It gets rid of all of the ads on a video and removes most of the UI, so all you're left with is an iframe. Here's your video in Layluh[1].
[0]: https://www.layluh.com/features [1]: https://www.layluh.com/watch?v=F_tkS4dvi8A
A recent example is Shutterstock's change to the payout and bonus structure.
https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/guv6s3/shutter...
https://xpiksapp.com/blog/2020/new-shutterstock-earnings-bre...
The minimum was 25 cents per image. That could add up fast when an agency buyer with a huge bulk credit plan took notice of your portfolio and bought it out, then returned every time you added more. It's now 10 cents per image.
Spotify got there fast. YouTube will get there if it isn't already.
Spotify directly removed massive barriers to entry in distributing music. So there are more artists available to you than ever. Listeners might have grown as well, but it seems not in the same scale.
This could also be the case in microstock (and it seems to make logical sense). More and more photos are posted, and more people are posting. So ofcourse as supply grows the price lowers.
I made no attribution to bad will. I described a phenomenon without judgment.
Reminds me of watching TV when I was a kid :(
Many Youtubers have made videos about the aggressive ad changes. Here's one example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_tkS4dvi8A
I don't know if any new definitive statistics are out but some Youtubers complain that they don't seem to be getting any additional money even though viewers are bombarded with more ads.