Prime Video discreetly doubled the amount of advertising that it shows paid customers. According to Adweek, the initial advertisement burden of two to three and a half minutes per hour is now sitting four to six minutes.
I am not surprised: Amazon told Investors last year that it would increase the volume of ads and the introduction of new ways to get bored when you take a break or travel. But as one of the subscribers who will see these announcements, I really don’t know if I will stay and pay for a service that is getting worse, and I expect me to get worse.
The fact that I am in the United Kingdom deserves to be noted here. I saw a lot of reports saying “Hey, you know, it’s not as bad as we broadcast television, Admiirian!”. But I come from a place where television advertising is much more civilized. Of course, American viewers have long been exhibited at 13 to 16 minutes of announcements per hour. But here, in the United Kingdom, the regulator claims that the main broadcasters – including the ITV, STV and UTV commercial broadcasters – can only on average seven minutes per hour.
This means that Amazon can always keep its promise to display fewer announcements than the “linear TV” networks with which it is in competition in the United States while increasing the annuity of ad to display much more advertising than the British show of broadcasters. And these radiudiffusers do not charge me a monthly subscription to watch their ads.
It is not only a Scottish complaining from the American style advertising farce, although I do that. This is also the problem of technological companies that try to earn more money by aggravating their products.
Here is why streaming is broken
I write on digital media, file sharing and streaming for a very long time, and what made it possible to succeed in streaming was simple: it was less painful than hacking. Of course, you can search the bay of the pirates or use an application to pay, but why bother you when you had Netflix there? A flat rate, tons of great things to look at, no advertisements: obvious.
But of course, we don’t just have Netflix now. What we have in place are endless streamers with shareholders who want growth, growth and more growth in a supersaturated market at a time when the cost of everything rises and that people’s income is not.
If you cannot win new customers, you can tighten the ones you are more difficult. And again and again, this seems to be the option that technological companies prefer: password repression and advertisements and price hikes and advertisements and less choice and advertisements and reduced video quality and ads and no atmosphere without upgrade and advertisements and advertisements on advertisements on advertisements.
Here in the United Kingdom, we have an airline that people like to hate, Ryanair; The American equivalent is probably a spirit. But although low -cost airlines are largely hated, we always use them because there is not really an alternative – so that they can throw the seats and make luggage allocation of the size of a coke can and perhaps start to fill the aircraft with snakes and honey -frying badgers and gasoline gas and we will support it because there is no other option.
But this is not true for streaming.
There are many other options for viewers, but not with exactly the same shows. But for the shows that you cannot get, there is a hacking – often in full quality and HDR with Atmos and no advertising breaks.
I am not here to argue legality (it is illegal in most places) or morality (it is bad) of hacking. But as a person who has covered the online media since the 1990s, who has lived the wars of sharing files, I can promise you that what has effectively disappeared piracy was not metallica high school students or the FAI prohibiting the strange kid. It was Spotify, then it was Netflix.
The best streaming services beat hacking because Break the bad On Netflix, there was fewer hassle and a much better experience than assembling the episodes via the pirate bay.
Is it always true?
What if so, for how long?
