Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Will Introduce Ads as Videos Start, a Move Long Resisted

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 271 posts

Re: Facebook Will Introduce Ads as Videos Start, a Move Long Resisted

#12

Post by delphinius81 »

dirtybirdnj wrote: post #3

I've had a few videos on Facebook recently begin playing, and then 10sec in start to play an ad. I have since stopped watching FB videos.

Same. Ad starts playing? Skip to whatever is next in the feed. Ad at the start of a video, not even going to wait. As it is, after turning off all notifications from FB I maybe open the app once a week.

Re: Facebook Will Introduce Ads as Videos Start, a Move Long Resisted

#14

Post by froindt »

nkrisc wrote: post #9

>The company also wants professional creators to post more videos to the site and make the platform a content hub on par with YouTube, a unit of Alphabet Inc.’s Google. That's interesting, because I've never been able to find a second time a video that popped up in my feed. For my experience, videos on Facebook might as well be ephemeral. forever vanishing the moment my feed refreshes itself automatically.

I experience the same thing and it's really frustrating. I refuse to install Facebook applications on my phone, and they've needlessly crippled their mobile site (disabling messages except mbasic.facebook.com among many other things). If I so much as check a notification then go back to the newsfeed, it's different content and hit/miss as to whether I can find the top post again.

Re: Facebook Will Introduce Ads as Videos Start, a Move Long Resisted

#15

Post by krastanov »

vuln wrote: post #4

I for one cannot wait for the American Facebook user to actually sit down and consider whether they pay their ISP $10 a month to be force fed ads in their time line now throughout all videos and the finally put down the 'free' drug that Facebook has become. Edit: Not just Facebook but social media as a whole.

I am confused by this comment. You pay ISPs for connection to content providers (assuming net neutrality). It is normal to expect people to pay the content providers for the content itself either directly or through watching ads. You can argue (and I would agree) that some content is not worth it, but this is not ISP related (again assuming net neutrality).
Post reply on HN