←back to thread

SponsorBlock – skip sponsor segments on YouTube

(sponsor.ajay.app)
661 points anotherhue | 3 comments | 12 Aug 24 09:10 UTC | HN request time: 0.629s | source
Show context
noone_youknow ◴[13 Aug 24 02:41 UTC] No.41231674[source]▶
As a YouTuber, I’m conflicted about this. My main channel (non-tech) is small, but is monetised, and YouTube see fit to throw me a _very_ variable amount of money every month. CPMs are down right now so revenue has tanked along with it, it’ll pick back up at some point, but the variability is itself the pain point. My videos are relatively expensive and time consuming to make, but people seem to find them useful, and even enjoyable. The occasional (relevant) sponsor read or similar has been a huge help in providing some stability in the past, and I know for many channels it’s the main source of income since YPP revenue share can be so volatile.

I do worry that if this takes off it will just result in those sponsors pulling their budgets for this type of advertising, and it’ll be another nail in the coffin for creators. Sure many of us also do patreon etc but that’s never really sat right with me personally (and see also the post on HN just today about Apple coming for a revenue split there for another creator-hostile storm brewing).

On the other hand, I totally get the hatred of “the usual suspect” sponsors (VPNs, low-quality learning platforms etc) that get done to death because of their aggressive sponsor budgets and not-unreasonable deals. Those get shoehorned into a ton of videos and it’s a shame, but a blunt instrument like this is likely to kill off sponsorships as a whole, not just those bad ones.

replies(25): >>41232437 #>>41232581 #>>41232707 #>>41233038 #>>41234040 #>>41234084 #>>41234999 #>>41235001 #>>41236793 #>>41238030 #>>41238280 #>>41238298 #>>41238611 #>>41239066 #>>41239394 #>>41239637 #>>41239654 #>>41239960 #>>41240838 #>>41240845 #>>41241269 #>>41241757 #>>41243225 #>>41243783 #>>41247631 #
erklik ◴[13 Aug 24 05:37 UTC] No.41232581[source]▶
> blunt instrument like this is likely to kill off sponsorships as a whole

That's the dream. Ads are a poison and a blight.

Removing them is something many users, including me welcome. If one wants money for their videos, they're welcome to actually allow getting payments i.e. patreon, the "Youtube sponsorship"-thing.

replies(6): >>41233013 #>>41233478 #>>41233501 #>>41234540 #>>41238244 #>>41241740 #
0dayz ◴[13 Aug 24 11:54 UTC] No.41234540[source]▶
And I'll agree with you the day we all decide to pay a monthly fee that is big enough to support various websites and creators.
replies(1): >>41235558 #
ndriscoll ◴[13 Aug 24 14:01 UTC] No.41235558[source]▶
Why? As a HN-er/content creator, I don't see why it would be taken for granted that people need to be paid for their hobbies. In fact many people post online for enjoyment.
replies(2): >>41238217 #>>41238655 #
labcomputer ◴[13 Aug 24 19:16 UTC] No.41238655[source]▶
I’m sort of amazed this has to be explicitly stated:

Because most YouTube creators (even the hobbyists) are at least partially motivated by money, and if you take away all the money they will likely make less content or stop altogether. I understand that it’s fun to get things for free, but that’s usually not sustainable.

replies(4): >>41238947 #>>41239038 #>>41239755 #>>41242788 #
1. kelnos ◴[13 Aug 24 20:55 UTC] No.41239755[source]▶
I think that's fine, though. Maybe we should have different platforms. Maybe we have a platform just for people who post stuff out of love for their craft, and don't expect any sort of compensation. And then we have a platform for people who want to monetize, and the platform itself has a subscription fee that gets distributed to creators based on views, or... something. Anything, really.

Maybe this could all be YouTube, but creators decide on a per-video basis whether they're uploading publicly or only to paid viewers. I dunno, there are so many other models.

The current situation with YouTubers asking people to subscribe to their Patreon or whatever is so weird, since often they have to distribute patron perks outside of YouTube, or via unlisted links, or whatever. I assume Google hasn't built in paid subscriptions option for fear of anti-trust regulation, but an integrated solution like that would likely be better for both creators and viewers.

replies(2): >>41241016 #>>41241968 #
2. ndriscoll ◴[13 Aug 24 23:40 UTC] No.41241016[source]▶
They do have that functionality[0]. The elephant in the room to me when discussing these things is that people aren't wrong when they won't pay for most "content". The overwhelming majority of it brainless filler-noise that a lot of people probably only look at because they don't know what else to do with their time. If actually pressed to come up with how much they'd pay for it, they correctly come up with $0 as the answer. Unfortunately, they don't then figure that it's not worth their attention either.

[0] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7636690

3. johnnyanmac ◴[14 Aug 24 02:24 UTC] No.41241968[source]▶
> Maybe we should have different platforms. Maybe we have a platform just for people who post stuff out of love for their craft, and don't expect any sort of compensation

There are plenty of alternative video hosting sites if you seek that. So, why are you still on Youtube?

>but creators decide on a per-video basis whether they're uploading publicly or only to paid viewers. I dunno, there are so many other models.

Sure, works for Onlyfans. they even blend in both subscriptions AND PPV behind the sub. And we know how quality that content is (no offense to the models there. but come on, I've seen $100 for 2 pictures, behind a $20/month subscription. You're not 2000's Brittany Spears).

> I assume Google hasn't built in paid subscriptions option for fear of anti-trust regulation

They do. CC's can enable Memberships and upload videos specific to that.

The issue is that

1. the memberships are small for many right now. Conseuqnces of being late to the party.

2. what's offered isn't necessarily going to be even higher quality than a public video.

3. ad rev from non-subbed views is still signifigant. Making a paid subscription for certain videos can mean brining in less money.

4. That lower view count affects your algorithm for growing.

It's complex. And sadly, outside of the OF model most people simply don't want to pay for content. They get bored and they move to Tiktok and that's the real endgame should YT fall.