[MW Forums]

YouTube might need to rethink their new InVideo advertising scheme based on initial feedback to the popular video sharing Web site. more

[iron_chef]

How about showing the ad AFTER the clip is done.

/forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[scotts13]

You know, writer Cenzo74 is right - placing advertising in the video frame, concurrent with any part of the playback, is essentially editing and changing the video - which YouTube does not own.
I believe we're past the point where anyone pays much attention to advertising, except as background noise. We have ads on every available outdoor surface - billboards, busses, buildings, on race cars, even athletes uniforms, soon. They're in magazines, paperback books, on DVD's we buy - and how long has it been since you were able to watch a TV show without the bug in the corner being animated, and with sound effects?
We're very close to the point where advertising is totally inescapable, and completely tuned out by everyone. And the entire, huge industry will exist for nothing.

[adobephile]

Nah. That'd be sorta like ads between TV programs, and that seems to have been abandoned, at least on some networks where new shows start immediately, and viewers have to endure them mid-program.
I don't like advertising, either, but these strong protesters are kinda like homeless people, refusing to work or pay for accommodations and drifting around to the next "free" handout or the next bridge overpass to hang out under.
Bottom line is that people have to pay in some form or fashion for what they get. YouTube has to make money somehow, some way. Perhaps this new ad tactic is more greed poking its ugly head, but it may just be "reality" knocking. They'll do what they have to do.
Apple quit its free e-mail system amidst a lot of squawking from the "homeless" some of whom still rant, but .Mac seems to be thriving with constantly improving services. Maybe YouTube will manage to survive under a new business model of some sort. But I don't think it'll be with this latest ad gimmick.

[fribhey]

so let me get this straight. youtube already makes money off of other people's videos and now they want to make more money for people to watch other people's videos?
if google OWNED the content then they can do whatever they wanted but they don't and the site would disappear if all the users decided to delete all of their videos and go to another site.

[fribhey]

Quote:

---

I don't like advertising, either, but these strong protesters are kinda like homeless people, refusing to work or pay for accommodations and drifting around to the next "free" handout or the next bridge overpass to hang out under.
Bottom line is that people have to pay in some form or fashion for what they get. YouTube has to make money somehow, some way. Perhaps this new ad tactic is more greed poking its ugly head, but it may just be "reality" knocking. They'll do what they have to do.
Apple quit its free e-mail system amidst a lot of squawking from the "homeless" some of whom still rant, but .Mac seems to be thriving with constantly improving services.

---

how can you possibly compare this to iTools? while i do agree that people in general think they are entitled to free everything (email, hosting, news, music, etc) BUT these people aren't getting something for free. their content is generating money for youtube and they aren't seeing a dime. youtube would be worthless if the users all decide to leave and pull the only source that generates money for them. all the ads in the world wouldn't make them any money if nobody was visiting the site.

[dmstewart]

So VideoEgg rips off Apple to note YouTube's ripping off VideoEgg. Very audacious and cute!
http://www.macmother...iouslyIBM_l.jpg

[d00d]

Clearly you missed the earlier article about this.

Quote:

---

YouTube will work with partners on the new advertising scheme, and said in a note on its blog that ad revenue will be shared with content owners.

---

Also, I'm still not convinced that YouTube in its current form is actually a money maker.

[mdawson]

Well, people taunted Jeff in one of yesterdays threads about this new advertising scheme and as it turns out he was right. We can accept that content providers/hosts need ad revenue to offer free content, but the simple matter of fact is that advertising is becoming ever more intrusive. The fact that a browser that cannot block pop-ups is a browser that will not be utilized, should tell these companies something. The Macworld site is plastered with ads, and that is fine as they are not in the way of content. But the day that ads begin appearing in the middle of posts and articles, will be the day I see Mac news elsewhere; and I doubt that I am the only regular on these boards of that mindset.
As the producer of the linked video indicated, as did scotts13, advertising has begun to intrude on content. Even on shows owned by a network, the intrusion makes television viewing distasteful to the point where The Daily Show spoofed the NBCs intrusive advertising by showing a critical plot scene in the highly rated Heroes with an intrusive overlay ad to see next weeks episode of Deal or No Deal using large text and an animated Howie Mandel blocking much of the actual content. Exaggerated? Sure, but they still made a pivotal point: keep the d/forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gifn advertising out of the content.

[d00d]

Quote:

---

Well, people taunted Jeff in one of yesterdays threads about this new advertising scheme and as it turns out he was right.

---

He was proven right how? Some people agree with Jeff. So? Some people agree with each other that OJ was innocent too.

[tallscot]

Quote:

---

You know, writer Cenzo74 is right - placing advertising in the video frame, concurrent with any part of the playback, is essentially editing and changing the video - which YouTube does not own.
I believe we're past the point where anyone pays much attention to advertising, except as background noise. We have ads on every available outdoor surface - billboards, busses, buildings, on race cars, even athletes uniforms, soon. They're in magazines, paperback books, on DVD's we buy - and how long has it been since you were able to watch a TV show without the bug in the corner being animated, and with sound effects?
We're very close to the point where advertising is totally inescapable, and completely tuned out by everyone. And the entire, huge industry will exist for nothing.

---

I'd rather see ads than pay for subscriptions. Most ads don't appeal to me, but sometimes I see one that does. That's the point. It's a numbers game. 99% of the time you may not even look at them, but then you might see an ad for something that you need or interests you or is timely...
My only beef with Web ads is when they distract me from enjoying the content of the page, indefinitely. That gives me justification for using an ad-blocker, in my mind.

[tallscot]

Quote:

---

As the producer of the linked video indicated, as did scotts13, advertising has begun to intrude on content. Even on shows owned by a network, the intrusion makes television viewing distasteful to the point where The Daily Show spoofed the NBCs intrusive advertising by showing a critical plot scene in the highly rated Heroes with an intrusive overlay ad to see next weeks episode of Deal or No Deal using large text and an animated Howie Mandel blocking much of the actual content. Exaggerated? Sure, but they still made a pivotal point: keep the dn advertising out of the content.

---

That's worse because it's self promotion, not advertising for revenue.
What annoys me more than the lower thirds promotion are the product placements in the content...
Heroes:
"Hey, we have to go find Sylar!"
"Yeah, let's get into our brand new Ford Edge!" - camera zooms in on Ford logo.
"Sounds great! Mind if I drink a refreshing Coke?"

[hayesk]

Quote:

---

How about showing the ad AFTER the clip is done.

---

I assume you are joking. Although, ads before the clip, if short enough should be acceptable. It's clear that YouTube isn't making enough money with banner ads alone. They aren't a charity.
I agree that overlays are a terrible idea - what if the add covers the spot that you want to watch? However, increasing advertising shouldn't be that shocking to people.

[d00d]

Quote:

---

You know, writer Cenzo74 is right - placing advertising in the video frame, concurrent with any part of the playback, is essentially editing and changing the video - which YouTube does not own.

---

You're right that they don't own it, but by uploading, you are giving them permission to modify the video as they see fit.

Quote:

---

C. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. However, by submitting User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube's (and its successors' and affiliates') business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels. You also hereby grant each user of the YouTube Website a non-exclusive license to access your User Submissions through the Website, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such User Submissions as permitted through the functionality of the Website and under these Terms of Service. The above licenses granted by you in User Videos terminate within a commercially reasonable time after you remove or delete your User Videos from the YouTube Service. You understand and agree, however, that YouTube may retain, but not display, distribute, or perform, server copies of User Submissions that have been removed or deleted. The above licenses granted by you in User Comments are perpetual and irrevocable.

---

Besides, as it currently stands, content producers have to sign up to be part of this advertising, negating all the "but what if it covers up something I want to see" arguments.