> I think the current YT Premium model is more fair
I don't think it is entirely fair to invent problems for people and then demand payment from them to stop getting in their way. That said, I don't object to Google providing people with the option of giving their money to Google either, I just don't think they need the strong arm tactics.
> Likewise with YouTube, nobody will donate to well-made instructional videos or original news reporting
There are countless examples to prove you wrong. Many people on youtube doing original news reporting and providing instructional videos get donations and many earn their living entirely from money they made on youtube (either from those people who choose to donate their money directly, or those who pay Google for Premium, or those who choose to allow themselves to be subjected to ads).
After running the platform at a loss over over a decade until their competitors evaporated. And then refusing to sell the solution to the invented problems without bundling it with an unrelated service in another market they want a foothold in...you know, just anticompetitive behavior.
> There are countless examples to prove you wrong.
I think there are many more examples proving me right. In my estimate, about 1 in 750 to 1 in 1000 subscribers will donate to a video creator. That's "nobody". If you look at your favourite channels and compare numbers of subscribers with numbers of Patreon sponsors, I think you will see similar numbers.
It's not only YouTube, it's almost everything on the internet. Then people here complain about diminishing quality of the stuff online... Well, people who make that stuff need to eat. If they can't support themselves with producing quality content, they will do something else and that content will not be made. It will not exist. At least YouTube is a way that enables a lot of high quality content to exist. I know hackers think that these creators should go to hell if they don't accept to create their stuff for free, but I side with the creator in this one.
For me, I look forward to the day when YouTube is completely behind a paywall, so that penny pinchers are left to wallow in the filth to save their precious dollars.
This is also why unhealthy slop food is sold everywhere. Most people will happily destroy their own health and keep buying the cheapest crap so they can pinch their precious penny, instead of spending a little more on quality.
But what I've always wondered is what people want to do with that penny that they've pinched for so long?
I don't think it is entirely fair to invent problems for people and then demand payment from them to stop getting in their way. That said, I don't object to Google providing people with the option of giving their money to Google either, I just don't think they need the strong arm tactics.
> Likewise with YouTube, nobody will donate to well-made instructional videos or original news reporting
There are countless examples to prove you wrong. Many people on youtube doing original news reporting and providing instructional videos get donations and many earn their living entirely from money they made on youtube (either from those people who choose to donate their money directly, or those who pay Google for Premium, or those who choose to allow themselves to be subjected to ads).