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.

  • rob200@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    They want to squeeze out that extra bit of profit and get the users that never subscribed on there so they can boast about improved numbers.

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        What I fears is that its a matter of time before entertainment industry figures out a way to stop those services. I’ve even begun to see discussions that open source may be struggling to remain relevant. Whose taking over for the power houses from early days. So much talent out there. But I really worry the community will shrink over time because we all raiser a generation on the concept of monetization rather than open collaboration. I look out on the internet and the loudest voices are artists and content creators. Both groups who push the fuck you pay me mentality that I believe was not what we all had originally on the internet and it makes me so worried to think how that will only grow if there is no push back.

      • bblkargonaut@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Im the one that was paying for Netflix for my family, but the password crack down motivated me to learn how to build a server and go full arrs. They had a good thing going, but now that $26 a month will be used to buy hdds.

    • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days 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.

        • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days 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
        0
        ·
        2 days 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
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days 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

      • efstajas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days 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
            0
            ·
            2 days 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
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days 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
                0
                ·
                2 days 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.

        • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days 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
            0
            ·
            2 days 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
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Mind explains what is far fetched about it?

              Like can you explain what the original argument was and why the comparison I made would be far fetched in that context?

          • TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            For me, it depends on what they’re promoting. If it’s some crappy mobile game or crypto, I’m out. But I’m fine with the usual shit like energy drinks or VPNs. Like, those things usually have a serious business behind them, even if they might be useless for the vast majority of viewers.

            • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              If Netflix ads were just energy drinks and VPN then you’re cool with them adding these tiers?

              Honest to god question. How many hours a day are you OK being spent on being sold something. What is your ratio of content to ads.

              • TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                It’s a little different with Netflix, because of what they started out as. With Youtube, I expected to be advertised to from the beginning, you know? I pay for Youtube Premium and use Sponsor Block to support the creators I watch while having a mostly ad free experience. Also, I just trust most of the creators that I watch to have my best interest in mind in terms of what they advertise.

                But for Netflix, their whole thing from the beginning was that they were better TV. That’s how they sold it to me. Now they’re slowly losing their point. So I’d definitely not be alright with it if they started showing me ads on top of my subscription fee. Same with Prime Video, because I know they’re experimenting with that.

            • Iheartcheese@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              Yep. I don’t hate youtubers for doing ads. Everyone needs to make money. Just skip the ads.

              Except for Ryan George because he actually makes his funny as fuck.

  • NutWrench@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    “Free ad-supported” makes you no different than a hundred other garbage-tier streaming services.

  • AWildMimicAppears@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    My Plex share doesn’t care lol

    The way the industry is pulling the screws tighter and tighter is just ugly to watch, and it’s hard not to be caught out.

      • MentallyExhausted@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        They do keep adding garbage that nobody wants, but the core product still works great. I plan on getting a jellyfin docker running in parallel though so I’m prepared in the event they piss me off too much.

  • Eggyhead@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    They will still be selling user data whether you opt for the ad supported tier or not, so get used to that.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      If they haven’t been doing so for at least a decade, I’m sure their shareholders will want to know why not.

  • DannyMac@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    “The enshittifucation will continue until profits improve.” --CEOs of Publicly Traded Companies

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    It’s almost like all these CEOs and MBAs are just shooting in the dark because of the $$$ in their eyes, but the fact remains that the market is no longer responding favorably to their absolute need for year-over-year growth.

  • roofuskit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Obviously the majority of content is not going to be available. It will essentially b a Tubi clone or what Netflix streaming was when they first launched it.

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    If they aren’t going to charge for access otherwise then I don’t think being ad supported is such a bad thing. Much more honest than subscription pricing and ads in my opinion.

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Doesn’t this already exist or did I imagine it?

    I thought they introduced it years ago

    Edit: oh I read again, this time it’s free

      • Patch@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        See, now I’m fine with that. I pay for Netflix and I want what I pay for to stay ad-free. Having an ad-supported tier with no fee in addition to that means that there are options for other people without enshittifying my experience.

        That’s a world of difference to what Amazon have done where they’ve shoved ads into the service that I thought I was paying for, and then offered to charge me even more to get my original ad-free service back.

  • Fluid@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    There’s no better ad for piracy than the greed of corporations. Don’t let ads shit in your head. They disrespect you, you disrespect them.

    • RuBisCO@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      “People are taking the piss out of you every day. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you. You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head. You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs.”

      Banksy