Seriously this was very surprising. I’ve been experimenting with GrayJay since it was announced and I largely think it’s a pretty sweet app. I know there are concerns over how it isn’t “true open source” but it’s a hell of a lot more open than ReVanced. Plus, I like the general design and philosophy of the app.
I updated the YouTube backend recently and to my surprise and delight they had added support for SponsorBlock. However, when I went to enable it, it warned me “turning this on harms creators” and made me click a box before I could continue.
Bruh, you’re literally an ad-blocking YouTube frontend. What kind of mental gymnastics does it take to be facilitating ad-blocking and then at the same time shame the end-user for using an extension which simply automates seeking ahead in videos. Are you seriously gonna tell me that even without Sponsorblock, if I skip ahead past the sponsored ad read in a video, that I’m “harming the creator”?
In case anyone is wondering, here is the “shaming” that is done in the app. (images attached)
You’re not being shamed anywhere in this text. You are being presented factual information. Any shame that you feel as a result of being faced with information is pretty much entirely on you.
I have no qualms turning on sponsorblock and adblockers, I support the creators that I enjoy via other means.
If you are taking issue with the “don’t freeload” then I guess you perhaps feel bad being told that you’re freeloading? I won’t pretend to know what’s going on in your own brain. But you’re posting this in a piracy community so I don’t imagine it should be any surprise to you that you’re freeloading, lol. If ye choose to sail the seas, do it with pride, me hearty. And support small businesses, yarr.
Sponsorblock does not harm creators. Youtube has no method of detecting when a sponsored segment is skipped, so the creator still gets their sponsorship money. A person who is using sponsorblock is extremely unlikely to use the sponsored products even if they did watch the ad, so the creator isn’t losing out on any affiliate money either.
YouTube absolutely can see which parts of videos people are actually engaging with. So can creators. And sponsors can request engagement metrics as part of their sponsorship deals.
Advertisers care about impressions and engagement. A person simply watching a sponsored segment is an impression. If people’s impression metrics for sponsored segments start dropping, they become less attractive to sponsors as they knew they’re going to get fewer impressions as part of the deal.
It may, or may not, be a very small impact but it is an impact nonetheless.
If nobody is watching sponsored segments (which we’ve established: YouTube itsself, creators, and sponsors can track) then companies don’t have any incentive to sponsor videos, and creators no longer get revenue from sponsorships. Sure, this is a very end of the line example, because there’s always going to be someone who doesn’t have sponsorblock installed and can’t be bothered to skip the segment.
Just FYI for all the people who keep repeating this ad-nauseam it doesn’t apply to third party apps like Newpipe and grayjay which DO NOT send analytics data. If anyone wants to make arguments against sponsorblock they also can’t support apps and front-ends which strip the Analytics from the video because without them you add no watch time or metrics, so it’s a hypocritical argument.
I mean, it applies equally here. Using apps that strip metrics and analytics, has a similar effect to using sponsorblock. I don’t think I was arguing against sponsorblock I was saying facts about it. I use sponsorblock, I use grayjay, and I pay content creators.
The thread is about grayjay saying that using sponsorblock on grayjay will hurt creators. If grayjay doesn’t send metrics, then any metrics sponsorblock might mess up are already messed up by watching on grayjay.
Advertisers that care a lot about engagement use CTR instead of CPM. CTR enables advertisers to keep track of engagement and lie about real engagement numbers to save costs. If advertisers rely on video segment statistics, creators can fake the statistics to earn more money. So advertisers rarely measure their payout based on unverifiable information. And people that use SponsorBlock wouldn’t buy it, even without SponsorBlock. Or in other words: Most creators can ignore SponsorBlock.
I agree with you that clickthrough rate is a far more useful metric for advertisers, and is probably more widely used in sponsorship deals.
Creators faking impression metrics would be followed by the advertisers seeing weirdly low clickthrough ratios, seeing that somethings up, and the creator losing future deals from that advertiser, so it’s not something I would expect creators to do unless they think they’re smarter than multi million/billion dollar companies advertising departments.
Where does this assertion come from that people that use sponsorblock are somehow never going to buy products? People keep saying it but I just don’t get it. We live in a world where people buy things. Some products are relevant to some people and some aren’t to other people. I use sponsorblock and adblock, and if I were to somehow see an advert for a product that seemed like it perfectly fit a need that I had, I’d definitely consider getting the product.
Where does this assertion come from that people that use sponsorblock are somehow never going to buy products? People keep saying it but I just don’t get it. We live in a world where people buy things. Some products are relevant to some people and some aren’t to other people. I use sponsorblock and adblock, and if I were to somehow see an advert for a product that seemed like it perfectly fit a need that I had, I’d definitely consider getting the product.
I use SponsorBlock. Ads have an influence on me, but usually with a negative impact on whatever they sell, so it’s beneficial for them that I don’t see their ads.
If I was looking for a fantasy-themed, turn-based role-playing gacha game, and a specific game annoys the fuck out of me with their massive marketing budget, they’re automatically on my blacklist. I’ll proactively ignore the game in my market research and exclude the game, the game’s company and publisher from my Google search results with the uBlacklist browser extension.
If it’s a SaaS and they charge a premium for SSO, they get a once in a lifetime opportunity to land on a public wall of shame that some sysadmins use to preemptively filter out software vendors from their purchasing process. So it’s a really shitty idea to advertise crap to the wrong people.
Okay, sure, that’s a nice story about yourself, but like, this doesn’t address the core of your assertion that people who use sponsorblock won’t buy products if they see ads for them. It doesn’t seem like the two are actually inherently related at all. (People who don’t want to watch adverts) are not necessarily (People who don’t buy products).
Why do they have to prove that? You backed up the assertion that sponsorblock hurts creators with the mere unlikely possibility that sponsors might be able to see metrics, how does their single anecdotal bit of evidence that people using sponsorblock are the kinds of people that won’t click ads anyway not pass the same muster?
Admittedly they’re both bad evidence, so why are we treating yours as better?
YouTube gets metrics on which parts of videos are being played. You can see this in the player where it’ll display things like “most played segment” on the timeline.
In theory the sponsor could demand access to the statistics showing watch time and pay differently because of that.
I doubt it happens though.
YouTube is unbearable without it.
I believe this is because sponsor segments are like traditional TV ads. They don’t use trackers, they are not targeted and they respect your privacy.
They don’t use trackers, they are not targeted and they respect your privacy.
In that case it won’t matter to anyone that I skipped them.
As I’ve mentioned in another thread, I believe YouTube provides analytics on this (hence the “most replayed” parts for some videos), and I’m certain I’ve seen some creators mention sposors requiring that information before a deal is made. So it may really hurt some small youtubers that can’t rely on merchandise sales.
That said, I personally use sponsorblock as I don’t feel like wasting my life on nordvpn ads, but I have to admit sponsor segments are a whole lot better than regular YouTube ads.
Edit: And as I far as I know they pay much better than regular ads.
The most replayed section won’t count your view anyway since you’re watching through an unofficial app that doesn’t send tracking data to YouTube
I manually skip all sponsored segments except for the Internet Historian ones.
You thief!! /s
Pretty much. I watch all the NordVPN Man ads and don’t even sign up for a 12 month discount and the first month free. I’m basically a criminal.
Also Mullvad FTW.
They don’t use trackers,
Well, they can see whether you watched them or not. So technically still tracked. At least in the official youtube app.
They can see the percentage of people who watched that part of the video, as part of the video analytics. This doesn’t track the user, though, at least not if you have history turned off, or are using another front end.
And I’d guess that’s done in the backend instead of the frontend. They should be able to know how many times their server steamed a part of a video.
They don’t respect my attention and time, thought
I mean, the person making the video you are watching respected your time to the point they put in 10-100x the amount of time it takes you to watch that video to make it.
And the sponsor ad is how they afford said time commitment.
Then they fucked up.
they put in 10-100x the amount of time it takes you to watch that video to make it.
And show it to millions of people… So per capita… I put in more time then they did.
Apologies. You are the true hero. Thank you for your service
Hence why it might be hurtful to small creators. I’d love to see the numbers on that though, as the overall percentage of people using an adblocker is very low, I assume for Sponsorblock it’s significantly less.
No not even close. You did not put in more time.
Skip it all you want but don’t act like it’s such a terrible inconvenience. Creating high quality content is a full time job and people gotta eat
Everytime the same argument. I don’t want to see ads never ever, period. They are useless and annoying at best, sometimes plain evil manipulation.
I recognize the need of income for creators, and they can ask for money in the form of donation/subscription and other methods. I am paying and will pay for everything I want to support. If you decide that your way to sustain yourself is by shoving up fake opinions and useless noise in order to manipulate me into buying something, I don’t accept it. It’s as simple as that.
If the creators you like choose to monetize with sponsors, you can choose not to watch them instead of complaining about it on a forum. Or go create the content you like yourself.
I don’t like ads either and have stopped watching several channels because of how they use them.
“Every time the same argument” is right - “my time is valuable but the creator’s time is not!”
deleted by creator
Go for it! I’m not holding that against anyone. I’m railing against the entitlement of saying it’s “not respectful of the viewer’s time” to have sponsored segments.
Like I said elsewhere, I think that stance is ironic because it’s not respecting the creator’s time and effort. “I want you to spend hours and hours making videos for me but I don’t want you to make money from it”
Shit, I didn’t realize the only way some people can eat is by making Youtube videos.
Shit, I didn’t realize there were 48 hours in a day.
Sorry, you’re right. Creators should work their 9-5 and then spend another 8 hours a day making videos for us out of the goodness of their hearts. I now think it’s disgusting that these people try to monetize their hard work
I think it’s ironic that the argument is both “sponsor segments don’t respect my time!” AND “I have no respect for the time of the creators”
Nobody needs YouTube videos nor is anyone compelled to make them. I’m guessing you don’t remember when YouTube was completely free and people just made videos for fun?
Now people quit jobs that support them to do something fun and try to make monry off that. Which is fine, but we’re not required to support their hobby. Stop acting like people have no other option in their life except to make reaction videos, video essays, meme compilations, etc.
On one hand true, on the other, a lot of those sponsorships advertise dubious things at best. I love the channels that just shill their own merch, but being entirely fair, you need to be at a certain revenue threshold to afford making said merch.
The problem with those, 3rd party sponsorships is that they’re usually just either mobile games, F2P(P2W) MMOs, overpriced basic products or software advertised in the FUD way. Sorry, I don’t care for Raid Shadow Legends, War Thunder, Manscaped or NordVPN. Especially the last one and the ones like it grind my gears because the sponsorships for that kind of product are borderline misinformation.
All of them, in some way, can be considered somewhat predatory. I’d rather buy a silly hat or a plushie, thank you very much.
I don’t care for those, either.
If that was their reasoning, they should say that rather than vaccuously claiming that it “harms creators”
Well, it does harm creators, as they may get less money. The same goes for adblockers.
Then again I don’t really understand why would you care about being “shamed”, especially by a company that charges money for a frontend using YouTube’s (extremely expensive) servers for free.
Then again I don’t really understand why would you care about being “shamed”, especially by a company that charges money for a frontend using YouTube’s (extremely expensive) servers for free.
To paraphrase Norm MacDonald: the worst part is the hypocrisy 😅
Before getting Sponsorblock, I would always manually skip forward past the integrated advertisements. This tool does the exact same thing but faster and more convenient for me. My conscience is unaffected
Precisely! The sponsors have to be aware that some subset of the audiences watching the sponsorees will skip ahead anyway. They can’t seriously believe that they are entitled to our attention.
The Wadsworth Constant was a thing even from the earliest days of Youtube.
Outside of his right to repair work I find most anything Rossmann gets involved in is questionable. He is a good example of someone that got popular for something they cared about and knew something about, then mistakenly got the idea that success meant they had valid opinions on other things they know nothing about.
Rossmann knows about laptop hardware repair and running a small business. But that doesn’t necessarily translate into being a knowledgeable voice in the software dev or large scale digital advertising industries.
He is just a mouthpiece for the company behind Greyjay, nothing more.
I’m inclined to agree. I respect the work he’s done for R2R, but I find his videos on New York commercial real estate to be incredibly cringe. Nonetheless I think GrayJay is a decent YouTube frontend and will probably continue using it until it gives me a reason to stop or until something I prefer comes along.
So he’s basically Elon Musk.
Grayjay doesn’t block adds. It simply doesn’t load them in the stream. There is a difference.
Grayjay also doesn’t send analytics data back to YouTube, so watching the sponsor or skipping it look identical to YouTube’s servers. One can’t make the argument that you are supporting creators by watching their sponsors if the sponsors have no way to know that the sponsor part of the video was watched.
As far as I’m aware, creator sponsorships rarely care about whether or not you watch the segments, but about how many people follow the link or whatnot. So you could make the argument that sponsorblock makes you never follow the links, but that really assumes you would otherwise, which…
Yeah, and there are no products that I care about that get advertised by youtubers so I would never click on those links. I don’t shave, I don’t need to build a website, I don’t need a VPN, I don’t need a food delivery service, I don’t listen to audio books, I don’t need earpods, I don’t play mobile games…
Listening to these sponsors literally loses me time. I reinstalled revanced 2 months ago and sponsorblock already has skipped 50 minutes worth of sponsors. (oh these sponsorblock stats also seem to be missing from grayjay. Grayjay doesn’t seem to have any sponsorblock settings besides allowing you to manually skip instead automatically)
Shame is an artificial construct that I am choosing not to opt into. Thanks for letting us know that sponsorblock is in, I’m turning it on now.
Shame is a mismatch between ego and ego-ideal, whereas guilt is a mismatch between ego and super-ego. The ego-ideal in shame does depend on social norms. But that is by no means “artificial”.
I’m confused about your stance on ReVanced. It’s about as open-source as you can get https://github.com/revanced/revanced-patches
With ReVanced there is a core underlying app being patched which is not OSS. With GrayJay, the source of the whole thing is source-available
I understand that and wouldn’t have commented if you said that. Instead you said that, quote, ReVanced, end quote, is not open source.
My understanding is that it literally can’t be used in an open fashion since it critically requires a proprietary closed base.
Some source code is available but the entire thing is not open source.
I think you guys are just discussing semantics. Revanced as a project is the patches themselves, so Revanced is open source. But a YouTube app patched with the Revanced patches is not.
Exactly. Could have just said YouTube is closed source from the start when ReVanced is 100% open-source.
That’s a better way to frame it.
The patch is ‘about as open source as you can get’ but the actual application is far from it.
no it’s not. the modifications are open source, but the base client is the same old closed source Youtube app.
i keep sponsorblock on but i pretty much have it set on manual skip by default. i mostly use it for critical role (whom i also subscribe to on twitch) shows to skip the intermission or for twitch vods on youtube to skip the beginning and after parts where it’s just the streamer talking to chat.
but i also don’t understand how skipping in video sponsored segments loses them money like it’s not a youtube thing it’s a creator thing like television adverts. how would they know if it’s been skipped wouldn’t they already get the money to do the sponsorship before the video is posted?
Youtube tracks how much of a video each person watches. These metrics are used by youtubers to strike deals with sponsors.
The amount of money the sponsor pays will be based on how many views the sponsor’s message part of the video gets.
I was kind of dissapointed when I read the new pipe team was having an issue with sponsor block, but tbh their reasoning makes a lot of sense:
https://newpipe.net/blog/pinned/newpipe-and-online-advertising/
And even thought I am using the sponsor block fork now I only skip the non-music part in music videos, because I do agree that creators have to make money somehow. And while I don’t love ads most of the time (sometimes they are really well made) my main issue with ads on Youtube/the wider Internet is how intrusive they are and them not respecting my privacy.
Well they won’t make any money off you watching them on NewPipe because the way it parses videos doesn’t register views or watched timestamps, the things that sponsors take into account when paying creators.
It’s why their argument is garbage, because they designed NewPipe the way they did for the purpose of privacy, which also defeats any method of making money through analytics yet they think Sponsorblock in this case stops them from making money, as if they could make money off NewPipe users at all in the first place.
There’s no reason in watching the sponsors through NewPipe, because the view doesn’t count, especially segment-based view.
The YouTube channel (and their sponsor) will never detect that you actually watched the sponsor. So, why bother watching it in the first place?
How sure are you that your view through NewPipe is getting counted on YouTube statistics so that the channel is getting a proper measure of reach?
Because I am not so sure the view is being counted, and much less the (not)viewing of the sponsorblock segment.
Views don’t get counted on Newpipe and if they do somehow it’s not accurate, as in it won’t count watch-time or parts of the video watched, the way it parses the video these analytics don’t get sent.
I know my klick on the link is counted if I am interested in the product they are selling.
If you really want to support someone on YouTube something like patreon is the way to go. Sponsored videos are life draining and a lot of extra work for paultry pay. But a legion of patreon subscribers can set someone up for a comfortable income from actually making things you want to see.
Depends on a sponsor. Some sponsors can pay crap loads of money to a big creator.
Real sponsors pay up front, or only add an additional bonus for affiliate link sales, if a creator accepts a deal on affiliate link money only, it’s their own fault. So if you always fast forward through sponsors and don’t care, you might as well enable it to save the bandwidth and power.
Skipping sponsors automatically means you definitely won’t be influenced by the marketing, so it hurts the creator because the sponsor might not work with them again because of low sales impact.
Anyway, I’ll continue to use NewPipe x SponsorBlock and the Firefox addon.
Do these particular advertisers asks the influencers to show their statistics?
I mean, wouldn’t the creator have to take a screenshot and send that info in? How do the advertisers even know people are skipping through sponsored segments?
Also I’ve never understood. I’m not going to buy a subscription service because someone I watch is offering it. If I want it I’m going to buy it regardless whether I’ve seen its ad or not, and the creators are just offering a discount code that can help them as well.
Lost views is not lost sales. That’s just stupid.
He’s still bitter someone Sponsorblocked his cat segment :-)
That’s unironically the reason I don’t use Sponsorblock, I don’t have any control over what people choose to mark as sponsored, what if they make me skip important content like cat segments?
Sponsorblock has categories and you can choose which to skip.
Also it’s important to report incorrect submissions since if enough people report them they get removed and the users who do this reprimanded.
But which category is the cat in??
Not having seen the video I would think it is in filler/off topic
You also don’t have to set it up to skip automatically, it will play through with a popup option to skip.
Seems to me an overreaction to complain about a single checkbox suggesting that people who make YouTube videos make actual money from sponsorships where ads get them jack shit. They added Sponsorblock but just have a one-time warning, is that really big of a deal? It’s informational, and if you don’t like it, ignore it and move on with your day.
If they were more insistent like a popup every time you used it I could see getting upset about it.
It’s not a big deal, just something I thought was odd. I’m not gonna claim checking a box is ruining my life or anything.
Blocking YouTube’s advertising is necessary for privacy, and it punishes YouTube for their bad business practices.
But sponsors aren’t underhanded like that and I feel like they’re the type of thing we should really be promoting as an alternative to privacy invading ads, and hopefully a way for creators to move off of YouTube eventually.
A lot of sponsors are very exploitative companies in their own right, and I don’t owe them my time or attention.
The point is that YouTubers pay for that with their own reputation, if I followed a YouTuber that promoted exploitative companies I would stop following that YouTuber - why would you want to watch their content anyway?
Eh, at least they added support for it. Good for them. Still looking at this app with some skepticism but so far seems to be doing what it sets out to do.
I know there are concerns over how it isn’t “true open source” but it’s a hell of a lot more open than ReVanced.
For me, terms and definitions are very important. Just like right to repair is often misrepresented to the detriment of consumers, it’s important to only talk about open source if the license actually respects your freedom [1].
Open source has a lot of positive connotations and calling some project open source while only being source available feels like taking advantage of it.
It’s similar to how large corporations talking about being eco friendly with their packaging whilst making the actual devices as hard to repair as possible.
You’re right, the ReVanced project is open source, but the resulting app is not, since it’s modifying the official YouTube app.
