For most of the modern entertainment era, the answer to a simple question was obvious.
Who runs the media business?
Disney.
The company built a machine that every studio tried to replicate. Own the IP, control distribution, and turn stories into global franchises that move through films, TV, licensing, and consumer products. The model defined the modern entertainment industry for decades.
Now something quietly changed.
According to estimates from research firm MoffettNathanson, YouTube generated roughly $62B in revenue in 2025, narrowly surpassing Disney’s $60.9B media segment for the year.
There’s an important caveat. The comparison excludes Disney’s Experiences division, which includes theme parks, cruises, and resorts and remains one of the company’s largest businesses.
But inside the media business itself, the lead appears to have changed hands.
The company that now generates more revenue than Disney’s media operations does not resemble a traditional studio, a network group, or even a typical streaming service.
It resembles an attention marketplace.
The Company Hollywood Never Took Seriously
For most of its history, YouTube existed outside the hierarchy that defined the entertainment industry.
- Studios saw it as user-generated video.
- Networks treated it as digital overflow.
- Agencies categorized it as online inventory.
That perception stuck for years.
YouTube wasn’t competing for Emmys. It wasn’t producing billion dollar film franchises. It wasn’t commissioning prestige dramas designed to anchor streaming services.
While the industry debated which streaming service would win the subscription wars, something more fundamental was happening.
Attention was shifting.
YouTube became the default destination for video consumption across billions of people. The platform expanded across phones, laptops, tablets, and eventually connected TV. Creators built audiences that rivaled cable networks. Entire programming categories emerged that never existed inside the traditional studio system.
None of this initially looked like competition for Hollywood.
YouTube did not resemble a network. It didn’t resemble a studio. It originally didn;t even resemble a streaming service.
What it was actually building was a distribution system.
Distribution advantages rarely resemble the systems they replace while they are forming. They appear first in behavior.
Advertising Does Not Define TV
One of the more persistent debates across the industry revolves around whether YouTube should be considered part of the TV ecosystem.
The argument usually appears in discussions about programming standards and measurement. Some critics argue that YouTube cannot be considered part of TV because the platform hosts everything from professional programming to user generated video. Others point to the historical lack of standardized audience measurement systems traditionally associated with TV.
In this framing, TV represents professionally curated programming environments while YouTube represents an open video platform.
That reasoning confuses the medium with the business structures surrounding it.
Advertising never defined TV. Advertising funded TV.
The medium has always existed across multiple economic models. Broadcast networks relied on advertising. Premium cable relied on subscriptions. Pay-per-view relied on transactions. Streaming services rely on subscription and hybrid models.
Those financing structures evolved over time. The product remained the same.
TV has always meant professionally produced video designed for lean-back viewing on the largest screen in the home.
The debate now exists because the measurement and monetization systems built for linear TV do not translate cleanly into internet distributed video. The distribution model changed faster than the industry infrastructure around it.
The Quality Argument Misses the Point
Critics often argue that YouTube cannot be considered part of the TV ecosystem because the platform hosts everything from professional programming to user generated content. In this view, TV represents high quality programming while YouTube represents an open video platform.
That framing rewrites the history of television.
For most of its existence, TV contained a mix of prestige programming, syndicated reruns, reality shows, infomercials, public access broadcasts, shopping channels, and late night filler. The medium was never defined by quality standards. It was defined by distribution and viewing behavior.
People turned on the largest screen in their home and watched video.
That behavior now includes YouTube.
In fact, much of the growth in YouTube viewing on CTV comes from professionally produced programming distributed by the same broadcasters that once controlled traditional TV. Networks increasingly publish clips, highlights, and full episodes on the platform to reach audiences who no longer rely on linear schedules.
Critics sometimes point to ambient programming such as multi hour music streams or relaxation videos as evidence that YouTube viewing should not count as TV. But passive viewing has always existed in the TV ecosystem. Cable news runs continuously throughout the day. Reruns play in the background for hours. Music and weather channels historically filled entire broadcast schedules.
It’s not the viewing behavior did not change. It’s the distribution infrastructure that did.
Distribution Rewrites the Economics of Media
The deeper reason YouTube now sits at the top of the media industry has little to do with content libraries and everything to do with distribution economics.
Traditional media companies grew inside systems defined by structural scarcity.
- Channel capacity was limited.
- Programming schedules dictated when audiences could watch.
- Geography controlled which markets received which shows.
- Advertising inventory was finite.
Those constraints shaped the economics of our entire industry.
Internet distribution removes those limits.
Video can reach global audiences instantly. Programming doesn’t need to fit inside fixed time slots. Discovery happens through recommendation systems instead of channel guides.
Under these conditions the strategic advantage shifts toward companies capable of aggregating attention at enormous scale.
YouTube built EXACTLY that system.
The platform distributes video to billions of viewers across nearly every device on earth. It monetizes that attention through advertising markets and subscription products. It continuously feeds its ecosystem through a creator economy that produces an effectively unlimited stream of programming.
No traditional studio system operates this way.
Studios scale output by increasing budgets. And YouTube scales output by improving the infrastructure that creators use to produce video.
The Creator Economy Is a Production System
The creator ecosystem functions as a decentralized production network.
YouTube has already paid more than $100B to creators, music companies, and media partners. That payout structure incentivizes millions of producers to continuously upload new programming in pursuit of audience growth and monetization.
The result is a constantly expanding catalog of video.
Some of it resembles traditional TV. Long form docs, serialized commentary, educational programming, and lifestyle content regularly attract audiences comparable to cable channels.
Other categories are unique to creator culture and operate entirely outside traditional development pipelines.
None of it requires a centralized greenlight process.
Every improvement to the platform increases the output of the entire ecosystem. Better discovery algorithms help creators reach audiences faster. Monetization tools increase earnings potential. Production tools continue to reduce the cost of creating high quality video.
Artificial intelligence tools entering the production workflow will accelerate that dynamic even further.
The supply of programming expands because the incentives reward anyone capable of attracting attention.
The Living Room Changed the Equation
For years, YouTube was widely perceived as a mobile product.
That piece of industry lore stopped being accurate a long time ago.
CTV has turned the living room into one of the platform’s largest viewing environments. Millions of households now open the YouTube app on their TV screens every night and watch long form programming in the same lean back format that historically defined traditional TV viewing.
This shift has major economic implications.
The living room remains the center of the video advertising market. Once YouTube established itself as a primary destination on connected TVs, the platform entered the same economic territory that historically funded broadcast networks and cable channels.
The business now generates more than $40B annually in advertising revenue, while subscription products like YouTube Premium, YouTube Music, and YouTube TV add additional layers of revenue on top of the same distribution engine.
Two monetization systems now operate on top of one global distribution system.
The Streaming Wars Take
YouTube surpassing Disney’s media segment signals a deeper shift in how power is structured inside the entertainment industry. And even if the exact crossover point is debatable, the outcome isn’t.
Disney built the most successful content machine in modern media history. Its strategy relied on IP, franchise development, and global licensing relationships that allowed its stories to move through theaters, TV networks, and consumer products.
That model thrived in a world where distribution channels were limited.
Internet distribution changes the equation.
When the marginal cost of distributing video falls dramatically and global reach becomes instantaneous, ownership of individual titles becomes less important than the ability to aggregate and organize attention at massive scale.
YouTube sits directly in that position.
The platform attracts billions of viewers each month and supports millions of creators who continuously expand the supply of programming. Advertising markets scale automatically with audience growth, while subscription services layer additional revenue streams onto the same infrastructure.
As viewership grows, more creators participate because monetization opportunities expand. More creators increase the supply of programming, which attracts additional viewing time. The system reinforces itself as it grows.
This compounding dynamic explains how YouTube overtook Disney’s media segment without operating a traditional studio system.
Disney perfected the economics of content ownership.
YouTube built the infrastructure that organizes global attention.
In a world shaped by internet distribution, the company that controls attention increasingly sits at the center of the media business.
The Streaming Wars is intentionally ad-free
We don’t run display ads. Not because we can’t, but because we don’t believe in them.
They interrupt the reading experience. They cheapen the work. And they burn advertisers’ money on impressions nobody actually wants.
So we chose a different model.
We say the things people in this industry are already thinking but don’t say out loud. We connect the dots beyond the headline and focus on explaining why things matter to the people working in this business.
If you believe industry coverage can exist without clutter and interruption, you can support it here → SUPPORT TSW.
Support is optional. But it directly funds research and continued coverage — and helps prove this model can work.
Support TSW →
