they are adverts. When did I ever say they weren't adverts??...

they are adverts.
When did I ever say they weren't adverts??

they are not "paying" people for their views.
When did I ever say they were paying the viewers to watch the ads?

they could spend the money on TV ads (like Kinder does). But you would not then claim that anyone watching that Kinder advert on TV is paid. likewise YOW ads on facebook, or competitions conducted on FB, are paid to FB. Yow does not pay people to click or view the advert.
Again why would the viewer be paid to watch? Who claimed that? You are not making any sense

and yes, what proof do you have that the views, are anything other than legitimate views?
I never said the views weren't legitimate, I said the majority would not have been organic views.

I'll explain one last time because you are not getting it. Yowie PAYS Facebook or YouTube or whoever it may be to run their videos on that particular platform. The video is then forced upon a certain demographic that Yowie chooses, whether this be an ad that plays before the video that they are actually trying to watch or as a sponsored link in their newsfeed. These are classified as PAID views. The more you pay, the more people the ad is exposed to. This is what I am referring to when I say paid views and these views mean absolutely nothing unless your video is working as a sales tool to convince those people to buy your product. If more money is going out in advertising costs than is coming back in product sales, your marketing campaign has been a failure.

So going back to my original point, I find it embarrassing when management brag about how many views they have, when the majority are PAID FOR, because this has not translated into actual sales. Marketing is extremely important but only when it is successful.