I think it's more like being annoyed at OTA television programs which are interrupted by ads put there by the broadcasters, because none of the funding comes fr

I think it's more like being annoyed at OTA television programs which are interrupted by ads put there by the broadcasters, because none of the funding comes from viewers/subscribers, it's all from ads ...so people who don't want ads are marketed to by cable TV companies, and invited to pay a subscription for TV with no ads, because _all_ the program's funding comes from subscribers ...and then either the cable TV people get greedy and start adding ads to programs already 100% funded by subscribers ...or the program makers get greedy and cut product-placement deals to get extra money on top of their 100% funding from subscribers In either of these situations, subscribers can rightly ask: why the fuck did I agree to fund these people? They promised me no ads if I pay, and they've added ads. The answer is: don't pay, make them lose revenue, and either they will respect the promises they made to subscribers, or they will abandon it completely and go back to free-to-air with ads, or they'll go bankrupt (or they'll keep conning people, and some portion of suckers will always fall for the "no ads! oh hey, i started adding ads to your no ads subscription, hope you like it! ka-ching!" approach, and they'll get by on duplicity)