• gohixo9650@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    yes. But then they have different problems. Now it is the ad company who is responsible to serve the ads and the personalization comes from there. This is achieved by the client directly “asking” the ad company for ads. If they want the ads to come from the same stream this means that the customer identity is passed to youtube, then youtube requests the ads in behalf of the client, and then serves them mixed in the video stream. I’m not a lawyer but I think that this causes different legal problems for youtube on the part that they will need to ask the ads on behalf of someone else.

    Also apart from that, technically, the part of the video that is an ad, will be associated with a call-to-action URL and an overlay on top of the video, since they need that by clicking on the video it will go to a the ad’s call-to-action instead of just pausing the video. This will still make them detectable

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The ad company is Google, no? So they already have that logic ready to go.

      Does anybody actually click the ads in YT videos? The only clickable thing I ever see is “Skip Ad”.

      • TheGalacticVoid
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Clicks are a metric that Google/YouTube tracks to determine whether a business has to pay for that ad, so it’s necessary for ads to be clickable.