At the time of writing, my two-week review of the Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra has hit just over 88,000 views.
It’s done quite a bit more than that, though. It has also appeared more than 765,000 times during YouTube sessions throughout the world, achieved a click-through rate of 9.7%, and encouraged 559 people to hit the ‘subscribe’ button.
This has happened in less than two days. And this is a video which, when it went live, started for the first few hours as a 5/10 on the ‘how crap is your latest video’ YouTube Studio scale.
This is what it looks like now.
So, what happened?
It’s fair to suggest that my S24 Ultra video has gone viral, just like the M3 iMac video I published in November. I don’t experience many of these seismic videos - they are unicorns in Mark Ellis Reviews land.
This is no bad thing. Achieving viral success on YouTube is a great feeling; the numbers shoot up at a rate which is, frankly, breathtaking. But those numbers also run the risk of pigeonholing you within a niche. You become known as the creator who does <insert viral topic in which you scored highly here>. Make a video about something else next week, and it will tank, by comparison. Achieve another viral video in the aforementioned niche a few weeks later, and you’re only restricting yourself further.
I’d much rather have a spread of decent views across a broader range of topics with the odd viral monster thrown in for good measure. I think I’ve achieved that goal thus far, but it’s hard to tell. This is what makes YouTube so damn hard; with the greatest will in the world, no creator can fully control their destiny on the platform.
What fascinates me is why some of these videos go viral. After all, my S24 Ultra video wasn’t the first to the post (indeed, my first impressions video of the device was dropped on the embargo date, and that has ‘only’ achieved 23,000 views to date). This latest video also didn’t do anything different to the reviews that are already out there - it was just yours truly telling the world what he liked and didn’t like about Samsung’s latest flagship smartphone.
Boiled down, and as with everything in life, the reasons my video hit the big time are the simplest and most obvious.
The thumbnail worked. It wasn’t designed by yours truly - I now have a thumbnail designer whom I can call whenever I think the video needs his expertise. And for anyone who is fed up with silly faces on YouTube thumbnails, I’m afraid this is categoric proof that they still work. For those of you who haven’t seen it, here you go:
Beyond the silly face, it features the product, some very descriptive text, and just enough visual flair to make people stop and take notice.
The title worked, too. Once again, it features the product name, a clear description of what the video is about, and a nice dose of clickbait. Adding ‘the TRUTH’ leaves just enough of a knowledge gap to incite a click, and I’m confident the video delivers its promise in that regard. That’s how clickbait should work.
Timing plays a huge role in the success - or otherwise - of a YouTube video. The ‘two weeks later’ thing for tech reviews is a pretty big deal. After consuming the initial flurry of reviews and first impressions, consumers generally take time to digest the information before committing to the purchase. A two-week later review usually provides additional answers to any questions that might have arisen during the early coverage and reignites the desire to buy. There are also the viewers who did buy immediately but who want to either justify their purchase, seek validation for their decision, or suss out if they have a defective unit.
There is, of course, a sprinkling of luck, too - that has to play a role in the performance of a YouTube video. Most niches are saturated these days, and for your hard work to be seen by as many people as possible, good fortune needs to land on your doorstep. Consistency puts you in a position to find that luck.
I’m also super proud of that S24 Ultra video - I think it’s one of the best videos I’ve published so far. It starts strongly and hooks the viewer, and the narrative is very well constructed; there’s just enough intrigue to keep people watching. I also encourage audience interaction throughout - either directly or indirectly - because I know how important engagement is for the algorithm. This element of the video’s success doesn’t come from luck, either - it comes from four years of damn hard work, and even longer before that building the skill set that has enabled me to become a successful full-time creator.
The big question: is this repeatable? Well, given what I noted earlier about the poisoned chalice of the viral video, I’d suggest that chasing virality isn’t a particularly smart tactic. You’re far better off just doing your thing and letting YouTube and the audience decide what does and doesn’t work. That’s all I do.
A great example of this is the follow-up video I made to that huge iMac hit. To date, that has scored just over 11,000 views - versus the 294,000 views achieved by its predecessor. Same format, the same thumbnail and title technique, same target audience. But it tanked, by comparison. Why? I have absolutely no idea.
The moral of the story: don’t chase big numbers on YouTube. Instead, create videos you’d want to watch and of which you’re proud. Some will hit big, others won’t - but you’ll end up with a far more consistently performing channel, and one which doesn’t wedge you into a corner that demands you make the same video again, and again.