In today’s fast-paced digital world, we often rely on various online platforms to quench our thirst for knowledge, information, and entertainment. Among these platforms, news websites hold a significant position as they allow us to stay updated about current events across the globe. However, despite their essential role in delivering crucial content, many of these sites have resorted to irritating tactics that negatively impact user experience. One such tactic is the automatic playback of videos accompanied by full audio when one opens their webpage.

This practice has become increasingly common among news sites due to the belief that users prefer a multimedia experience over plain text articles. However, there is no empirical evidence to support this assumption. On the contrary, many have raised concerns over these autoplaying videos. These concerns range from audio intrusion into private spaces, lack of control over sound output, to the consumption of data and battery life on mobile devices. The most prominent criticism against this practice stems from the mismatch between the video’s subject matter and the article itself. In other words, these videos are unrelated to the content of the page and often serve solely as advertisements, disruptive interfaces, or attempts at misleading engagement metrics.

Does ANYONE actually like these videos? I typically scramble to find the close and/or mute button as soon as I can. Infuriating.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Nope. I uBlock element zap them if they happen to slip through the annoyance filter.

    You pause/mute it at the top, and then damn thing has the audacity to follow you down as you scroll and resume playing. 😡

  • jqubed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    No (except on pages that are specifically for a video), and I don’t think the “news” sites autoplay the videos because they think users want it; I think they do it because video ads pay more and it’s an easy way to slip a video ad in, especially as a pre-roll ad.

    • yarr@feddit.nlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Easy, when they go to sell spots to advertisers: “Look, our video had 15,000 views last week” (except all of them were unwanted)

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s true! I used to sell web ad space for the local newspaper, and it was recommended that we click on all of our local ads when they pop up so at the end of the month we could say “Your ad was so effective, 100 people clicked on it!”

        90 of them were me.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      The MBA who’s in charge of their website. See, they heard that video was the future of the web, so they got a ton of budget to add video. But when nobody clicked on the videos they had the brilliant idea to autoplay them, which dramatically increases video viewership, thus justifying their budget.

    • JowlesMcGee@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Some might put adds in front or at the end of videos. I’m sure the “viewer counts” also help them negotiate rates for adds on the page itself.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    It’s the sort of thing that gets decided in a weekly meeting where some dipshit in middle management says “Guys, we need more engagement. Can we force them to watch a video? Is that possible? Seems like that should be possible.” Then some long-suffering coder has to admit that yeah, it’s possible. Then the coder then mumbles that it’s also a bad idea and very obnoxious, and that most users will just mute it or leave the page…but the manager douchebag doesn’t even hear it, because he’s already patting himself on the back for his ‘brilliant innovation’.

    • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Meanwhile the real question is why major browsers don’t seem to have a “do not ever fucking make a noise unless I explicitly tell you to” setting. I swear, Chrome and IE look like they do, but it never seems to actually work. And then there’s “this setting is managed by your administrator” bullshit on top of that…

      • yarr@feddit.nlOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not specifically browser settings, but in Windows and Linux you should have access to a per application mixer and can reduce / mute the volume of your browser to zero.

        • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Yeah but that mutes sound even if you want it (and toggling it back isn’t exactly one click). I don’t want to remove the ability to play sounds, I want to disable autoplay of anything that makes sounds (except perhaps if I white-list a site?). Or mute/unmute on a per-tab basis with the default being muted. As mentioned there are settings that you’d think would do this thing, but they’re either bugged or deliberately crippled because I still seem to get plenty of autoplay video with sound that finds its way through on my work pc.

      • OsaErisXero@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think firefox’s version works properly? At least, I’ve not noticed it as an issue since switching back to it from Chrome

      • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I feel this way about the “This website would like to send you notifications” popup. I will never, ever click accept on that. Why are you still asking. It’s not even embedded in the website, it would be so easy to build a toggle into the browser to blanket reject those requests. Why is this even a “”“feature”“” at all ffs, after email and push notifications and junk mail why do these shitty companies need yet another way to freely spam unwilling consumers. You did not under any circumstances have to hand this to them.

  • YaksDC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    If I am looking to know about a particular goings on, I will go through the news sites I trust to find the text article. I do not like video on news sites.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    No one, ever:

    News sites: Let’s autoplay a video when they hit the page!

    No one, ever: . . .

    News sites: Let’s put more ads in!

  • AlwaysNowNeverNotMe@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I hate it so much infact that I actually remember which sites do it and don’t click their links.

    Fucking tragedy that “comedy news” websites like the onion and wonkette are actually head and shoulders above “respected” news sites in terms of professionalism.

    I could actually see a complete reversal where they become the actual “Paper of record” and people refuse to even wipe their ass with a rag like the times or wapo.