I don't really understand either side of the equation here. So, on the one hand you have people who use ad blockers. The first retort that comes to mind here is: Well, we'll take our business elsewhere. Which is odd because without ads they aren't paying and them leaving is the goal. Of course on the other hand ... when I read the title my thoughts weren't that I would be okay because I don't ad block youtube. My tho…
I'm really puzzled with the ad business model. I always wonder if those silly mobile game ads can get really bring the mobile game developer additional revenue? And even for other ads that look less stupid comparing with those mobile games, I think I had never been attracted to purchase something due to ads, nor I would prefer them when I actually need to buy something (note that I keep my spending minimal, so I am p…
YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
391–400 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#392If the copy said "Looks like you're blocking trackers and content from properties we don't own" instead of "Looks like you may be using an ad blocker" it would be more truthful. Maybe somebody should go after them for deceptive advertising.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#393This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium, but something that a lot of ad-based services don't seem to grasp is why people block ads. It's because they've become increasingly obnoxious. Nobody blocked ads when they were a simple column of links in the gutter or maybe an animated GIF banner with 3 frames. No, adblockers became popular because ads kept getting more loud (both visually and audibly), in…
What you have to understand about the contemporary media industry is that their primary business objective is to sell advertisements. Your attention is the product now; the more of it they can sell to advertisers, the more profitable the business becomes. It's much easier to present positive quarterly earnings reports by selling eyeballs and clicks than it is selling pretty much anything else. In the before times, wh…
I'm far from convinced this isn't relevant to YouTube history with controversial content. I think somebody is paying to do that, covertly or overtly. Sort of payola? I think there are ways to pay off YouTube to promote your content.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#394I block ads because they're psychological warfare that corporations wage against me. I don't care how unobtrusive the ads are. I don't care if the ads don't track me. I grew up changing the channel on TV when ads came on, and ripping adverts out of magazines before sitting down to read them. I vote for billboard bans whenever I can. I have zero tolerance for ads of any sort. Advertisers have no morals, they're comple…
> It is really not so repulsive to see the poor asking for money as to see the rich asking for more money. And advertisement is the rich asking for more money. A man would be annoyed if he found himself in a mob of millionaires, all holding out their silk hats for a penny; or all shouting with one voice, “Give me money.” Yet advertisement does really assault the eye very much as such a shout would assault the ear. “B…
I also think that advertising is often a crutch for incompetence. Build a good product and it can take off all on its own. People advertise for you. Or build crap and hire an industry to manipulate people into wanting your crap. Advertising is manipulation. Watch any ad and ask, “what emotion are they trying to con me into feeling?”
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#395This doesn't really affect me since I subscribe to premium, but something that a lot of ad-based services don't seem to grasp is why people block ads. It's because they've become increasingly obnoxious. Nobody blocked ads when they were a simple column of links in the gutter or maybe an animated GIF banner with 3 frames. No, adblockers became popular because ads kept getting more loud (both visually and audibly), in…
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#396This is just so funny to me. Google has to have the absolute worst PR for any company I've ever seen to make this happen. Somehow, they've duped the general public (at least on HN) into believing they insert the ads into videos. All they need to do is run a marketing campaign about how as a content creator you get to decide when ads play, whether they're unskippable, and how many ads to place in your video. Blast tha…
I don't think content creators can choose not to have ads in their videos. Creators can turn off monetization, but YouTube can still play ads, they just won't pay the creator. https://www.makeuseof.com/youtube-ads-without-paying-creator... I do agree with your general point. Creators can choose to show less ads, and we should prefer channels that choose to monetize less. EDIT: I'm no longer sure whether YouTube is di…
Edit: Also, when I click on the help icon next to the monetization bubble, the entire Google help article[0] talks about turning on ads. Which seems to imply they're off by default, but they don't mention turning off ads, so who knows if that's just "clever" writing to indicate there's no way to turn ads off.
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#397My Browser My Rights. I don't allow ads because no matter how good you are, someone will figure out how to get malware into ads. Once a system is compromised, best to burn it and start over. And now there are UEFI viruses that can reinstall malware even after the OS is wiped. And then there is the recent Gigabyte Motherboard discovery they were loading EXEs silently without approval. So no, I will not lower my protec…
I mean it works both ways no? Their server their right? If they don't think they can benefit from you viewing the content they serve, they can choose not to serve it?
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#398This is just so funny to me. Google has to have the absolute worst PR for any company I've ever seen to make this happen. Somehow, they've duped the general public (at least on HN) into believing they insert the ads into videos. All they need to do is run a marketing campaign about how as a content creator you get to decide when ads play, whether they're unskippable, and how many ads to place in your video. Blast tha…
I don't think content creators can choose not to have ads in their videos. Creators can turn off monetization, but YouTube can still play ads, they just won't pay the creator. https://www.makeuseof.com/youtube-ads-without-paying-creator... I do agree with your general point. Creators can choose to show less ads, and we should prefer channels that choose to monetize less. EDIT: I'm no longer sure whether YouTube is di…
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#399This is just so funny to me. Google has to have the absolute worst PR for any company I've ever seen to make this happen. Somehow, they've duped the general public (at least on HN) into believing they insert the ads into videos. All they need to do is run a marketing campaign about how as a content creator you get to decide when ads play, whether they're unskippable, and how many ads to place in your video. Blast tha…
I'm on desktop, adblocking the entire internet to the best of my ability. I daresay if YouTube got pushy with me as a video watcher, I would watch less and would be the better for it. Go ahead, make my day ;)
Re: YouTube is testing a more aggressive approach against ad blockers
#400The primary reason I use an adblocker is to prevent malware / viruses. I would be more accepting of ads in general if: 1 - they were all served from the primary websites server - eg yahoo blaming third party ad servers for injecting virus scripts and taking no responsibility is not okay with me. 2 - I had easy choices to block ads for things like gambling and alcohol at the ip level, not just browser level. 3 - no fl…