| > If you are taking something out of a system while intentionally preventing contributing back to it, you know you are having a negative impact. This is the same flawed argument against software piracy, but even more absurd. Just like piracy, this is a service problem. Some people refuse to be forced into the transaction of selling their attention to consume advertising. Being psychologically manipulated is not worth it, and certainly not in exchange for some digital content. If content creators understood this, they would seek out alternative business models to capture this demographic. If they want 100% of their audience to pay for their content, they should go on a different platform and put up a paywall. You can't simultaneously want the exposure that "free" access gives you, while objecting when people choose to not participate in the business transaction you've forced upon them. What advertising does is introduce a sleazy middleman that gets rich by tarnishing the end product and harming the consumer. Then the platform that hosts the content decides how much of this wealth gets trickled down to the actual creator, who is then annoyed when it's not enough, and blames the consumer for it. How about eliminating the middleman and producing something people will choose to pay you for directly? |