Hacker News Reader

Comment by loloquwowndueo | Hacker News Reader

Cue uBlock origin - I don’t recall the last time I watched an injected ad on YouTube. Of course most content these days is peddling some product, or has a quick word from sponsors - but at least I don’t have to put up with unrelated ads in the middle of a stream.

View on HN

And so the creators don't get paid when you watch their content.

I pay for YouTube Premium. Creators get paid and I don't watch ads. We have a family plan so this applies to the whole family.

We spend way more time watching YouTube than Netflix but pay for both.

> And so the creators don't get paid when you watch their content.

Let's be honest here -- creators aren't really getting paid any meaningful amount of money from those ads anymore. Those days are long gone. That's why all YouTubers who care about revenue do their own ads as part of their own content, and/or use things like Patreon.

There's only one reason why YouTubers even bother to allow YouTube to "monetize" them -- if they don't, YouTube won't recommend them to other viewers.

I also pay for Premium, though.

This is untrue afaik. Even big channels with big self-sponsorship (eg Linus Tech Tips) still make (pulling out of thin air here) something like 20-30%+ of their revenue from native google ads.

As I understand it, the big channels do make decent money from their cut of Google's ads. But the vast majority of YouTubers aren't big. I think it's a percentage game.

> And so the creators don't get paid when you watch their content.

They could ask the users to pay for the content they produce and measure how many microseconds would pass before they switch to someone else's videos.

It's an option.

I don't want to watch ads, I skip sponsored sections, I feel no guilt about it, if they can't monetize enough and have to shutdown operations, I can survive without that content.

What would you say if I was dancing in the middle of the streets asking for money and blaming people who don't give any because "I am not being paid for the show I've put up, you ingrates!"?

Nobody asked or forced content creators to upload their content on YT.

Your analogy is only correct if you watch content that's recommended to you, but many of us actively watch YouTubers we have subscribed to, in that case it makes sense for the creators to get paid then. Edit - Edited the comment a bit

95% of what I watch on YouTube is from YouTubers I actively subscribe to. I rarely use YouTube's recommendations (in no small part because YouTube is bad at recommendations for me).

I'm very happy to support the ones I follow who are doing it for a living. For most, I consider their cut of my Premium fee to be sufficient. For some, I go beyond by giving them money through Patreon and the like, or buying their swag.

of course it is fair to be paid, they should be paid regardless by YouTube though, not by me watching the ADS.

If I block the ads, YouTube should pay them nonetheless.

Because I chose to block the ADS, not the content creator.

But it's not my responsibility to watch the ADS or the sponsored content.

The content has been uploaded as "public & free" and I watch it for free.

Where is Youtube supposed to get the money to pay them if you don't watch the ads or buy premium, which is how they make money?

by selling ADS.

TV commercials are paid regardless of how many people are watching them, you pay for the potential audience, not for the actual number of viewers (which is always presumed).

Putting pressure on the viewers (us) to undergo the torture of constantly being nagged by glovo and audible ads every 15 seconds, it's frankly the best way to not get any more viewer and scare the old ones away, for the content creators.

You want to advertise on YT?

You pay for it and hope people will watch your ads, if they skip them, they are probably sh*t and you need to make better ads, not force people to lower their standards.

I'm confused here, what do you propose? Showing ads but allow to skip them? if you think they're bad?

Echoing this, a YT premium subscription feels like a proper transaction.

Nearly all of them shill some product in there video. They get paid.

Do you want to encourage this behaviour versus those who merely rely on what YouTube pays them?

If I had to choose between seeing the ads by YouTube and seeing the creator's own ad, I'd choose the second.

I don't really know why. But if I turn off ad blocking, YouTube's own ads are way more obnoxious and intrusive. Maybe it's because every advertiser has figured out they need to cram as much shit into a 5-second segment? Or maybe it is because seeing an ad at the very beginning is much more psychologically disruptive (or if the YT ad is in the middle, it is usually inserted without any regard to the video, even breaking up sentences).

Even with sponsors, adsense is always an incredible driver of revenue[0,1] especially as more and more people (especially in the US) have an iPhone which prevents any ad blockers within the YouTube app.

And YouTube Premium views pay out a lot more per view than any ad-supported view[2,3].

0: https://twitter.com/linusgsebastian/status/16094682622194032...

1: https://twitter.com/LinusTech/status/1486918784401088515?s=2...

2: https://twitter.com/LinusTech/status/1486935690315112455?s=2...

3: https://twitter.com/hankgreen/status/1513177490730061829?s=2...

Youtube ad revenue is a very small part of income made from creating Youtube videos. Most people who makes videos take up sponsorships which are way more lucrative.

I don't really care that creators don't get paid. Youtube was better when no one was getting paid.

You, my friend, need to install SponsorBlock.

It could be argued that the worst thing that happened to ads are targeted ads. The targeting part manages to insert irrelevant ads at the most inappropriate times, even after invading users' activity across the web. Even simple non-tracking ads like a word from the sponsor are sometimes relevant and manages to avoid invasive breaks.

Ignoring the issue that targeted advertising requires surveillance, my biggest problem with it is that it removes the only useful thing about ads:

You used to be able to tell pretty quickly what demographic any given content was made for by noticing what ads were running with it. Targeted advertising removes that signal.

One time while working at Google, someone sent me an email linking to a video file related to our work. Before I could watch the video, I had to watch an ad of a unicorn pooping and then a man eating it. I was quite repulsed and livid about it.

Ahh, you mean the original Squatty Potty ads:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YbYWhdLO43Q

It's definitely bizarre. I assume they were going for memorable, but your report sounds like it failed at the basic goal: remembering the product.

Cue the people implying that blocking YT's ads is a form of theft.

I'd gladly pay for ad-free YT, mostly to send the message that I will never ever go back to watching ads. The problem is that google is already stealing my data.

Where is the stalker-free option? Of course, I'd never trust google anyway...

> I'd gladly pay for ad-free YT

Then why don't you? That's been an option for years.

>The problem is that google is already stealing my data.

My data is worth much more to me than the cost of a YT sub.

But, as you said, google is already stealing your data anyway. Would paying a bit of money every month really make that any worse?

But aside from that, it's totally possible to minimize your exposure and still pay for Premium. What I do is have a Google account that is only used for YouTube, paid for through a prepaid debit card, and I only watch YouTube on a single tablet that is not used for any other purpose.

It's not perfect protection, but it's also not terrible.

If I give data thieving Google money, I am sending the message that I am OK with their data theft (regardless of going through ridiculous hoops to keep them from stealing it).

Yeah, I'm with you there.

YouTube is the last Google service (outside of Android) that I still use. I'll be ditching it as soon as some other service comes reasonably close to being able to replace it for me. That hasn't happened yet, but the day is coming closer.

> Cue uBlock origin

uBo doesn't work everywhere. I do have it installed on Firefox for Android though.

Sponsors are the way ads should work. Ads aren't the problem, tracking is.

I don't bother with that stuff. I just wish the ads were more relevant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com