As if people haven't been addicted to watching TV for the past five decades. You decide for yourself what kind of content to get from YouTube, they don't force you into harmful habits.
Recommendations, promotion, automatically playing a related video after the one you watched ended, etc.
Even a landing page with "tailored for you" or "currently popular" is a distracting attention grab, and that attention grab leads to the addictive nature.
Combine that with how those YouTube recommendations and search rankings seem to prioritize click bait titles and cover image, and yes, I think you can start forming a thesis that in-fact, they are trying to force you into more screen time spent watching more YouTube videos.
Have you ever used Youtube? Serious question? There is next to no way to tell them what kinda of content I want. I pay for YT premium and recently my Android tv youtube is full of sports/football games at the top, never i have watched a sports game on YT. Shorts are shoved down your thrown on desktop or mobile, even with paid thers no way to turn that off.
If that doesn't work, you can use your subscription page as your entry to YouTube and you won't see any recommendations at all.
God forbid I watch a one-off video on a topic I'm not typically interested in, like woodworking. Current iteration of Youtube algorithm seems to boil down to "oh I see that you watched ONE woodworking video? Well half of your homepage is about woodworking for the next week!". I've started watching videos in incognito mode which I definitely didn't need to do a couple of years ago.
Current Youtube UX is beyond terrible, half the time I can't even find what I'm looking for through search because they arbitrarily cut off real search results to push clickbaity dopamine-sucking content.
If they want me to pay for Premium, they need to do more than just removing ads, the entire experience needs to feel, well, Premium. They could add customization options for the homepage and search results so we can remove shorts and all the "For you" crap, add knobs to tweak recommendations, return dislike counters which were the best way of quickly filtering out terrible/clickbaity/dangerous content. They could even add some power user features like being able to find videos by searching through their indexed transcripts rather than by the title alone.
YouTube search results are awful, can't disagree with you on that. The same for shorts. Searching for videos on Kagi or FreeTube instead of inside YouTube can be a better option. I've also noted that YouTube search results are much better on the TV than on desktop, and that they don't suggest "Others also watched.." crap there.
As for premium, I only consider it that I'm paying for the bandwidth to have the videos delivered to my computer, phone and TV without any ads. Just for that, it is incredible value already. Adding the features you list would make it even better.
I wouldn't call somebody who sits and watch YouTube clickbait "a victim".
Only thing different is that google is doing that in terms of decades.
No wonder it’s like no one wants to pay after decades of free access and no ads added to videos.
For my purposes, youtube premium is 100% worth it.
As a listener, I use yt because it's easy to find new things similar to what I just heard. And people also do mixes of many different pieces together, like a mixtape from someone I don't know. Those are great for uninterrupted listening. Can you do that on Spotify?
And sometimes, like with Youtube, many people wish they didn't use it. It's hard to get people to pay for something they wish they didn't use.
You realize YT isn't special, right? They are piggybacking on user content more than users are on their infra.
> They are piggybacking on user content more than users are on their infra.
Are you sure? How many people host their own content now? People that do that will soon become irrelevant because for half of humanity YT is THE video hosting site with the rest being Huabao, niconico or something. So in that regard it is special.
State owned media outlets are only awful if the state is awful.
Current Youtube: Well obviously this vital service needs to be slow-as-hell because ads, what are you gonna fund it by donations lol
It’s not exactly what I’d call dedicated watching. If you think I’m going to pay $10 for maybe an hour of video, I think we just have different standards of expense.
Their comment was to people who watch a lot of YouTube, but still whine about the $14 cost.
I use Youtube to watch Frontline, PBS, news, etc etc so its not just for entertainment.
If Youtube "owes" its user some service, which it provides for free, then it might as well be state funded or become non-profit. I keep asking people the same question; if YOU are the owner of Youtube, how would you stay afloat? Good will of the people to donate money? lol.
inb4 they make so much money from ads!! Well, there you go, theres the answer. They (and we) need ads to keep Youtube afloat.