When the discussion is based on "negative externalities" of individuals towards tenants who are already at the mercy of a non-negotiable relationship receiving

When the discussion is based on "negative externalities" of individuals towards tenants who are already at the mercy of a non-negotiable relationship receiving an opaque and steadily decreasing cut of revenue, and when most tenants attempting to create have to rely on more than just ad revenue to keep creating, it seems to me that the more harmful actor in this scenario to tenants is the monopoly and not those who avoid ad revenue. It's not productive or in good faith discussion to flip the focus of an examination of negative externalities on those individuals avoiding ads once that is brought up, but again, the largest contributing problem actors are not what you care to talk about.