3 ms·
Yes, I am of that opinion. An ad is an ad is an ad. If I pay for "no adverts" (as, unfortunately, advertised), it ought to be "no adverts". Calling an advert "
by spacedcowboy 1y ago
Yes, I am of that opinion.
An ad is an ad is an ad. If I pay for "no adverts" (as, unfortunately, advertised), it ought to be "no adverts". Calling an advert "sponsorship" is not a solution, it's lying.
I will not be continuing my "free trial" of premium YouTube at the end of it, it's not worth the money to pay for something it singularly fails to do.
- perching_aix 1y agoMaybe my perspective on this is different because of my experiences, but I won't deny it, content creator ads are annoying, and if I didn't have Sponsorblock, I'd be banging on the desk for it to become a proper Premium feature too. In my location, the ads served up by YouTube were a whole lot worse than what you'd see in videos. Think unapologetically ragebait local political propaganda. Passing through adblocking, even multiple layers of it. And since YouTube is actually interested in serving you those ads, they'll engage in an increasing amount of technological efforts as time goes on to ensure you see them. That's when I decided I'll rather pay up, than to see any of those ads even just one more time. Compared to that, being yapped to about some water bottle merch some creator is selling is almost like heaven. But yeah, if I didn't need to go the extra mile, would be happy about it too.