Netflix, once a pioneer of ad-free viewing that offered a break from traditional TV norms, is now contemplating launching free ad-supported versions of its service in markets like Europe and Asia, Bloomberg reported.

The plans to offer a free ad-supported tier, albeit in select markets, suggests that pivot towards monetizing user data, in other words — making users and not the extensive library of award-winning shows a product, might be well in the pipeline.

  • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Told people this years ago when pewdie pie became a millionaire selling ads. Like that was the time to wake up and hate every single one of these content creators for selling out and making the internet the hellscape this is. But no we Revere and emulate these people.

    • efstajas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is a bit unnecessarily tough on independent content creators… what exactly do you expect them to do? Make no money from their content? How would they be able to make a living?

        • efstajas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sure, Patreon is great, but Patreon alone is not enough for most creators to make a living, considering how hard it is to get people to commit to monthly subscriptions.

          • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            But why do they need to make a living creating content.

            We should go back to hobbyist sharing videos of their hobby and interest for the love of it instead of a guy trying to make money by jumping into trendy hobbies and creating bland generic content until the algorithm picks them.

            It would reduce so much noise online and the stuff we would be left with would be people who have the best content. It would eliminate the drama and toxic crap for views.

            • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              There are certainly hobbyists making good content. Most of the great content is from people making a living off it. They have time and resources to devote to doing deep dives into subjects that hobbyists just generally don’t. The bigger problem as far as filling the internet with crap goes is all the react content and people making clips of other people’s stuff that adds nothing to it and whatever YouTube shorts are supposed to be.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Patreon alone is not enough for most creators to make a living

            I’ve seen a number of content creators argue otherwise. From the “Hello from the Magic Tavern” sketch comedy group to the “Scenes from the Multiverse” Cartoonist to the various musicians cranking out indie tunes on Bandcamp, the refrain I consistently here is that direct patronage offers significantly better returns than ad-supported payments on bigger media platforms.

            Indie creators generally have an easier time of securing monthly subscriptions because they’re more boutique and have closer connections to the audience. And you don’t need an enormous audience to bring in a reliable income. While YouTubers need to get into the hundreds of thousands of subscribers to see any kind of productive ROI, Patreon artists can justify the expense of their work on an audience in the hundreds. They can go entirely indie with an audience in the thousands.

            Most creators can’t afford to go fully indie, but the margins are so much better relative to the audience size with direct payments. Even just $2/viewer/episode pays vastly more than what a streaming service offers.

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Would you put blame on doctors for contributing to the opioid?

        I see it the same. Every one bares responsibility. And even though a big chunk is on the pharma and media companies. There is still the pusher

        • efstajas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Would you put blame on doctors for contributing to the opioid?

          I’m gonna assume by “contributing to the opioid” you mean over-prescribing pain medication for the commission? If so, that comparison is so far-fetched that it’s completely meaningless. You’re really going to compare that with independent creators having skippable ad reads that have to be clearly marked as such on content you get for free?

          • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Mind explains what is far fetched about it?

            There was an opioid crisis where drug makers sold pills to the public that the public did not need and they used doctors to sell them.

            There is an advertising epidemic where industry is working to push ads into every space we listen, look or experience and they are using content creators to justify it

            Both have a large well funded industry. Both require an interface between public and the industry to sell their product. Both push products to people who don’t need them by using these interfaces to bullshit, lie and leverage their authority to sell the product. And in one case we blame the interface in the other we say " they aren’t responsible they are just making money" so why?

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Too fucking many. But replace him with any of them. Speed, H2, Moist, donkey something. We use to have to walk uphill both ways in the snow to see content.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Like that was the time to wake up and hate every single one of these content creators for selling out

      And then what? Stop consuming their content?

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Sure, or accept that you participating in that industry will always lead to this stuff.

        What do people want here. In what world do you think you can separate the two things. Monetizing content through ads and marketing and a world where ads and marketing are not capitalized on.

        We all had to stop this decades ago when it was a tiny little part of the internet. You can’t kill it once its tendrils are in every corner its grown into Fafnir

        You all have to get better at listening to the crazy ranting of random strangers with hair triggers and obsess over things you don’t care about. Otherwise the future is bleek

        What’s even crazier is kids today will never realize the freedom that the first few decades of the internet was when the topic of information scarcity was supposed to end.

        We were all so against the idea that capitalist and opportunistic people could artificially create scarcity to make us all pay more. They did it through monopolies on industry’s that choked out smaller competitors. The internet was a new frontier that was supposed to reject that. We could digitally copy and share everything. Hero’s shot up and built all kinds of amazing tools and things. Then it got popular and we recreated the same scarcity issues within decades. Everything trapped behind walls and monetized. Instead of open courseware at Berkeley we favored monthly subscriptions to udemy.

        This is the average 6 year olds dream right now. A life where they can emulate a NASCAR fender and live that twitch life just like their heroes Pewdie and Moist and whatever else. Those kids grow up with that mentality and end up shaping a new generation pulling away from what all this could have been.