The cost of social media is much lower than the cost of television content (licensing and producing shows and movies). Cable TV is more accurately described as subsidized by subscriptions, making up the difference with ads. HBO and others are examples of content providers that (mostly, they still advertise their own content between shows) eschew advertisement in exchange for a higher cost to access.
Social media is cheaper than that, on a per user basis (at least amortized across all users, very active users are a net cost, but also lead many others to participate). I don't know what the price would be, exactly. But let's estimate. Twitter has approximately 300 million users, and brings in around $2.5 billion to $3 billion a year (over the past several years) in revenue. So to get an ad free experience and, assuming they're at least breaking even, cover their costs would be about $10/user.
That isn't to say they'd drop paid content, but they could.
Social media is cheaper than that, on a per user basis (at least amortized across all users, very active users are a net cost, but also lead many others to participate). I don't know what the price would be, exactly. But let's estimate. Twitter has approximately 300 million users, and brings in around $2.5 billion to $3 billion a year (over the past several years) in revenue. So to get an ad free experience and, assuming they're at least breaking even, cover their costs would be about $10/user.
That isn't to say they'd drop paid content, but they could.