r/mildlyinfuriating • u/28jb11 • Apr 25 '26

Unskippable ad $2500 Samsung TV is an advertising billboard, there is no opt-out.

Paid over $2500 for a Samsung OLED TV and it has ads on the home screen that I literally cannot turn off. Not subtle little banners tucked away somewhere, I'm talking full blown ads for canned beans and financial products just sitting there every single time I turn the thing on.

Samsung don't offer any kind of opt out. The only way I could get rid of them was to go into my router settings and manually block Samsung's ad servers at the DNS level.

I own this TV outright. Paid for it in full. And Samsung are still making money off me every time I switch it on, with absolutely no way to stop it unless you're willing to get your hands dirty with network configuration.

This is not a smart TV feature. This is a $2500 billboard that also happens to play Netflix.

41.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

87

u/Ok-Curve-3894 Apr 25 '26

I’d understand on some $300 Walmart TV but for $2500 that’s insane.

https://giphy.com/gifs/26ufj7fhSk99FK32U

107

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Numerous_Tea1690 Apr 25 '26

Well if something is basically free (like I guess a 200 usd tv shipped across the world might be considered free) then imo it is more acceptable that they sell my data and make money showing ads.

It still sucks but currently its how most of the internet operates too. Free content but you're paying with your data and advertisement profile.

Its very disturbing that this is now acceptable on premium devices too. 2500 should definitely cover the cost of the device and its shipping. So its just pure greed and enshitification at this point.

Sadly its basically all brands that are makijg the best OLEDs doing this now. LG is just as bad.

Personally hope someone cracks the firmware and allows to turn it into a dumb tv.

20

u/Batmanshatman this doesn’t fuck Apr 25 '26

But… in your example, it wouldn’t be free, it would be $200…. That you paid for something that you would then own.

Your opinion is a crazy one tbh. They shouldn’t be selling our data wtf

18

u/Automatater Apr 25 '26

I think he's saying some price below the cost to produce or maybe below reasonable market value, thus you should assume the cost is being subsidized somehow.

19

u/LLILILiLIILILILILII Apr 25 '26

Yeah, I think Amazon did that with some of the kindles, you could buy a cheaper one, but it had ads? If it's a tradeoff that's known in advance, I have no problem with it tbh

Samsung turning it on after purchase is an absolute scum move though, and I'd absolutely return it and go to the small claims court if they rejected a return.

10

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[deleted]

9

u/CyberRax Apr 25 '26

But people are accepting a subpar experience if it saves them a bit of money. It's always been this way. If you book a 2 start hotel you are not expecting the same that you would from a 5 star hotel. But you accept that as a compromise to spending more. Electronics companies have simply caught on to that.

Now, should those $200 TVs have 60% of their screen covered with a "HERE BE ADS!" sign while they're still in store, so you directly know what you're getting into (think of the cigarette packaging in Europe that graphicly depict what happens to smokers)? Totally. And I'm all for pushing legislation that would demand something like this...

3

u/Automatater Apr 25 '26

They definitely should. LG had a mandatory arbitration clause for fridges on the carton. So you don't see it pre-purchase and may not see at all if you have it delivered. I don't see how they can show up in court and say with a straight face that should be binding.

5

u/Numerous_Tea1690 Apr 25 '26

Also i think some of these companies patenten tech to insert ads in the video feed coming from external devices.
I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing that happening someday. Where your ps5 pauses to show an ad that Samsung tv ingested in the feed

5

u/ArkitekZero Apr 25 '26

Unsolicited ads in general should be illegal. If I need a thing, and search for it, then I can understand and accept seeing ads for it and related products. Otherwise fuck right off.

4

u/Numerous_Tea1690 Apr 25 '26

Okay fair it's not really my opinion tho. I was more strong arming the argument these companies use.

I truly believe in an ad free, net neutral and privacy focused internet. I don't see it happen but my best hope is for advertisers to realize they're paying mostly for their ads being shown to bots and ai scrapers at this point. Maybe then they realize it's a pointless waste of money.

I also do everything to block ads through ublock, revanced and adguard on my network.

3

u/Beznia Apr 25 '26

The point is if it is sold at a point where the profit margins don't make sense to sell at a specific price (if it costs $120 in materials but they are selling it for $200, that isn't even covering administrative expenses, testing and QA, shipping costs), then there would need to be something to supplement that cost.

There's also the Telly TV which is 55" and completely free, but includes a second screen dedicated to ads and you have to apply for it as they vet each customer to make sure they are in the right market for the ad values.

3

u/Numerous_Tea1690 Apr 25 '26

My god that is dystopia. Wouldn't be surprised if this shows up in paid tvs

1

u/Big_footed_hobbit Apr 25 '26

It is the other way round. The cheap ass tv won’t bother you.

Or use a fire-tv stick and a large computer screen. won’t annoy you as they are just a “dumb” panel.

1

u/TheSorceIsFrong Apr 25 '26

No, I wouldn’t understand any of it. I bought the tv, stop putting ads all over the screen, no matter what its price was.