Im a little unsure as to why this has so few views. Your honest opinion would be most appreciated.

[digital helm]

https://youtu.be/CsHn6cS0qkQ

[hot forge]

ask the question: why -> you build the mystery you are going to explore with the audience

6. then you do the schoolchildren thing as an anecdote to make the enormity of the crime more visibility and relatable

7. so generally you see i think you have a story flow problem that does not build enough suspense and mystery for a video that is supposedly "utterly unbelievable", you are not a newsspeaker, you need to build mystery and suspense, which means to ask "why" "how could this happen" in many ways, especially at the beginning. the facts are at the end of the story flow.

8. too many static pictures, there are, specifically for this incident, lots of sources. you could do a collage of news papers, a collage of news videos (a few seconds should be fine), the statements of people affected, etc. that all makes it more personal and makes the audience dive into it being relatable. now when you do something similar for historic things, draw from books, pictures, old videos that may fit the theme etc. lets say you have jack the ripper as one video - there are probably videos you could use from historic reconstructions, old london etc. you get what i mean. the whole presentation is too static. you need to have 80% footage, 20% you (in my opinion). If you use a static picture make it animated a bit, lets say move a picture against a background, so it does not feel so static.

9. at 3:15 you build a timeline. people are visual creatures. giving them times is bad, you need to provide visual aid with the dates and times, that basically is the structure for your story. so if you have a timeline you could add a timeline into the video that updates you further you go and connects the dirrent parts of the video.

10. focus less on the facts and more on emotion. the facts are the outer structure what people are interested in is WHY someone would crash the plane. so you should have focussed more on the history of the pilot, his depression, his motivation and emotions. you do this later, but at that point its too late, the empathy needs to be at the start. make people get into the skin of that pilot, that makes subsequent facts more interesting.
    So the story structure could be
    newsreels -> shocker:pilot crashed the plane on purpose -> you ask the question: why -> who was pilot xyz -> suspense narration "everything was fine", then basically the decent into catastrophy (this could be a place for the timeline, like a forensic narration) -> outcome, here could be a place with the schoolchildren

11. so to summarize, i think the basics are all there, you are a good narrator, but you need a.) a changed story flow b.) more third party sources, otherwise its too static c.) some sound support, not necessary music, but sound to support certain sections d.) you need to appeal more to emotion than facts, appeal to the mordbis aspect and fear after all that is your channel

ah shit

[crystal monolith]

Low views is all relative, it seems to be in line with previous uploads for views.
What is your total number of impressions for this video, and the ctr(if low sample size this number doesnt matter)

[hot forge]

let me try again

1. Title is very poor. This was a major event (Germanwings Flight 9525). This should be obviously part of the title. Beyond that the title is convoluted. Example: "Germanwings Flight 9525 - When pilot mental illness became mass murder." <- this plays with the fears of the audience that it might happen again when THEY fly.

2. The thumbnail seems ok

3. your intro should not start with you, that is very slow and anticlimactic (we have the thumbnail and then it pans to a seemingly nice dude in a shirt, that can come later). maybe a collage of news reels after the crash as an intro to your moderation.

4. the schoolchildren thing is fine but i would not start with that, that is very specific. the actual shocker of that thing is that the pilot crashed the plane ON PURPOSE and that is where the morbid fascination of viewers might come from.

5. so basically newsreels -> shocker:pilot crashed the plane on purpose -> you ask the question: why -> you build the mystery you are going to explore with the audience

6. then you do the schoolchildren thing as an anecdote to make the enormity of the crime more visibility and relatable

7. so generally you see i think you have a story flow problem that does not build enough suspense and mystery for a video that is supposedly "utterly unbelievable", you are not a newsspeaker, you need to build mystery and suspense, which means to ask "why" "how could this happen" in many ways, especially at the beginning. the facts are at the end of the story flow.

8. too many static pictures, there are, specifically for this incident, lots of sources. you could do a collage of news papers, a collage of news videos (a few seconds should be fine), the statements of people affected, etc. that all makes it more personal and makes the audience dive into it being relatable. now when you do something similar for historic things, draw from books, pictures, old videos that may fit the theme etc. lets say you have jack the ripper as one video - there are probably videos you could use from historic reconstructions, old london etc. you get what i mean. the whole presentation is too static. you need to have 80% footage, 20% you (in my opinion). If you use a static picture make it animated a bit, lets say move a picture against a background, so it does not feel so static.

9. at 3:15 you build a timeline. people are visual creatures. giving them times is bad, you need to provide visual aid with the dates and times, that basically is the structure for your story. so if you have a timeline you could add a timeline into the video that updates you further you go and connects the dirrent parts of the video.

10. focus less on the facts and more on emotion. the facts are the outer structure what people are interested in is WHY someone would crash the plane. so you should have focussed more on the history of the pilot, his depression, his motivation and emotions. you do this later, but at that point its too late, the empathy needs to be at the start. make people get into the skin of that pilot, that makes subsequent facts more interesting.
    So the story structure could be
    newsreels -> shocker:pilot crashed the plane on purpose -> you ask the question: why -> who was pilot xyz -> suspense narration "everything was fine", then basically the decent into catastrophy (this could be a place for the timeline, like a forensic narration) -> outcome, here could be a place with the schoolchildren

11. so to summarize, i think the basics are all there, you are a good narrator, but you need a.) a changed story flow b.) more third party sources, otherwise its too static c.) some sound support, not necessary music, but sound to support certain sections d.) you need to appeal more to emotion than facts, appeal to the mordbis aspect and fear after all that is your channel

[digital helm]

6.9k impressions and 1.8% c t r

[crystal monolith]

ok so 1.8% is a little low So you have a title + thumbnail issue.

Impressions are just thumbnails shown on people feeds/homepage. Of the 6.9k Potential viewers The ctr (click through rate)or the people who clicked on it was 1.8% or just 173 potential viewers clicked on it. So thats what we can tell before even watching the video.

[digital helm]

Thank you very much William. I suspected some of what you said to be true. I need to make the story more compelling indeed.
Really dont want to start including things like newsreels or outside video.......just a preference of mine....but I am going to give it more thought.

[crystal monolith]

Your video can be a incredible a 10/10 video but if it doesnt draw attention and isnt "clickable" then no one will find out about how good it is.

[digital helm]

Yes, and really it should have been more I think. I altered the thumbnail and title a couple of times, and it doesnt seem to help much

[hot forge]

why not? its part of the history

and using third party sources gives it an objective reality

[digital helm]

Just that I wanted to do short documentaires from my point of view and not 'tell the news' as it were

[crystal monolith]

Well why do you think it should be more?
You have 500ish subs. Youtube showed it to a potential 6.9k viewers they as whole were not interested in the title+thumbnail.

As a creator we are not owed views but earn them.

[hot forge]

if i see documentaries on tv they usually start with something visual, something relatable, not facts 🙂

the thing is you need to get people emotionally invested

[digital helm]

Scoop.....very true. Maybe my expectations are set too high and it is I that needs the adjustments 🙂

William....I can see it needs something a little more compelling to start, but as Scoop says, I need to get the people there to start with.

[crystal monolith]

However give yourself some credit at the same time. You hit 500subs in 31 videos.
You are probably near the first monetization tier if I had to guess.

Thumbnails and compelling titles are hard to come up with and its something that comes with time similiar to learning any other skill there is.

I think potentially the titles are a bit too wordy, they get chopped off and at a glance you have no idea what the back half of the title is

for example of titles being chopped up on pc

Another potential tool you may or not be using is, fellow creators in your niche as inspiration(not copy of course)

So looking up mick philpott from your 2nd to most recent upload your title is very wordy

but this is your competition

[digital helm]

Scoop....thank you. I think I was using all the characters because I thought I should. But I can see how its not always beneficial

[crystal monolith]

They are straight to the point and the viewer can take a glance and know what its about.

[digital helm]

Ok, yes, I can see that

[hot forge]

again i am going to be blunt but that guys starts with third party footage

in every video

[digital helm]

Which guy?

[hot forge]

https://www.youtube.com/@TheTrueCrimeChannel

[crystal monolith]

Im not talking about content as far as a video. I havent watched any content. Im talking purely thumbnail and title and those are the top results when the topic is searched.

[digital helm]

William, Some people do use outside reels and videos to give their own videos more of a TV documentary feel. Im wanting to create more of a storytelling feel. Telling the stories in my own words with just some photos for illustration purposes. Classed as short documentaries really

[digital helm]

I will definitely look at making the titles more Snappy

[crystal monolith]

You can make content any way you want right. Ideally you want to build a community with repeat viewers and go from there.

Over time skills will improve like scripting/voiceover/ editing. Focus on one to three things to improve on in each video.

[hot forge]

ok i get it, but even then you need to get people emotionally invested, people are interested in this topic not because of the facts, but because of the morbidity, so you still need to wrap it into a story and not a summarization of facts. external footage would just make it easier to tell the story, this way it is all on you and you have no guardrails.

[crystal monolith]

My last bit of advice is to look at your first produced content to the most recent and you should be able to see tangible results if you are learning/moving in the right direction.

[digital helm]

I will rewrite my beginnings to be more interesting to more people, however, Im not ruling out your idea as yet William

[hot forge]

actually you know what, chatgpt could help with storyfying the facts. at least with crafting an outline

[digital helm]

Scoop....yes, I definitely think there is improvement