3 ms·

> If you believe that content creators have a right to earn money there are two ways that can happen: 1) directly - you pay directly for the content that you wa

> If you believe that content creators have a right to earn money there are two ways that can happen: 1) directly - you pay directly for the content that you want to consume or 2) indirectly - you see ads or sell your data in some way. I don't think this is a truism. Sites in the style of BBC/CNN/Fox/Yahoo/etc. may have a tough time with their online content if they aren't able to support those properties with ads. IME most content that's actually worth the time it takes to consume (e.g., well-composed articles and essays written by field experts) is not ad-supported. A lot is behind paywalls, and still more is provided on non-ad-supported websites. For example, distributed freely by fee-supported professional organizations or else by the author him/her-self as a tool for self-promotion/brand building. I don't see any reason why high-quality content can't survive on non-ad revenue, given that there are plenty of counter-examples. And that's just considering the ad-supported sites that are actually content-driven. A lot of online advertisement is not supporting original content creation at all.

dwild 11y ago
> For example, distributed freely by fee-supported professional organizations or else by the author him/her-self as a tool for self-promotion/brand building Content made to promote something, isn't that an ads? Sure that could happen but hell nothing stop ads from being more high quality right now. I much prefer to watch content that's primary goal is to entertain, teach, etc... and not to sell you stuff. > I don't see any reason why high-quality content can't survive on non-ad revenue, given that there are plenty of counter-examples. Well nothing stop them to exist right now. The reverse is false though, content funded by ads currently only exist based on that good ad targeting. Personally I seriously hope Google push more Youtube Red and Google Contributor. Ad work for people that can't pay for it (or don't want to), we only need something for people that doesn't want ads but can pay instead.

dwild 11y ago

> For example, distributed freely by fee-supported professional organizations or else by the author him/her-self as a tool for self-promotion/brand building Content made to promote something, isn't that an ads? Sure that could happen but hell nothing stop ads from being more high quality right now. I much prefer to watch content that's primary goal is to entertain, teach, etc... and not to sell you stuff. > I don't see any reason why high-quality content can't survive on non-ad revenue, given that there are plenty of counter-examples. Well nothing stop them to exist right now. The reverse is false though, content funded by ads currently only exist based on that good ad targeting. Personally I seriously hope Google push more Youtube Red and Google Contributor. Ad work for people that can't pay for it (or don't want to), we only need something for people that doesn't want ads but can pay instead.