- YouTube is intensifying efforts to combat adblockers, including blocking video playback and warning users of potential account suspension.
- Increased ads on YouTube have driven many users to adblockers, hurting both YouTube’s ad revenue and content creators reliant on ad-based income.
- Despite these measures, many users are leaving YouTube or finding workarounds, leading creators to seek alternative revenue streams off-platform.
Imagine being on the YouTube ad team…that has to be the most depressing team in tech history. Your whole existence revolves around peddling ads before people can watch the ads they want.
Even better, you work for one of the wealthiest corporations in the world with virtually unlimited resources at your disposal, and you still get your asses handed to you by a handful of people with laptops.
If they didn’t have to support the web, and various legacy platforms, the could lock it all down with drm more easily.
Hence Google’s proposal to DRM the web
And people’s response has shown its not easy or even working.
deleted by creator
That’s far less true now that they’re breaking the functionality of tons of adblockers that it was a few years ago.
deleted by creator
All the eggs in one basket? Computer nerds would never allow that.
At least you can tell your boss “I’m working on it!”, sit on your ass, and every 6 months add one more little UI or formula change which “finally stops adblockers” but is defeated within 3 days.
Yeah I don’t believe they really put their hearts in it. If they truly wanted to force you into watching ads, they’d manage. Their team is just not that interested.
Their team is probably using adBlockers more than the rest of us. They understand the depth of the surveillance baked into those ads.
Your whole existence revolves around peddling ads before people can watch the ads they want.
Ah, what. Who wants or likes to watch ads at all?
A lot of creators have just turned into corporate shills. I stopped watching ETA Prime’s channel about tech reviews because it was becoming pretty clear that mostly everything he got was paid for by the company. Also, most creators are putting their own ads into their content.
I don’t follow those creators!
The best part of YouTube is the small creators who are just making videos as a hobby. Once they get so big they start shilling products they wouldn’t use themselves I drop them like a hot potato. For the most part that doesn’t happen though because I prefer niche topics and creators that don’t have “sellout” personalities.
Welcome to Youtube. It’s ads all the way down. Unless:
Firefox browser, Ublock Origin extension, Sponsorblock extension
Save 40% of your viewing time for actual content and send tips through creator’s Paypal or whatever.
I know right… Why should content creators be able to make money from content. Am I right?
You’re joking, but you’re right.
Once the content has been created, the near-zero marginal cost of online distribution makes the concept of charging for copies wholly untenable.
The furry community figured this out years ago, our creators work on commission or paid subscription through Patreon or one of its ilk. They (mostly) don’t care where you freely share their work because they already got paid.
The knives are out for Patreon. Apple is looking to carve a big chunk out of that revenue. Google and Amazon (owner of Twitch) will not be far behind. Believe me, Google and Twitch are very unhappy that creators skip the platform monetization methods and just tell viewers to go to Patreon to bypass the heavy commissions.
Patreon deserves to die, their cut of the subscription income is extortionate for what amounts to a very limited web hosting platform.
Open-source alternatives like Mirlo or Cloud Patron will take its place, it’s only a matter of time.
Great time for Patreon to expand more into content delivery.
The same reasons as open source software devs.
Some content creators but not most of them. A lot of open source software advertises too.
I’ve clicked in to see a movie trailer, which is basically an ad, and had to watch an ad before I could watch the ad
People watch an ad for the privilege of watching a movie/show/game trailer all the time.
I have no problem watching a ad for a video but when I have to watch an ad just to see if I am interested in watching the video is where I draw the line. Forced ads before the video starts is the worst. Give me a min or two before forcing an ad. If I am looking for help for a particular issue I don’t want to watch ads after ad while trying to gauge the video.
Yea…I’m old enough to remember when that was the content that paid for the platform. Putting an ad on top of that is fucking soulless vampic greed.
Welcome to the new Google. It’s rent seeking all the way down.
I’m sure they make enough money to not care. Being in the part of the company that brings in the dough is generally a pretty good position to be in as well.
It’s the only consumer product they haven’t canceled.
Gmail would like a word
All corporate IT jobs are depressing, because working in a corporation isn’t something that a thinking person is equipped to do.
and it’s potentially an existential threat.
So tell the content creators you like that you don’t like YouTube. While YouTube Premium is the same price as like two coffees a month… Maybe your content creator will help you if you can’t afford it.
Well, to begin with, both the watcher and the creator are clients of the platform. Both sides feel bound to it, even if both dislike it.
Then, YouTube premium is literally 20 machine coffees a month in my first world country. 15 if they’re done by someone. You seem to be speaking “privileged minority”.
I’m sorry… I didn’t realize the reason that there are so many Starbucks in America, like literally caddy corner from one another is because their customer base is the “privileged minority.” I’ll have to remember that line.
In all seriousness, you could argue that ads prey on poor vulnerable people unable to afford YouTube Premium that just want to use it to learn, and that would be a semi-coherent argument.
What you are trying to point is that in the United States of America (and maybe Canada) you people have coffee that’s so expensive that two of them pay for YT premium. You’re only missing out on most of the internet (eg. Not the US).
Starbucks is notoriously expensive and nobody refers to it as coffee round here. Starbucks in my first world country is considered something for hipster digital nomads. You can’t find them outside areas with tourists as everyone else is happy with “regular” coffee that’s literally 10 times cheaper.
Saying that two coffees equate to YouTube premium while using Starbucks as a metric is like saying that a car only costs a watch or two while using a Rolex as the reference watch. If you consider a Rolex to be your reference watch, cool, you’re a privileged minority.
Good.
Youtube is a wonderful thing. It’s a wealth of knowledge and resources unlike anything this world has ever seen.
And it’s ran by one of the worst, most predatory corps on the planet.
it’s ran
it’s run
it’s ren
Ron*
Danke. Mein Reichsleiter.
*Reichsleiter
Ty. I knew it looked wrong.
Ballsy to use a 2nd language as a sarcastic reply to someone correcting grammar.
Perfectly put. The product is great and I love how it democratizes “being on TV” and lets some people make a living doing their own thing.
But I do not like where YouTube’s cut of that ad/sub money goes, and the enshittification pushed into it.
Unfortunately, YouTube is not unique in that regard. It’s a sucky fact of life that just about any complex product you spend money on will benefit a collection of rich sociopaths skimming as much as possible from the incomes of the people actually making the thing. Gotta vote with your wallet where you can, and vote the traditional way for the systemic issues.
i consider unblockable ads to be direct attack on my psyche, trying to worm in and make me think in a way they want. I will never tolerate them and would rather see anything relying on them burn. My mind is my own and no one else has any business influencing me without my permission.
Agreed. It’s a form of cyber terrorism and needs to have an end put to it.
I agree with that… somewhat. Except they are providing a service.
The content is not produced by YouTube, but it is made available by YouTube. There’s a cost to provide that service and value to the consumer for having videos available to watch.
I doubt you want to pay for the service, so how is it supposed to work? What pays YouTube’s costs so we can all keep watching videos for months and years to come?
I get that this comes across as someone simping for YouTube. I’m not trying to do that though. I’m just intrigued by this worldview and would like to understand if there is more to it or if you believe YouTube should not be compensated some other way.
Is it a “Fuck you. I got mine.” mentality where people watching ads and paying premium cover the cost for you to use the service for free? Or is there some nuance I’ve missed?
Nationalize youtube and turn it into a public utility financed by the UN. Create a kind of patreon system that distributes funds to creators similar to how it’s done for music collection agencies.
There are always alternatives, but not until people demand an alternative to constant brainwashing. Right now it’s unthinkable because people insist that there cannot be an alternative and therefor the status quo mustn’t be endangered.
At this stage burning it all down would be preferable although that would never happen until we’re seen widespread system collapse.
There is nebula.tv which works like that, but it lacks content. I am a subscriber, but I’m running out of interesting content to watch there.
OBviously there is network effect in play here. If Youtube switched to subs-only model tomorrow, they would have much wider content offer from the get-go.
Yeah, but the issues there are any musicians that aren’t Taylor Swift don’t make enough on their music alone. They have to either continue working, or go to other extreme lengths with frequent touring, extensive merch offerings, etc. They have to work the equivalent of 3 full time jobs (somehow) to make the money worth it.
If they were to nationalize YT in the same way, there would be 0 content creators. There is already so much effort that goes into that work, lowering the amount people earn even more would kill that as a career path.
Just my speculation of course, but I don’t think the answer is always “make the governments pay for it”. That will come back around in taxes, and the everyone is paying for YouTube Premium.
Well even if you’d keep advertising if you turn YT into a public utility or non-profit, MUCH more of that money would go to creators. And/or much less advertising. Or less annoying or more discerning ads. And of course no demonetization because you talk about problematic issues.
Without advertising you’d need some kind of revenue. I imagine something like e.g. a EU wide “universal content subscription” or something like that. So if you create good content the various distribution channels simply track what you watch, anonymize it (firefox has this new system that got them in hot waters) and distribute the money from the giant pool to the creators.
Maybe start with a universal newspaper subscription so we’d have a free press again, new newspapers or channels that produce independent news with only the viewer as a customer, without ads.
For music in the EU / Germany there are collection agencies that already do this sort of thing. So it’s not even without precedent.
Obviously there are tons of issues to work out, but the biggest is simply that the elite do everything to gain and maintain power or wealth and this would go contrary to that.
Not our problem. They can go the twitch.tv’ish way and add subscription models for people to subscribe and support their favorite content producers and Youtube can take a cut.
Just because they can’t think of a profitable business model other than annoying and exploiting the internet’s userbase while deplatforming, demonetizing and having their own myriad of problems doesn’t mean that’s on us.
Doesn’t mean you’re simping. You have a valid point, but when’s enough enough when they’re squeezing everything out of us for ad revenue and finding new ways to fuck with our psyche/psychological things like Facebook does with its highest paid employee(s) to rake in attention for cost-per-click and cost-per-view? We’re more than just ‘metrics’ and KPIS. We’re humans, we deserve joy. If youtube dies, there’s decentralized solutions out there that can become more mainstream. People can self-host and host their own content.
yup and I’ve always felt just like this even as a kid, fuck ads
They can keep going, it just makes want to leave these platforms for good
Despite all of their machinations my strategy of simply ignoring literally everything they say and continuing doing the same old same old appears to be flummoxing them.
I’ve literally not done anything and have never experienced any inconvenience. Are we sure they’re doing anything at all?
Same, I think they must be AB testing and I don’t get assigned into the shitty group
I definitely got really awful, unplayably spotty playback that seemed linked to adblock usage. Then I saw an article about it and confirmed I wasn’t going crazy, and that day it stopped happening, so it felt like I was going crazy all over again. It’s like the moment they realised it was going to become a problem and they weren’t as sneaky as they thought, they turned it off. I haven’t had an issue since then.
That would be quite a funny strategy that they could definitely implement. Creepy as hell but clever.
They know everything you do and look at, so they know if you’re the sort of person that would look up a fix for this or just take it on the nose. If they realize you’re looking at articles about the problem they just turn the function off.
I guess that’s possible, and a very creepy thought, but more likely they saw the level of general attention on the issue and backed off globally.
The kicker there is … Nobody I know is going to think “wow, playback on this video sucks, I should disable my ad blocker”.
Like, it wouldn’t occur to ANYONE I know that a piece of software we consider necessary could be the problem, ESPECIALLY if everything else is working fine.
That’s not even number ten on the list of troubleshooting steps and most people don’t make it past one or two before giving up.
WTF were they thinking?
Honestly it sounds like someone was paid to do something about adblocking and just like… did something. Like if you were tasked with reducing adblocking, and your first and most obvious idea of “reduce the obnoxious ads” was disallowed because enshittification is mandated, you could say no, which most workers won’t do, or you could just do whatever random bullshit feels like it might work because it’s punitive. Or at least it’s a gesture that shows your boss you’re trying.
Authoritarian systems like capitalist corporations are inherently low-information for exactly this reason. People on the low rungs doing the real work who understand what needs to be done will typically not report problems to their superiors. And when they do, those superiors tend not to listen, because the idea that lower workers know something they don’t threatens their leadership status.
Also our society’s legal system trains us to believe punitive measures must do something even though they don’t.
Also I guess another reason they might wind up at this strategy is that straight up telling users that the problem is their adblock is the fastest way to get adblockers to block your countermeasure, so they think they have to be sneaky.
They are definitely AB testing things like rejecting ad blockers.
One time they told me I had 3 days left to enjoy YouTube with my ad blocker, and then I would have to buy premium, or they would just lock me out of the site. I was like “welp, it had a good run, I guess that’s it for ol’ YouTube.”
But then the 3 days went buy and nothing ever came of it.
That tactic probably did get them some preemptive subscriptions though, unfortunately.
MBAs are taught they can shape human behavior with decades disproven assumptions.
It’s fallout like this that shows their hand.
“Oh, the customers don’t like it? Fine we do it twice as hard” is fucking Pavlovian training and the executives behind the initiative should be sealed in an underground vault knee deep in hungry roaches.
“Should we moderate our ads and get rid of 2 hour long ads, disinformation, porn,scams and fake products?”
“No, no. Thats to much effort. Lets spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to force people to watch our 2 hour long ads, disinformation, porn, scams and fake products. Thats clearly the way forward.”
This decision process brought to you by Prager U proceeds into 30 minutes about how slavery was good for the black man and he should be grateful for it
Woah, youtube ads in the US are so much more interesting. Don’t get me wrong, fuck pro slavery propaganda, it’s just completely exotic to someone who only saw bank loan and lame product ads (when visiting parents who use official app on their tv)
Its real funny when you see a video get demonitized because they said a no no naughty word in the first like fe wminutes, but the first advertising you see is literally almost completely nude art of women bouncing around screen for the latest scam mobile game.
Like, Saying Fuck to early in a video is no no bad for the kiddies. but cartoon tiddies 96% uncovered in a 3 minute ads is perfectly okay for the kiddies.
Sounds really healthy
deleted by creator
Patreon and sites like it exist as a hedge against YouTube banning your channel.
I would love it but I don’t see it.
It costs an enormous amount of money to host video content, doubly so when you need to replicate it across servers. I have never seen another company come close to usurping them.
Yeah, The problem is, the price on YouTube is so incredibly expensive because we have to pay for a million script kiddies worth of useless videos to be uploaded and permanently stored everyday.
If someone made a competing system where you had to pay a small amount to host a video and then it turned around and paid you once you’ve got enough eyeballs that would be a far more sustainable model and cause people to police their old underperforming content.
I agree. We don’t get a new YouTube, we get whatever comes after YouTube—some new modality.
I think its more likely that YouTube will shut down and be replaced by nothing. Its existence has never made sense as anything but an act of charity from an organization with tech resources to burn.
Remember that Google bought YouTube only AFTER it was successful for several years. This was also before Google turned evil.
There are a lot of unprofitable startups that get purchased speculatively based on other factors like their user count. The idea being the buyer thinks they can monetize.
This was more like a merger with Google being the larger company. YouTube was already very successful.
deleted by creator
And the content creators I personally know have shown me the amount of money they get from Premium users, and it’s sometimes less than the value of an ad-supported user, even though the Premium user generates more revenue than an ad-supported one.
Can you expand on this? I don’t follow what you mean here
i read it as - the Premium money is mostly going to YouTube HQ, instead of to video makers.
Every creator I’ve seen talk about it said they get more from Premium viewers, so that’s why I’m confused
deleted by creator
Those surfshark maps… ugh. No, I’m not searching for ublock origin. Why would I it’s been installed since time immemorial. You have to measure install base, not search interest. Leave search interest for celebrity gossip.
Enshittification actually does work, but only up to a point. Unfortunately, all the corporations have all the subtlety of a Sherman tank, so they always go all in on it.
YouTube is also aggravating customers who use their official apps by increasing the frequency and length of the ads. In just 4-5 months, I’ve seen YouTube ad lengths on Roku go from 10-15 seconds to 30 seconds, to a minute.
They’re trying to recoup lost ad revenue by pissing off the one demographc most likely to sit in front of the TV the longest.
On rare occasions YouTube will play exceptionally long videos as ads. When YouTube Red came out I got multiple entire hours long shows as ads (as a “free preview!”) I’m pretty sure Ive gotten one of the movies they put up for free viewing as an ad before.
Obviously you can skip after 5 seconds or whatever but they hope to catch someone playing stuff in the background. Probably to increase their crappy view count for those features to sell actual ads later.
I’ve noticed this on my TV’s YouTube app as well. It went from 15 second I shippable ads, to 2 ads where I need to watch at least one and only then can I skip, to sometimes at least 30 seconds before I can skip. It’s worse on the longer video essays that I like watching, where they say “Fewer ad breaks for this long video”, but in reality they have the same amount of ads that you need to watch more of to skip. I absolutely fucking hate it :D
I think they should have included “ad free YouTube” as a perk for their YouTube TV service, which I had for a short while. Instead they wanted you to pay an extra subscription cost for YouTube Premium to get rid of ads.
The dark pattern game they play with the “skip” options and the increasing amount and random placement of ads is really offputting.
Gotta love when the article saying adblock-blocking doesn’t work is itself preceded by a notice to disable your adblocker
Honestly it makes me appreciate Lemmy more. Like we’re all on here enjoying an ad free experience… it’s clearly feasible to do
there are several orders of magnitude difference between text-forums with almost all multimedia content hosted externally, and hosting/streaming video.
a big Lemmy instance is a manageable cost for a few well-paid people to run out of their own disposable income.
anything even vaguely approaching YouTube is not.
Who could have foreseen this? s/
Wheres the data to back up this claim? That article is purely opinion
That’s true, would be great to have more evidence.
But I really wish this to be True 🤞
Fuck em, they’re just greedy fucks that’ll blame us for everything.
If they kept the ads to 10-15 seconds at the start of a video and didn’t interrupt my videos for them, I would never use an adblock on Youtube (i’ll even give them an allowance for one 10 second ad interruption for every hour in the case of super long videos). But for as long as they keep trying to squeeze every goddamn penny out of me that they can, I will fight back and do everything in my power to prevent them from being allowed even a single ad impression off me.
I’m not unreasonable, but I refuse to accept unreasonable offers.
that mentality is probably what most ppl started with. however, youtube burnt quite a lot of bridges. i would assume, that many ppl, just like me, wont do the 3 clicks to disable adblock for youtube.
It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.
Fair and I agree. I should have stated it in the past tense because what I really meant is exactly what you stated - that I wouldn’t have brought the adblock to Youtube had they not gone nuclear assault in their ad approach and made the choice unreasonable, now I am unwilling to engage with them honestly without ENORMOUS, HERUCLEAN efforts towards rehabilitation on their part.
Cheers.
Do they give the creators any control over where the ad breaks are? Seems like they just get thrown in all willy-nilly, too often and in the middle of sentences.
They get some control but it depends on the content how exactly it works. I think for normal videos they get a say right from the start where the breaks are. But I know one guy who does YT and he live streams and has to clean up every VOD because they just randomly pepper ads all throughout.
Hopefully somebody who actually makes monetized Youtube videos will join the conversation to answer that one, as I’m not certain. I’m a pretty active Youtube watcher and fairly savvy on the culture, so from what I’ve gleaned I believe there is some control given to creators but I believe it is somewhat limited. For example if you watch the Sorted channel (a UK-based food channel) with ads on, they seem to pretty consistently happen at small scene transitions, which leads me to believe the Sorted team is doing their part to strategically place them.
I want the statistic on how many Google employees use ad blockers now. It’s basically a necessity.
I’m sure Google employees get Premium for free
They still probably use ad blockers for other sites though. It’s essential on the Internet these days.
The number of malware or otherwise malicious ads is too damn high. There are articles that are so filler they literally have less content than ads, it’s an embarrassment.
Premium doesn’t have downvote count and sponsor skip.
The pirated version of youtube is better than the paid one.
Google should spend time improving their service instead of being assholes.
Dislikes is why I left anyway! XD
I even left ads on for nearly a year until a particularly metally hazardous on pushed me to turn them off, and I haven’t gone back since. On the occasion I use YT outside my ecosystem, it suddenly feels so much worse.
It’s pretty sad how not having the money for it makes it unbearable, while all of them don’t need to experience it, disconnecting them from their practices.
potential account suspension.
What account?
But to be serious, this might be at actual risk to those who are logged in. They were locking out users of their whole google accounts for less, including their emails and the uploaded files to drive.
