3 ms·

Pretty likely the author of this article is confused. They're not charging a fee to users who decide to skip ads. They are, I suspect, offering two services : o

Pretty likely the author of this article is confused. They're not charging a fee to users who decide to skip ads. They are, I suspect, offering two services : one is low priced and does not permit skipping ads. The other is priced higher and does permit skipping ads. Much the same as Hulu in the US, or at least the same practical outcome.

jjulius 4y ago
>They're not charging a fee to users who decide to skip ads. >The other is priced higher and does permit skipping ads. Isn't your second comment "a fee to users who decide to skip ads"? And, yes, that this is a tiered plan is mentioned in the article by the author.
- petesergeant 4y ago
  The headline intentionally makes it sound like you'll be fined if you skip adverts, rather than a two-tier service being offered.
  - jjulius 4y ago
    That's why folk should read articles instead of trying to understand a nuanced subject that has been condensed to a single sentence. I don't know why people continue to remain shockedpikachu.jpg at the fact that headlines are supposed to grab your attention, and that the onus is on you to read further for clarification.
LeifCarrotson 4y ago
The second sentence of the article does read "Some Sky TV viewers will be required to pay if they want to fast forward through ad breaks." and it later elaborates with "However, if you happen to purchase a Sky Glass telly or the new Stream box after today, you will need to add the "Ad Skipping Add On pack" to your subscription if you want to spin through those commercials." The author is not confused, the editor who wrote the headline intentionally manipulated it to grab people's attention.
petesergeant 4y ago
Flagging the submission for just this reason -- it's spam-bait over a pretty dull announcement of a "with ads" tier being launched
1123581321 4y ago
The article is clear on the change; what you said is in the first couple sentences. You are misreading their terse writing style as them misunderstanding.

jjulius 4y ago

>They're not charging a fee to users who decide to skip ads. >The other is priced higher and does permit skipping ads. Isn't your second comment "a fee to users who decide to skip ads"? And, yes, that this is a tiered plan is mentioned in the article by the author.

petesergeant 4y ago
The headline intentionally makes it sound like you'll be fined if you skip adverts, rather than a two-tier service being offered.
- jjulius 4y ago
  That's why folk should read articles instead of trying to understand a nuanced subject that has been condensed to a single sentence. I don't know why people continue to remain shockedpikachu.jpg at the fact that headlines are supposed to grab your attention, and that the onus is on you to read further for clarification.

LeifCarrotson 4y ago

The second sentence of the article does read "Some Sky TV viewers will be required to pay if they want to fast forward through ad breaks." and it later elaborates with "However, if you happen to purchase a Sky Glass telly or the new Stream box after today, you will need to add the "Ad Skipping Add On pack" to your subscription if you want to spin through those commercials." The author is not confused, the editor who wrote the headline intentionally manipulated it to grab people's attention.

petesergeant 4y ago

Flagging the submission for just this reason -- it's spam-bait over a pretty dull announcement of a "with ads" tier being launched

1123581321 4y ago

The article is clear on the change; what you said is in the first couple sentences. You are misreading their terse writing style as them misunderstanding.