• teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Reminder to support creators in other ways if you’re going to use this.

    Edit: similarly, if you can afford it kick a few bucks to your Lemmy instance. We’re about freedom as in speech, not as in freeloading, people. The whole reason the internet shifted to being ad and data collection based after the dotcom bubble is because no one wants to pay for anything.

    • Sneezycat@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      You know creators get paid for the sponsor right? Not for if people watch that part or not.

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        A main reason youtube is so successful as an advertising product is their detailed metrics. Virtually every sponsor will want to see each video’s metrics which show retention during different parts of the video. It would be the same as putting the ad at the end of an hour long video; if they see a huge drop off where almost no one sees the ad, they may decide the creator didn’t fulfill their end of the contract, or pay them proportionally to the retention during the ad.

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

        Thing is, the way a company determines if a sponsorship is working is by using offer codes. If no one is using an offer code, the company is going to assume that that sponsorship isn’t working out and might terminate the deal.

      • mlc894@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why would a sponsor pay for an ad if they know nobody will watch? Its not magic money out of nowhere; the sponsor has to come out net positive or else they stop sponsoring.