I would have no problem with ads if they weren't so obnoxious. They cause the page layout to shift as they load in, they block the loading of actual page content, they play sounds, play videos, pop up over the content i'm trying to read. Advertising doesn't have to be like that and that's why i block it.

Producing television shows also costs money, but no-one forces me to watch the ads there. I can change channel, or skip past them if recorded, or just leave the room while they're on.

Why can’t you do that with YouTube? Changing the channel is as easy as closing the tab and you certainly can leave the room or mute it during ads.

If you rely on ad revenue and people do not enjoy using your product more than enduring your ads, maybe your business model is wrong to begin with?

then websites should be able to stop you from using ad blockers and presumably no one should throw a hissy fit about it, but thats not what happens.

Wdym? That's exactly what people do. If they can't look at a piece of content they close it and move on with their life.

and then they go on forums and act like they are being put in an internment camp because they cant block ads

they are sharing how they feel. you are not forced to read them.

How does this follow exactly? It sounds like a non sequitur.

By not caring about how any random website/app/whatever will survive, and only caring about the ones that add value to me.

I am not saying it makes total sense or is perfectly thought through, but I am asking myself for example, how would it be like if I never used/watched this service/app/creator/whatever ever again? Would I feel I lose something, would I care about it? I am not saying just finding some similar alternative, but about the experience itself regardless of alternatives.

Maybe others think differently, but for me, a vast majority of what I may watch on the internet is not really adding value to me and could just easily do without. To the ones that do add value, I support them, but in reasonable ways. If I do not feel it is reasonable, then I do not, and sad truth is that, for me at least, ads as implemented in most places create a bigger distraction than my incentive to support.

One example, I did not mind facebook's ads until facebook got over aggressive in sending me "suggestions" for various meme groups. It was unusable for me after that point. Then, I decided to use FB purity to get read of all ads and suggestions. If facebook had not done that, then I would have continued fine with its normal ads, one of the few ads that I have actually found useful was in facebook. But the alternative to removing the ads was not just seeing the ads after the change, the alternative was to stop using facebook (I have a very curated home page in facebook and unfollow 99% of my friends there) which is sadly not an option right now due to various social factors. Or maybe disabling the facebook feed itself somehow.

Another example is a supposedly private search engine. It had a banner to disable ads to support it, which I tried but then I just had to scroll down to see the first real results after the ads every time I was searching for something, which was non-sense and very annoying. I tried to find a way to donate or sth but there was no such option, so I gave up trying to support that. Maybe I move to another private search engine some point. I am not sure if I should just tolerate scrolling down to see the results everytime, but if there is a private search engine that uses ads in a better way I would be fine using that.

And as much as it is weird in our times, there are websites that do not depend on ads. For example I use bandcamp to buy the music I like, and with buying my music from there I support both the musicians and the website/service itself.

Other than that, I do subscribe/support/donate/buy services/apps etc that add value to me, even if I am not required to do so to use them freely and non-disruptively. I have even paid for games years after I actually played them through pirate versions, because before I did not have the money and I felt they deserved it. I guess if people do more or less something like that, according to each one's financial abilities, everybody will be happy or sth, and things that offer value to an adequate amount of people will be ok.

They are not entitled to profit from having captured the public square, no.

I think this is a silly framing, to be honest. Of course they're allowed to earn money, but they surely aren't entitled to that money.