top | item 29691886

(no title)

qybaz | 4 years ago

Given that the sites wouldn't exist at all if it wasn't for the ad networks they use to feed their editors, it seems justifiable to me!

discuss

order

Nextgrid|4 years ago

I have zero problems with ad-supported shit going out of business and making space for good, paid content. Imagine a world where content has to be so good as to convince people to take out their wallet. No more clickbait, "this video is sponsored by ShitVPN", chumboxes, etc.

IcyClAyMptHe|4 years ago

Fully with you on that one. The fact of the matter is that most "free" content is fast food style content - you eat it because it's designed to be addictive. Consumers may feel like they want it, but that's just because it's there, prodding you, calling out to you, autoplaying the next video out of "convenience". If it were to disappear tomorrow, I'd likely spend more time reading old books, practicing programming for my entertainment

There was a time when the likes of YouTube and blogging were just a hobby, not a job for pseudo marketers. Replacing paid "influencers" and "content creators" with plain hobbyists again would be a wonderful thing.

Aerroon|4 years ago

I can imagine such a world. It would be cable TV with heavy region locks. The poorer parts of the world wouldn't be on it at all.

Paying for things online is still a terrible experience. You need a credit card, which isn't always easy to get outside of the rich western countries. I would never have used websites like reddit, HN, Twitter, YouTube or Google if I had had to pay for it. As a kid I wouldn't have been able to pay even if I had wanted to.

>No more clickbait, "this video is sponsored by ShitVPN", chumboxes, etc.

No, you would have even more of this, because this type of monetization is not linked to cookies.

throwawayboise|4 years ago

Outside of email (which I do pay for), I can't think of an online service I'd pay for. HN is about as close as it gets, but I wouldn't pay for what it is today.