YouTube first spoke about pause ads last year when it started trialing them in select regions. At the time, the company said that when you pause a video, it will shrink, and an ad will appear next to it.

Example:

“In Q1, we saw strong traction from the introduction of a pause ads pilot on connected TVs, a new non-interruptive ad format that appears when users pause their organic content,” Schindler noted. He went on to share that YouTube’s pause ads are “driving strong brand lift results” and “are commanding premium pricing from advertisers.”

Schindler didn’t share any timelines for when pause ads will start appearing on YouTube, but we know they’ll first roll out on smart TVs. The nature of these ads, including their duration, skippability, and more is still unclear. We also don’t know if Google plans to introduce these ads on YouTube’s mobile apps.

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

    But usually I’m pausing a video to try to read text that appeared too briefly in the video!

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        If McDonald’s started charging $100 for a cheeseburger, the response of “well who’s going to pay for it?” Would not be appropriate.

        The cost is too high and is only increasing because of greed.

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

          The cost is too high? Seriously?

          You’re not paying anything for the service. You have no concept of what their costs are. You’re mildly inconvenienced by some annoying and slightly obtrusive ads.

          It’s a business, not a charity. And they owe you nothing.

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            They are charging me my time through ads.

            You have no concept of what their costs are.

            Neither do you, but I know Google will shut down anything not profitable enough and they haven’t shut down YouTube.

            It’s a business, not a charity. I owe them nothing.

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Wait y’all still see ads on YouTube?

    If I can’t block ads on a device, I’m not using YouTube on that particular device.

      • sandman@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        You can block ads on youtube on mobile devices by using firefox in desktop mode with ublock origin.

        Fuck youtube. Fuck ads. Fuck useful idiots defending either.

      • theareciboincident@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Normies genuinely turn on their Smart TV, watch start menu ads, open the YouTube app, wait 90 seconds for the shitty cpu to load the web view, scroll through hundreds of Spider-Man Elsa brainwashing videos and thinly disguised ads, open a video, watch 3 minutes of ads, straight into a 3 minute sponsor segment. All before seeing any actual content.

        And they see no problem with this at all, the thought that you can make ads go away literally does not even occur to them as a possibility.

        Humanity deserves extinction, I’m gonna go release some refrigerant real quick

  • archchan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’d sooner stop using the internet than be forced to imprint that carefully crafted poison into my psyche. They will not steal my life with ads.

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        So? Creating videos isn’t free, but few creators are receiving money worth the time they put in.

        They also have a cycle-of-rage algorithm leading children from video game content into far-right radicalization.

        • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          The people you watch on yt get a higher amount from premium viewers.

          the ones that are getting paid through the youtube partner program are getting that through either premium subs or ad revenue.

          so if we get rid of all the ads on the platform where does the money to run the platform come from?

  • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Tubi does this. It’s probably the least I trusive way to handle ads. I’d be fine with it if it was a replacement for in-video ads, but I doubt they’re doing that and just want to squeeze more views out of our eyeballs so fuck them

    • Boiglenoight@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s also a way to pay for providing a service. We hate it, but short of everyone paying for YouTube, it’s how they make their money.

      Now double dipping is where things get questionable. If you pay for a video service AND they run ads. /Ripley flaming eggsacs

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        It’s also a way to pay for providing a service

        Yes, but that doesn’t excuse trying to force an infinite number of ads on people.

        Podcasts are supported through ads and you don’t see people complaining about it, programs to block them, and Podcasts trying to subvert ad blockers. Why? Because they have a reasonable number of ads, with clear ad breaks, that are indistinguishable code wise from the rest of the podcast so you can fast forward through them. Oh, and when I turn it off it doesn’t keep paying audio at me.

        This is like a service charging 10x as much and you defending it saying “you have to pay for the service somehow.” Yes, there’s paying for the service, and then there’s the service being greedy and milking every last bit of money they can out of it.

        YouTube made $31.5 billion in ad revenue last year, and they’re still demanding more. Will these “pause ads” reduce the number of other ads users see? Will it help find other improvements of the service? Or is this just an attempt to keep building infinite growth in a finite system?

        At this point I would be thrilled if YouTube went out of business because too many people were using ad blockers.

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yup, and somehow Podcasts still manage to be successful.

            Yet for some reason people expect me to believe YouTube will go out of business if the ad doesn’t force me to stand up in front of my webcam and say “McDonald’s” before the video resumes.

  • kamenoko@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The last real executive at Google was forced out a few years ago. Google is firmly in the hands of advertising now.

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

        ?

        Well, let me break this down for you, one part at a time…

        FFS.

        FFS
        (Click on above link for explanation.)

        /picardfacepalm

        I’m facepalming the fact that YouTube wants to stick ads in when you do a pause on a video, the same way that Captain Picard from Star Trek the Next Generation does. It’s an older but still relevant meme.

        CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

        I’m apparently annoying some individuals for some strange reason who get triggered and can’t handle having a link in someone’s comment that points to an open source license.

        Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          can’t handle having a link in someone’s comment that points to an open source license.

          It’s a waste of screen real estate that does nothing. Your “rights” automatically conflict with the rights of the platform you’re posting to, and all the other ones that you federate with. Unfortunately there’s no standing for your link to do anything. All your doing is advertising a webpage for no reason. Further, you cannot enter someone into an agreement with your licensing terms without positive consent/agreement, which you’re not obtaining nor could ever reasonably obtain on a federated platform where your content is automatically distributed to the entire fediverse.

          Buy products from my affiliate link! (except yours does nothing useful at all)

            • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              to use whenever it’s used online.

              Didn’t say that at all. I’m saying that you posting your post to lemmy.world doesn’t bind them to any license. And neither does it bind anyone else to it.

              If it’s your words on your own platform then no problem, you can license it however you see fit. But your post was posted to someone else’s server and was federated to my instance. I didn’t agree to any license and neither did the lemmy instance you posted to (or anyone else in the federation), I wouldn’t have accepted any terms of a license, and will continue not to accept any that limits my ability to distribute content unrestricted (eg. a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license to use, copy, distribute, publicly display, and modify your User Content) specifically because all of that is required in order to distribute content over the fediverse. Regardless of if my lemmy instance makes money or not.

              Nobody needs to be a lawyer to understand this. Being bound to licenses requires consent in order to be bound. You published your data to my server knowingly where I do not offer such consent to any user submitted license. This would be akin to you handing me a gift and only after I’ve used it state that I need to accept terms and conditions. That’s not how it works at all.

              Lets look at this the other way… If I posted this response to my lemmy instance and grant rights only to lemmy.saik0.com with no rights for distribution, no rights to other instances, and all other rights fully reserved. I cannot now go after every instance in the federation for distributing my content to your screen, I willingly gave the content over and lemmy.saik0.com or lemmy.world didn’t necessarily agree to that license. Or another example… Where I want to post restrictive license that grants me rights to someone else’s instance even though I have no ownership stake in their instance for posting on their platform. You cannot simply bind someone to a license of ANY TERMS without explicit acceptance. In many cases it’s “by continuing to use this product” on a modal pop-up for example. requiring an active closing of the modal to continue operating the site. You’re missing that completely… consent… and every server in between me and you would also need to agree to it even if I were to agree to your license terms.

              Ultimately I own my server… and you’re submission of content pushes data to my server without my consent to your terms. You cannot bind me to them.

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

                Nobody needs to be a lawyer to understand

                Honestly, I’m too exhausted to rebut your various points that I disagree with. Been spending too much time, much more than should be spent, in debating this issue with people, for what we’re talking about, a single link.

                I’ll advocate for being the owner of my own content, and being able to license it the way I see fit, until an actual lawyer with some standing states otherwise.

                I do thank you for your input though.

                Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

                • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I just find it hilarious that you post shit like this… https://lemmy.world/comment/9578409

                  And think that your posts should not be usable for some purpose reason when O’Reilly definitely WOULD have a case over their trademark. And you’re distributing that content under your own license. Especially since that image is tagged with a different user in the bottom right.

                  I don’t care for the argument. I’m just outlining why people are downvoting you. You’re likely wrong, which you’ve already admitted in your comment history that you have no idea. And that you are a hypocrite on the matter anyway.

                  But right… Good luck.

      • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        It appears this person signs off all of their comments with a creative commons license for fair use, presumably saying how you’re allowed to use their comment. Which I’m relatively sure has exactly the same legal power as a boomer posting a Facebook picture saying that they don’t consent to having their data collected

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          It appears this person signs off all of their comments with a creative commons license for fair use

          I didn’t used to, but got tired of people making money training their AI models off of my comments. And it’s a momentary copy and paste, easy to do.

          Also, considering the types of replies I’m getting these days, and the entertainment I’m obtaining from people’s reactions to them, I find it good to just include them in every comment going forward. It weirdly triggers people for some reason.

          Which I’m relatively sure has exactly the same legal power as a boomer posting a Facebook picture saying that they don’t consent to having their data collected

          Well, when you get your law degree, come on back and let us all know what the final word from you is on this subject.

          Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

            • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Wtf?! You copy and paste them manually? I thought you were using an app that let you set footer/signature.

              I actually went looking on the Lemmy website client for a signature field in the account info area, but they didn’t have it.

              So I sent a text message to myself once with the Lemmy formatted url string, and I use that as a scratch pad.

              Then all I have to do is press hold on the text message to copy it once, and paste it in each of my comments.

              Takes just a second.

              I’m hoping someday the Lemmy web client will allow signatures, so I can just put it there and not even have to hassle it.

              Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

  • mark@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Google says pause ads on YouTube are getting a very positive reaction from advertisers

    Bc screw the users and their reactions 😄.

    We really need a good YouTube competitor. This is beyond ridiculous at this point.

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

    Damn. YouTube is just SO desperate to squeeze every bit of ad revenue they can, wherever they can.

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

        When it was hemorrhaging money?

        We’re in a weird time where all the tech companies are being told at once that they need to start being profitable, and at the same time the EU is cracking down on lots of the shady shit they’ve been using to control the bleeding to this point.

        The internet has spent the last 20 years developing an economic model that’s quickly becoming unsustainable, and none of the big web companies seem to have been prepared.

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t see it that way. YouTube has been slowly monetizing and is quite profitable at this point. Same with Facebook, and many other companies where “you are the product”. Advertising is a very profitable business.

    • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      There are ways to completely neutralize ublock power: put ads on the same server, as content + randomise div identificators

      UPD: by the downvotes I conclude people think I’m from the advertising industry.
      I’m not. I know these methods, because I have been struggling with counteracting such ads.

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

        Yeah, they could put the ads in the same stream but it would be too costly or inflexible. Ads have to be targeted to the specific market or even user so that would kill their advantage and turn them into generic TV ads.

    • Joelk111@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Laughs in… Supporting creators by supporting them in other ways than watching ads on their videos, right? Right???

        • Joelk111@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Sweet, for sure, I have no issue with that.

          The people complaining about ads who don’t support creators in other ways is what bothers me.

          • TwoCubed@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I don’t know man, I loved YouTube back in the days when people made videos for shits and giggles. No one expected money from that.

  • smackjack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Following in porn’s footsteps I see. Can’t pause a video without getting an ad shoved in front of your face.