3 ms·

This is a mere personal anecdote so it doesn't mean much at large, but I'm pessimistic about the advent of sponsored {thing} not necessarily with Giphy. To me t

This is a mere personal anecdote so it doesn't mean much at large, but I'm pessimistic about the advent of sponsored {thing} not necessarily with Giphy. To me this is just another %thing% that advertisers have leached a tentacle into for the sake of getting me to buy something. I get it, it's the game we play now with content that is ostensibly or otherwise "free", pandora's box is open but the internet has become such a frustrating place for me personally every time I see "Sponsored tweet" or "sponsored post" or "sponsored ________" that tries to blend itself into the rank and file of non-sponsored content I would otherwise enjoy.

twblalock 9y ago
The question is, how can the non-sponsored content you enjoy continue to exist if the company that hosts it doesn't make money? After the VC money runs out, content hosting service need to pay the bills somehow. I can only think of a few ways this can work: you pay for the content you like via a subscription or per unit of content, you look at ads, or you look at sponsored tweets/gifs/whatever. I suspect that most people would be unwilling to pay subscription fees, so ads and/or sponsored content are probably the way to go for most companies.
- iamdave 9y ago
  Agreed and well met. At least for me, if the content generated is truly engaging and substantive enough, I gladly would pay a subscription fee. This may not work arguably for a gif site, but your point is well taken-because it's completely true and we see it daily. I suppose to unpack my position a bit better than I have so far, if the sponsored content is truly relevant and engaging, I'd have far less things to complain about on this topic. As it is, the majority of "sponsored content" I've seen hasn't really amounted to much that seems to fit within the ecosystem it exists in; it oft seems out of place and irrelevant. But again, your point is well taken and I'm sure smarter people than I will continue working on this question and find ways to continue delivering content freeloaders like me love to consume :P

twblalock 9y ago

The question is, how can the non-sponsored content you enjoy continue to exist if the company that hosts it doesn't make money? After the VC money runs out, content hosting service need to pay the bills somehow. I can only think of a few ways this can work: you pay for the content you like via a subscription or per unit of content, you look at ads, or you look at sponsored tweets/gifs/whatever. I suspect that most people would be unwilling to pay subscription fees, so ads and/or sponsored content are probably the way to go for most companies.

iamdave 9y ago
Agreed and well met. At least for me, if the content generated is truly engaging and substantive enough, I gladly would pay a subscription fee. This may not work arguably for a gif site, but your point is well taken-because it's completely true and we see it daily. I suppose to unpack my position a bit better than I have so far, if the sponsored content is truly relevant and engaging, I'd have far less things to complain about on this topic. As it is, the majority of "sponsored content" I've seen hasn't really amounted to much that seems to fit within the ecosystem it exists in; it oft seems out of place and irrelevant. But again, your point is well taken and I'm sure smarter people than I will continue working on this question and find ways to continue delivering content freeloaders like me love to consume :P