4 ms·
I would be willing to consider paying for vetted ads - in other words, you pay for the NYT and you get a guarantee that you're only seeing ads that have been pe
by bombcar 9mo ago
I would be willing to consider paying for vetted ads - in other words, you pay for the NYT and you get a guarantee that you're only seeing ads that have been personally vetted by the NYT for correctness, appropriateness, etc.
Advertising is speech and it used to be that if a magazine/newspaper printed a scam ad, it was horribly damaging to their business, both legally and morally.
- PaulHoule 9mo agoYou'd think so. I think YouTube has no idea that when I see 70% ads for things that are transparently scams, the other 30% of advertisers are being scammed too because I'm going to assume that they are all scams. Meta has been busted for putting it in writing that they could do something about scam ads but won't because it would cost them revenue in the short term.
- bombcar 9mo agoYouTube doesn't care as long as people are buying the ads. They need to be made to care, somehow.
- tcfhgj 9mo ago> I would be willing to consider paying for vetted ads why, though?
- direwolf20 9mo agoBecoming aware of the existence of products and services you might like is not inherently bad. It's the state of the industry that is bad.