3 ms·
> So I happily pay for premium and while I'd rather that were the only option (I think ad supported content is an inherently socially corrosive model) Still do
by Scoundreller 3y ago
> So I happily pay for premium and while I'd rather that were the only option (I think ad supported content is an inherently socially corrosive model)
Still doesn't protect you from in-video sponsorships (skullshare, OstVPN, etc.), product placements, etc. Some creators especially do these because it protects them from platform demonetization risk.
Same shit with paying for cabletv & movie theatre tickets. If anything, people that pay are their most valuable targets for ads.
Even a newspaper that I sub to runs ads and a zillion trackers against me. Ugh.
I get where you're coming from, but the platform could more to protect paying members from this. E.g. creators with over $x revenue must tag promos so the platform ships them for paying users
- jcronenberg 3y agoTo me at least the sponsorblock extension is completely ethical when you are using youtube premium. The creators get paid extra for a premium view anyway, plus I don't think advertisers for in video ads pay per view of that segment (if there are even tools to detect that metric) or anything like that so you're not even hurting the creator. But I agree that something built in by youtube for premium users would be nicer. Would get youtube more premium users too I think because I was e.g. initially hesitent too of buying premium because I knew I would still be getting in video sponsors.
- scrollaway 3y agoIt doesn’t, but Nebula does. Creators don’t put sponsorships in their Nebula videos. And they had a lifetime subscription recently so personally I jumped on it and don’t have to deal with Yet Another Subscription…