# Social Media -- Ban the Ads, Charge the User?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [September 26, 2026, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408 "2026-09-26T18:23:35Z")
**Posts on this page:** 13
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@DtypeJag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DtypeJag)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/1 "2026-09-26T18:23:35Z")
With all the talk about how harmful social media can be for various groups because of the clever algorithims enticing people to keep clicking, bringing up pages that confirm their perceived prejudices. I have never heard anyone suggest charging the user a per month fee and making the site ad-free. Their would be no need for sustained attention to watch more ads, no need for algorithims collecting all kinds of personal data. The trick would be to legally require these companies to do this. What am I missing here?
---
### Author:  [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/2 "2026-09-26T18:28:55Z")
Any social medium provider is free to try this model, there is no governing body telling them whether they can or can’t. So I presume that they have all concluded that this model would cost them considerable income. What advertisers are willing to pay in order to put their ads in front of you would probably surprise you, and it is always increasing with the new ways that the providers are always developing to get more information about you. And it is all more-or-less hidden from you.
---
### Author:  [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/3 "2026-09-26T18:59:29Z")
> [@DtypeJag](#):
>
> What am I missing here?
What you are missing is that the site would instantly lose 98% of its users.
---
### Author:  [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/4 "2026-09-26T19:05:57Z")
Again the OP said that this would have to be mandated by law to work. Which immediately raises two problems.
One is political: getting any honest legislature to actually write and pass such a law. Much less the semi-honest ones whose members receive (or would receive) a lot of donations from the website operators and advertising vendors to kill this silly onerous legislation before it gets started.
The other is that absent a hermetic government-run firewall around a country, there is no practical way for country A to demand that all websites accessible within its borders obey Law X. It’s much too easy to set up the website in Country B that doesn’t care about Law X and Country A’s residents can access it just fine from home.
---
### Author:  [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/5 "2026-09-26T19:20:39Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#):
>
> Any social medium provider is free to try this model, there is no governing body telling them whether they can or can’t.
The SDMB tried it. Sorta
---
### Author:  [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/6 "2026-09-26T19:20:58Z")
Facebook told us years ago that “it’s free and always will be.”
---
### Author:  [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/7 "2026-09-26T19:28:53Z")
The “user” isn’t the customer. They’re the product.
---
### Author:  [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/8 "2026-09-26T20:49:40Z")
I’m with ya, OP. It feels like we’ve let this trainwreck go on even though there’s tons of agreement that it’s harming society.
I think subscription-based streaming sites still aim for maximum attention, so I don’t think the ad-sale motivation is solely responsible for the addictive aspect. Any site seems to wait to keep you on it as long as possible, even if it’s costing them some marginal overhead to keep feeding the user content.
One option would be a government run social media service that could actually be optimized for user satisfaction and social health. I was a fan of this until the fascists took over.
We could just ban social media sites. I’d be fine with that.
Separately, we could also just ban advertising. I think it’s long overdue.
---
### Author:  [@Reply](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reply)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/9 "2026-09-26T21:05:17Z")
It’s already a thing in the EU:
> **[Facebook and Instagram to Offer Subscription for No Ads in Europe](https://about.fb.com/news/2024/11/facebook-and-instagram-to-offer-subscription-for-no-ads-in-europe/)**
>
> We will significantly reduce the price of Subscription for no ads, and offer people in the EU an additional new choice to use Facebook and Instagram for free with less personalized ads.
From what I understand, it’s nowhere as profitable as productizing you and getting money from advertisers who will bid a lot of dollars against each other.
Same reason Google Search doesn’t offer an ad-free subscription.
They don’t care about serving you or society. They want the $$$. The EU forced their hand, but we don’t have a government that cares enough. Ours is just too captured and corrupt.
---
### Author:  [@DtypeJag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DtypeJag)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/10 "2026-09-26T21:39:32Z")
If Netflix or HBOMax started out free with constant ads and then started charging a few dollars/mo ad-free, would they lose many viewers? I doubt it.
---
### Author:  [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/11 "2026-09-26T21:53:21Z")
Netflix and HBOMax are not social media sites.
---
### Author:  [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/12 "2026-09-26T21:53:52Z")
I feel like any such legislation – if proposed in the next 2.33 years – would exempt **[Truth Social](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_Social)** ☹
---
### Author:  [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2026, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/social-media-ban-the-ads-charge-the-user/1033408/13 "2026-09-26T23:12:35Z")
> [@steronz](#):
>
> We could just ban social media sites. I’d be fine with that.
>
> Separately, we could also just ban advertising. I think it’s long overdue.
Sounds like a severe underestimate of the complexity of designing national law.