If it's not possible to ethically deliver content on an ad-supported basis, then maybe we shouldn't allow it to exist, instead of excusing immoral thinks because "that's the only way to do it".
>If the viewer should screen out the advertisements, they are getting the benefits of programming while depriving the network of the benefits it hoped to realize by providing the content.
I find this idea disgusting. There are many kinds of contracts we don't allow - for example you can't sell yourself into slavery, even if you want to. Similarly I think that the "contract" you describe should not be allowed to exist, even assuming it's legally binding right now (and I doubt it).
>Everybody seems to understand this except for tech nerds
In my experience it's the other way around - everybody disagrees, except a tiny minority of people who benefit from the ad-supported monopoles.
>If the viewer should screen out the advertisements, they are getting the benefits of programming while depriving the network of the benefits it hoped to realize by providing the content.
I find this idea disgusting. There are many kinds of contracts we don't allow - for example you can't sell yourself into slavery, even if you want to. Similarly I think that the "contract" you describe should not be allowed to exist, even assuming it's legally binding right now (and I doubt it).
>Everybody seems to understand this except for tech nerds
In my experience it's the other way around - everybody disagrees, except a tiny minority of people who benefit from the ad-supported monopoles.