Netflix layoffs have started(gizmodo.com) |
Netflix layoffs have started(gizmodo.com) |
I'm not sure if I'm phrasing this right. But I've felt for the past three years Netflix's US' content has become like the Hallmark Channel for U.S. progressivism. Too sterile, too formulaic, too forced. (Or could it be the algorithm that is recommending me the same content over and over?)
I'm sure someone could come up with a "Generic Netflix TV Show" video like this one:
* Dissolve - This a Generic Millennial ad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG_i7oWzTyU
* Dissolve - Generic Brand Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YBtspm8j8M
I still keep the subscription for some Asian and European content though.
Until you watch the film, I couldn't possibly care what you have to say about it.
Why are you so defensive about something that wasn’t even sort of attacked?
Yes, anecdotal.
And this is after 25 years of investing in technology.
I am not sure what the lesson is. But something seems to have gone really wrong for Netflix. Not just on the content side, but also with their technology investments.
Now lots of other companies are in the marketplace to provide this and Netflix would be a late entrance.
Here's one of their famous quotes,
“We’re a team, not a family. We’re like a pro sports team, not a kid’s recreational team. Netflix leaders hire, develop and cut smartly, so we have stars in every position.”
The most obvious name one could come up with this is The Big Tech Crash which has now spread into the private start-up markets. [0][1]
As for Netflix itself, they are essentially a side-project for Disney, Apple and Amazon which after this disastrous earnings they respond by raising prices; which is a bad idea. If they don't think of something clever soon, they will be at risk of themselves being taken over.
Probably won't happen, but we'll see.
[0] https://www.ft.com/content/298baba3-83c7-45d3-8932-d811d248e...
EDIT: Non-paywalled link.
Netflix is a zombie unless they can either produce some very popular series or the government starts taking antitrust seriously and either divorces producers and distributors or forces FRAND licensing for all content.
Now that digital is ‘refragmenting’ it would be funny if the red disks came back to get around all these silos.
When your boss says, "your department is super important to our company," that is effectively meaningless. I take it back; it has meaning: it means you should wonder why the boss has raised the issue at all.
I'm not an IP law expert, but does anyone know why fragmentation isn't such a problem with music? You never hear someone complaining that they have to subscribe to eight different music streaming services to hear all the popular songs. It seems the big music streaming services all have pretty much all the popular artists and you can just pick one and listen to all the hits, regardless of which label they're on.
Why isn't it this way for video content?
1. Exclusives were very expensive and not linked to growing subscribers. This is true within the other services but can be seen publicly by the failure of Tidal.
2. Frank Ocean screwed Universal Music (well played), resulting in the CEO declaring an end to exclusives [0].
[0]: https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/frank-ocean-endle...
I'm not an IP law expert, but does anyone know why fragmentation isn't such a problem with music? You never hear someone complaining that they have to subscribe to eight different music streaming services to hear all the popular songs. It seems the big music streaming services all have pretty much all the popular artists.
Why isn't it this way for video content?
You also get a lot of productions that are financed in-house. Few HBO properties are going to be available on Netflix and vice-versa. The filmmakers had no choice but sign with someone, giving them access to a particular subscriber base at the expense of the broader market.
My point is they could never get this far without their tech edge but it won't keep them afloat in the copyright-laden world we inhabit.
Same way that a bunch of studios waited for their Netflix/Prime contracts to wind down before opening their own streaming service.
It’s different but similar around the world, but there is no long term rights securitization going on.
I'm a strong free speech supporter - I'd rather there be lots of things that people find offensive on offer (as long as they wouldn't have been illegal in the year 2000). But having all new content revolve around some aspect of identity politics means there's nothing actually interesting to watch, which is why I've abandoned netflix now that I've seen all the foreign police procedurals.
No one should be expected or required to keep paying a subscription when they start disagreeing substantially.
I think I'm going to sit far far far on the other side of the overton window.
Anorher commenter in the thread called it 'child pornography', which is an even wilder claim, from a legal or moral perspective.
Also, I don’t understand that reasoning. You could make a film about the horrors of prison rape. That does allow or require you to film the actual rape.
Cuties exploits children on camera in an attempt to tell a story about child exploitation.
How many audition tapes did they go through in order to choose those 5 girls? 50? 100? Someone sat there and watched dozens of half-nude 11 year old girls twerking on camera. This is disturbing to me. If it isn’t to you then i don’t know what to say.
I really can't see why it would be disturbing, unless the person watching is doing so in service of a pedophilic desire - and you still have to prove that.
