me that if you’re selling fiction, publishers care less about your following. So I don’t know. That’s where we are.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 