On a critical note, the piece makes the attention the Youtubers garner seem fairly effortless, exaggerates the likelihood of ‘normal people’ making a living in this way, doesn’t fully acknowledge the dark side of internet celebrity and makes an uncomplicated link between authenticity and social media content.
Here are some further readings if you like a side order of analysis with your light reading on a Sunday:
Spyer's anthropological take on the dynamics of social organisation of groups of YouTube beauty gurus shows in reality how much effort goes into video production and publicity.
Whilst this Atlantic article demonstrates how the attention only rarely turns into financial success (a fact glossed by the Observer).
And this critique of the culture of celebratisation by boyd uncovers the flip side of attention for those least able to handle it (again largely glossed by the Observer).
Finally, here’s a more nuanced discussion about authenticity in a social media context.