4 ms·
4 ads every 12 minutes was quite common on TV. I’ve always thought Youtube would ramp it up to this level one day. It’s only a matter of time until VoD does it
by alexis_fr 7y ago
4 ads every 12 minutes was quite common on TV. I’ve always thought Youtube would ramp it up to this level one day. It’s only a matter of time until VoD does it too (Netflix? for 7$?).
- perl4ever 7y agoIt's not the quantity of ads overall, it's that the content I want to watch is frequently essentially an ad anyway, and in this case it was for the same entity, and yet I can't watch it uninterrupted.
- wazoox 7y agoIt was quite common in the US. We Europeans always considered US TV as totally unwatchable, because of the horrible, constant ad interruption.
- perl4ever 7y agoI'm not sure it was always common in the US, I'm sure I heard a rumor that in olden days, cable didn't have ads, or had fewer ads because you paid for it. Some places in Europe pay for OTA TV so that could be connected with the quantity of ads, rather than the inherent superiority of the citizenry in all respects.
- wazoox 7y agoI think this has more to do with inherent superiority of the consumer defence laws. BTW ads are an almost unmitigated nuisance: when France banned ads after 8PM on its public channels, their audience numbers soared (so the project which was an obvious gift from Sarkozy to his media mogul friends, badly backfired).
- perl4ever 7y agoBanning ads was a failure, because it harmed the media? I thought the media was who sold ads. Also, public television in the US doesn't have the same level of ads as other channels.
- wazoox 7y agoThe idea was to ban ads on public TV to augment the price of ads for the private channels by reducing the market size. But instead people watched the no-ads channels more, so the price of ads on the private channels didn't soar but fell instead.
- catalogia 7y agoWith Netflix you're already hard pressed to go five minutes without product placement.