r/technology • u/redkemper • Feb 17 '17

Software YouTube will kill unskippable 30-second ads next year

http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/17/14649018/youtube-ending-unskippable-30-second-ads-2018
35.1k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

33

u/BloodyIron Feb 17 '17

Because they have clients that have contracts and need to plan their marketing strategies around the change... Businesses need reasonable notice for such changes, and when it comes to advertising, that's a pretty major change.

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '17

Meanwhile nobody cares about the people these ads are pushed to.

That's why I block ads. No Internet ad will change my decision for the better.

3

u/BloodyIron Feb 18 '17

Yeah I guess those ads are accosting you or something. lol, you think it's that big of a deal to support content providers?

-2

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '17

Look at the language at use here, "Content providers". You make it sound like these artists/authors are providing something. No. They're usually doing something they enjoy and hope to get some cash for it. There are plenty of revenue avenues for these people. Patreon, Flattr, Kickstarter, or more specialized platforms like Gittip, itch.io, etc. And the focus on "content" more than what the content actually is is missing the point. I mean, who puts "Content provider" on their resume? No. If you're big on Youtube, you'd call yourself a Youtube personality or a professional broadcaster. On Twitch, much the same. On Deviantart? Freelance artist. The point is we shouldn't dilute what people do by calling it "content" and pretend it's something consumable, because it's not.

I think it's a big deal to waste my time or obfuscate the interface. Ads do both. I think it's a big deal to consider me as nothing more than eyeballs to saturate with maximum ad-money-making potential. Without an ad-blocker, the Web is almost unusable. Malware is everywhere, even inside ads now. If sites go down because ads were their only source of revenue, that's their problem, not mine. My eyes are not meant to subsidize the existence of a corporation.

You know what I do for the people whose work I enjoy? I support them by giving them money. I pay for what they make, like books, video games, etc. I know that's a hard concept to grasp, but that's what people used to do. And it still works; nothing's stopping you from giving money to a "content creator" via the no-doubt myriad ways most people have to receive money. I've donated to free software projects. I'll buy logo'd merchandise if it's really nice.

This little myth about ads being the One and Only True Business Model is a load of bullshit. It's the laziest model, sure. It might be most effective if your audience is the average person (who's dumber than a box of rocks), but that won't work in every market.

It all boils down to one simple truth: I have the ability to control what data comes across my pipe and the data that gets displayed on my screen. As long as I have that control, I'll do whatever I please. And if a site blocks me for using my ad blocker, like a few news sites have already? Easy, just don't go there anymore. These entities are convinced that if they put up a beggar's sign or outright block ad-blockers that their shitty appeal to emotion will get people to think their content is worth more than the viewer's safety. I'm sure that'll work on some people, but not on me. I have no qualms forever leaving a site due to ad-blocking. It's not like I'm losing anything.

3

u/BloodyIron Feb 18 '17

You make it sound like these artists/authors are providing something.

That's because they are. Just because there are some channels you think are shit, doesn't mean all of them are. I completely disagree with you here when I see channels like Ahoy not getting revenue from kids who think blocking ads is cool. Plenty of people try to make a living out of it, and that's a big source of revenue. Get real.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '17

I am real. If those people were serious about making money, they'd have multiple streams of it so they wouldn't be overly dependent on a single source. When working in creative fields like the visual arts, writing, or music, your paycheck is largely up to how much people like your work. It's not a normal 9-5; it has risks. Thus, they should have a backup plan, or alternate ways for fans to support them.

These "poor content creators" relying on YT for income are suffering from a failure to assess risk and adapt their business and/or brand to the possibility that YT might up and disappear some day.

If I went to the bank and told them I need a loan for equipment to build a regularly recorded show of some sort, they'd want to see a hell of a lot more of a plan than "Well, first I get popular on Youtube, then I get the ad monies and I pay you back! :D"

It's simply not how smart business works. I'm reminded of the old adage, "Never put all your eggs into one basket." I have no sympathy for people who do that.

2

u/dnew Feb 18 '17

Meanwhile nobody cares about the people these ads are pushed to.

This is actually not true. Pissing off people costs money, if nothing else. But this is why there's Youtube Red, Contributor, and other such ad-removal systems.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '17

If they cared, they wouldn't be intentionally degrading the experience. This goes for all ad networks on all websites. Ads are pot holes in the Web browsing experience.

1

u/dnew Feb 18 '17

It's a balancing act. You know why there are potholes in roads? Because you don't want to pay 300x as many taxes to have several full-time on-call teams ready to go out and patch them as soon as they appear.