| So, what's the issue here? When you subscribe to YouTube for ad-free content, you're essentially paying for an uninterrupted viewing experience. This is similar to how you'd expect no ads when you pay for a service like Netflix. For example, imagine watching "The Matrix" on Netflix and being unexpectedly interrupted by an Oreo commercial—it would be frustrating, especially since you paid for an ad-free experience. The issue with YouTube is that if they were to remove baked-in in-stream ads for Premium users, it might require them to compensate content creators more indirectly, which in turn could reduce Google's profits. This creates a financial disincentive for YouTube to fully eliminate ads. As a result, you might find be better if you use software like SponsorBlock. This situation is paradoxical; ideally, paying customers should receive the best user experience directly from the platform, and be rewarded for that. Technically, there is no limitation, LinusTechTips can perfectly take 1 minute to add a marker for its sponsored segments, at the moment he ticks "This video contains sponsored content". A more truthful description for YouTube Premium could be: "Pay 10 USD / month, to remove a lot of, but not all the ads", and then you understand it's not that of a good deal. |
No, I pay YouTube to not show me YouTube ads. Separately, I also pay several content creators for their content without ads. I pay the person showing me ads to stop showing me ads.
> Wouldn't you get upset if Netflix is streaming to you "The Matrix", and in the middle of it there is an advertising for Oreos?
If that ad is a part of the movie as it was shown in theatres or on other streaming services, then no, I wouldn't be upset at Netflix.