>In other words, if you video has ads, then the probability of appearing in searches and related content is higher
So users that permit ads on their video get a virtual "fast lane" on the Comcast internet service. You know, I'm sick and tired of these internet service providers violating Net Neutrality principles.
Oh, wait. It's YouTube? Oh, that's fine then./s
Youtube not providing extra promotion for content is different from Comcast charging extra to even access that content.
Re:YouTube monetization analysis
by cerebellum42 on Thursday November 30, 2017 @01:48PM
(#15818353)
Not permitting ads from the user's end doesn't even influence the ranking and likelihood of showing up in recommendations (as far as we know). It's just demonetization from Youtube's side that has that effect.
You do realise you're comparing a company that makes its money from advertising on top of an otherwise video sharing platform, with a company you pay a fixed monthly fee to access the internet, right?
>a company that makes its money from advertising on top of an otherwise video sharing platform
I know you meant YouTube, but that describes Comcast cable TV service as well. YouTube is a competitor. Should Comcast be forced to deliver a competitor's content?
>with a company you pay a fixed monthly fee to access the internet
Some parts of the internet. You don't get the "whole" internet. You've had limited internet and fast/slow lanes for decades.
http://www.newsgroupreviews.com/comcast-newsgroups.html
https://www.xfinity.com/support/internet/list-of-blocked-por...
In other words, if you video has ads, then the probability of appearing in searches and related content is higher, thus you, as used, are more exposed to ads.