|
|
|
|
|
by freediver
2040 days ago
|
|
Ads are not evil per se, overdoing them is. Do you think youtube algorithms optimize for you learning and becoming a better human or to maximize ad revenue? Based on the answer the knowledge you gained is on average either deep and meaningful or shallow, bordering entertainment value. That is not to say you can’t find deep structured knowledge on youtube, but the proper way to support its creation is to directly pay for it. Next best thing is paying for youtube premium. Imagine two youtubes, one ran by ads only and one exclusively for paid subscribers. Which one of these is more likely to have funny cat videos and which one deep, meaningful knowledge and why? In which case the interest of the platform is aligned with the interest of the user? When overdone, ad business models incentivize mass creation of low quality entertainment which is what most of internet including news has become. In no way ads help democratize the access to valuable information. |
|
I’d argue the only reason subscription based platforms have a higher probability of offering quality is that the pay barrier creates a more filtered user base that prefers quality.
If a platform dependent on ad revenue had some other barrier to entry, like content only accessible to an audience that preferred that type of high quality content to low quality content, I don’t see ads having a negative effect.