Hello My beloved Steemit friends,
As a Steemit/Crypto noob, one of my initial attractions to Steemit was the idea that we, the producers of content, would get paid for the very content underwriting the value of the platform. We look at Facebook, and we see a multi-billion dollar company, profiting off content they didn't make. Billions of dollars are generated off our content to ensure the Zuck gets to have a garage with a spinning pedestal in the Mission District of San Francisco (true story, it spins so that he never has to back his car in or out). But what are we, the content producers, left with at the other side of that equation? A place to connect with friends differently, pretty cool. A place to get in political arguments thus losing said friends, hmmm. A great place to receive Russian propaganda. And of course, a place we go when we want to provide FaceBook with all the information they need to garner a massive chunk of the world's digital advertising revenue.
Now I'm not opposed to people and corporations making their billions, and I am one of the reluctant fools providing FaceBook with the data they seek. But something about my relationship with FaceBook, for some reason, just grinds my gears. I can't articulate it easily, but something about it just makes me feel like a tool.
I'm not opposed to my social media platforms making ad revenue on my content, but I would feel much better about it if we were partners in the process. I pose the following two questions to my readers:
How would you feel if Steemit started doing some harmless banner ads? What's the harm there? Practically every website we use has banner ads, why should our community be any different?
How cool would it be if they rebated a portion of that ad revenue back to us, and distributed it based on how popular our postings were?
I can't wait to hear what you guys think.
I am opposed to this idea. If any company wants to advertise on Steemit, they can just register a profile and boost their posts in the 'promoted' category.
The day Steemit in any way become dependent on external advertising dollars, is the day Steemit becomes a corporate-controlled platform!
Yeah, advertisers should not be allowed to call the shots here. That will change the platform to something very different, may be not right away, but in the long run.
Thanks for the input svkrulze. So clearly most people agree with you on this, and I fully acknowledge I could be misinformed on the issue. But please explain, how would simple banner ads change the nature of Steem?
@thegreatwent, I may sound cynical but in your other reply to @techwizardry, you cite the example of NYT. You really think large media houses like NYT are impartial? Most people don't think so and as a matter of fact, media is not impartial though it's supposed to be.
While allowing display ads may not right away lead to corporate influence, but history shows that if you take money from someone they will surely want to influence how you operate.
Hello, please consider buying an upvote subscription.
https://steemit.com/upvote/@minnow-aid/minnow-upvote-subscription-service
Yes it's a good point you made about the NYTs. I remember Cenk Uygur of "The Young Turks" claims he was fired from MSNBC because he kept running stories that the advertisers didn't like, so the claim goes. But how would a few measly banner ads for airline tickets or the thing I just googled corrupt the content....when WE are the ones creating the content. That's the beauty of these kinds of platforms, there is no "editorial board" making decisions about what we can and can't write about.
Take for example Google or FB ads. Don't you think they have the interest of their advertisers in their mind?
It's often hard to see how things will turn out. There may be a chance that banner ads will be harmless, who knows?
Thanks for your input. Isn't it even worse if they are making ads through their own profile? Then we are getting bombarded by 'hidden' advertising. Whereas if it's a banner ad, at least we all know what it is. Second, I don't understand how allowing banner ads would make it corporate-controlled? Please help me understand this, as clearly most people agree with you, I'm open to the idea that I'm uninformed/misinformed on this issue. I use great websites that have banner ads, like the NYtimes for example, and it doesn't seem like those sites are being controlled by the advertising industrial complex. I figured if it's good enough for newspapers, which are supposed to be impartial, why isn't it good enough for Steem? How would it corrupt the system?
An interesting idea, on the one hand I like money and the idea of being paid just for being a member is pretty cool. Not to mention more money for Steem would hopefully result in more and faster development.
But at the same time, I think selling advertisements on the platform disincentivizes people from creating content, and shifts the financial reward engine to one that is focused on account ownership and gaining rep through any means necessary. I recently read the Steem white paper and a lot of what Steem is based on is the idea that users will police each other. The platform is not invulnerable to manipulation and abuse, but the hope is that since everyone is getting paid to not only create and curate content that is valuable to the community, but they are also getting paid based on their contributions weighted against everyone else's. Accounts that are abusing the system will get weeded out by the users who have an incentive to increase their reward percentage by exposing abusive accounts that take at least the minimum SP to comment amount out of the system just by existing. These accounts could pretty easily increase their power through boosters, which would be paid back pretty quickly through the increased rewards generated by ad sharing.
Additionally, it would feel like Steemit would be "double dipping" if they were getting paid not only to run the service, but also by selling their users information (which is essentially the same as users paying to use a service, users are just paying with their information rather than their money). Most services that sell ads as their primary source of income do so because they are a free to use platform. While Steemit is a free to use platform, there is already a percentage of the Steemit reward pool that is taken out for distribution to the developers. While again this is not directly requiring users to pay for the service, it really is since the percentage that is taken out is money that would have been distributed among the community otherwise. If Steemit were profiting off of ads, they would be requiring their users to pay them by giving up a percentage potentially rewards pool, as well as to pay them by selling their information. If that were the case, I think it would really detract from the value of Steemit and depreciate the value of this awesome community.
For those reasons I stated above I would be against Steemit selling ads on their platform, even if they shared the profits with the community.
Great question, it prompted some good thinking and discussion among the community. Thank you for asking it. I'm looking forward to seeing what the rest of the community thinks!
This is a great response darnuss06. You make some great points here. Here is my question: yes I understand that even harmless banner ads may involve some kind of "selling of information," but is that always the case? I remember the days when banner ads were not re-targeted ads, but just simply dumb ads that were essentially billboards on websites. Don't those still exist in some form? I know that when I go to the Nytimes website, I see ads that were clearly targeted (hence, my info was collected and sold), but I also see a few ads that almost certainly were not re-targeted (or at least I don't think they were). For example, from time to time I will see ads on the nytimes website that are for luxury women's apparel...clearly not for me. So that said, is it really double dipping if they are non-targeted ads? Second, my limited understanding of digital advertising is that the collection of MOST of the data is actually happening on OTHER sites. So for example, I google "travel to Hawaii," and the next day when I go to Nytimes, I see an ad for "Hawaiian Airlines." In this case, it wasn't the Nytimes that collected and sold my info. So is it possible to still do banner ads without collecting/selling information on users? Or are those times gone?
I think banner ads like the ones you are describing would be acceptable, I could definitely envision different Steem apps, crypto related products/games/etc, or even just users with large followings being interested in paying for some banner ads on Steemit. If I saw ads like those on Steemit I would think twice about it, they would be unobtrusive and entirely what one would expect when using a social media like Steemit.
I would still worry about how that would look to users. Unfortunately in this day and age optics are often more important than facts. A user will probably form an immediate opinion on banner ads when the see them, and that opinion will be hard to change even if that users takes the time to understand what information an advertiser may or may not have about you. I could see that affecting the way Steemit is perceived as a platform, especially where crypto is involved since people involved in crypto are often likely to be concerned with privacy than on a user on a traditional media site.
In summary, I would not have a problem with banner ads or sidebar ads, I could even see them enriching the platform, both literally through adding to the reward pool, and figuratively through providing users and Steemit apps a place to broadcast their products to the community. I would still be worried about how the presence of ads would effect the perception of Steemit as a platform and would probably still lean towards remaining ad free, but I also would not be disappointed to see ads on the platform because of the potential value they could add.
I personally like the fact that I am not bombarded with advertisement. That is the great thing about the block chain it isn't dependent on advertisement. I would rather get real word of mouth recommendations on products or services than be forced to look at the advertisements.
Thank you for your reply tecnosgirl. I hear you, but consider this. First of all, we see banner ads every where we go, does it really bother you that much? Even serious and venerable websites like Nytimes.com and WSJ have banner ads, has it ever stopped you from using those website? Additionally, do banner ads truly sway the value of real word recommendations? We all know the difference of ads and real word of mouth. Personally, I agree it's important to not allow the two to become confused, but so long as we can easily tell the difference, we don't lose. Right? What am I missing here?
The issue is slowly they start over taking social media sites, when Myspace first started it was social media then slowly advertisement was taking over, that is part of why Facebook was able to get a good foot hold in because they didn't have many advertisement back then now it is 90% advertisement on my feed on facebook. It is part of the reason I don't want to use it. I would hate to see advertisement taking up a bunch of space here.
I like this answer. I think you are correct. In the beginning of FB, it kind of "felt" cool that there were no ads. It made it seem more authentic somehow. But would you feel different about the ads if you knew you were participating in the revenue stream?
Advertisement based revenue isn't worth much of anything. Back in the day I use to write for a site similar in the way that the users vote for what content they like. I was recovering at the time from a botched operation so I had the time to sit there for 8 hours a day and it rewarded me a whole $30 a month. I just don't see it being worth it really.
Are you sure? My understanding is that Facebook is making billions in advertising. And when I say advertising, I mean strictly advertising, not the part about how they are selling our information to companies, that's a different thing.
Yeah I still don't think it is worth it. Money isn't everything and that is one of the biggest issues in the world now days is corporate greed. I would really hate to see the block chain get tainted with that greed on top of the human greed many people have.
YES! It indeed would be a welcome development if Steemit will sell adverts and share the revenue with us. Great idea!
Steemit.com is very nice without the advertisements but if they want to continue growth and serve users around the world with standard web response times, the infrastructure costs are going to go up and up.
Thanks for your insights bellsx1! So tell me, has Steemit had issues with web response times? Has this been an issue for people? Are you based outside the US and having slow web response times?
The problem with ads are the highest paying ads are going to want targeting. Targeting means online profiling. Profiling means alienating the core cryptocurrency crowd who got steemit on its feet.
The Brave browser is looking to solve this issue specifically with their browser attention tokens which plan to use local browser based profiling for ad targeting. It would not surprise me to see the steemit developers work specifically on a similar solution. Perhaps EOS is meant to host a solution to this problem. I am only speculating on whether the steem developers are working towards a solution on this specific problem.
I do not know if steemit has had problems with response times. Being outside of the US makes the internet slow for some people and faster for others, so that in itself is not a problem. But if you set up cdns and servers to cache the site for access from different global locations that starts to cost money. There are p2p ways to achieve this now and the steemit crew is probably aware of them.
This is probably the most interesting response on this thread so far. Ok, let's take a step back for a minute. Help me understand something here. You say that targeting means online profiling, this is true and I understand that. But how would profiling alienate us? That's the part I'm confused about...do you really feel alienated when you google "airfare to Hawaii" and the next day when you login to Nytimes.com, you see ads for travel deals to Hawaii? Second, isn't is possible to do non-targeted ads? Obviously they are less effective and generate less revenue, but they could still make money perhaps, with zero alienation involved.
Sure... The potential for exploitation exists should that saved profiling data ever be breached by an internal or external threat and used for anything other than ad serving.
That''s actually not a bad idea! I wouldn't mind a banner on my posts, if I made some revenue through it. I don't think it would be very lucrative to ad agencies since I doon't have a huge follower base, but a little something is never negligible. I would like to choose the company I'm running ads for, however, to make sure it's not a company with questionable ethics.
Ohh very nice insights evecab. You bring up some issues I have not considered. I was just thinking of general banner ads on the main home page, but I like your idea better. I really like the idea of letting us, the content creators, being able to post ads on our own posts, and letting us have the power to control who we choose to do business with. Very good ideas.
Really good question! I think that the biggest downside to ads is the editorial aspect. Who gets to decide what ads are allowed? If nobody filters them then that allow illegal or inappropriate ads to be displayed on my posts. If someone does screen them then we would need a system to ensure the integrity of that position. What if someone takes bribes? What if someone is politically motivated in the screening? I just think there ads would introduce too much downside.
Thanks for contributing to the conversation. I hear what you are saying and they are all valid points, but I have to imagine all of these problems have already been figured out by other websites. I can't remember the last time I saw an ad for anything illegal, and I have to imagine it would be easy for the guys running Steem to filter out any inappropriate ads. Why would we need a system to ensure the integrity of the screeners? Wouldn't the screeners just be the folks who run Steem?
All of those other ad platforms are very centralized and closed in nature. Steem is decentralized and open. There is nobody who "runs" Steem in the same way that other websites are run. It could be a Steemit only feature but then we lose a lot of the benefits of the blockchain and become more closed like other websites.
This is an interesting point I have not considered because I am still learning. How would advertising make us lose a lot of the benefits of the blockchain and make it more closed? Closed like how?
The blockchain allowed for a trustless environment. If we give that power to the Steemit team then they would have to do it off chain and we'd have to trust them. This is currently how the promoted tab works.
I'd prefer we use the blockchain as much as possible. Taking this off chain allows for abuse.
I think I understand. My brother agrees with you as well btw. So what you are saying, is that, when the Steemit team makes decisions about advertising, it would be done without any connection to the blockchain, and you're saying this is a bad thing? So let me ask you, don't they (the Steemit team) already make decisions off chain? Was every single aspect of this site done through the blockchain? I'm talking about things as mundane as the UX and design of the site itself for example. Second question, is it theoretically possible to make advertising decisions on the blockchain?
Do you think that letting in advertising would not lead to more advertising ? We live in a frantic consumming world ......
So by this post, I'm guessing you would be fine with a little advertising, but at the same time you're worried it would open the door to too much advertising eventually? If so, I can't say I disagree. Personally, a small amount of banner ads would be fine for me, but I would also NOT like tons of ads. Thoughts?
Trop de pub tue la pub .... French saying ...
I need to think about it a little , and let time go by , I am quite new here if you took a look at my profil .... I think that you have to take in more infos , like the money aspect , the philisophy and what steemit is tryong to do .
Advertising can very well make steem look like anyotjer social network , and we could easely fall in our human bad habits no ?
What does 'Trop de pub tue la pub' mean?
Its a french saying too much of something kills it If I were to translate it the best way ..... letting in ads may lead to something not controlable ....
I am not sure you understand Steemit. Especially since every valid point to not have banner ads brought up a “yeah, but” from you. One point first, your question above about harmless ads is not the google tied ads you mention below.
On this platform you make content and get a share of rewards (4+ million) Most of us are here because we hate FB and targeted ads Crypto people are a secretive bunch, so no profiling or targeting ads We hate ads As for sharing revenues, we are not YoutubeNow, I don’t know if it is permissible to have banner ads on your own blog. If it is, I recommend you work hard to build your following up and sell banner ads on your own posts. That way you could have the excitement of ads (and the money!).
Steemit monetizes content.
I'm a Steem newb, and this might sound like a silly question, but what is preventing companies joining Steem and posting content to advertise themselves ?
Nothing. But their content won't be upvoted if it is just spammy ads. If you are only looking at "hot" and "trending" posts then you'll never see them.
Good question. I don't know, but techwizardry mentioned this very issue. My suspicion is that, if someone were doing that, they could get "down voted."
Yes.
Sharing profit from adds would do a great good.