5 ms·
Are Netflix and other streaming services creating a content bubble?
I was discussing with a friend these days about the possibility/idea where Netflix, and other streaming services, could have being creating a content bubble. Too much content have being generated in the last years, but not all of them seems to be that relevant. I really wanted to have access to "dropped series per users" statistics, but I guess these services will never give this info.
By the way, I am really like the things that are happening because of content streaming: independent projects are being made possible, more original contents (instead of the standard Hollywood script), more dynamicity and so on. The only thing is that bubbles happen and we may be seeing one in front of our eyes.
Or maybe I am just overthinking it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_dRGQCkPqk
- DigitalSea 10y agoThere was a content bubble before Netflix existed, it was called cable. Exclusive content only for cable subscribers and choice has been the norm for years. If anything, Netflix has changed the game.
- datashaman 10y agoAlso: Google The Internet Television Radio Theatre Whoever puts on the show, decides on the content.
- ljk 10y agoDon't forget Facebook, where to even view some local community pages they bug you to make an account.
- ouid 10y agoCan you elaborate a little? I can't tell from the way you phrased your question, but a guess as to what you are getting at is "How much additional value does Netflix gain from adding a new series?" The netflix business model is based on a pretty simple formula. Their library has value. People who have already subscribed to netflix will continue to pay them for access to that library until they have exhausted it to their satisfaction, and then they will leave. You can extract a number from your database of user interactions which more or less quantifies this business model, and that number, times the number of expected subscribers is how much your library is worth. So if for less than $8/month/person they can continue to expand their library by more than $8/month/person, they will do so. The system is built on intrinsic value. It may be argued that that value is speculative, but not exclusively so. Additionally, they have really good prospecting for potential shows. They know what their users li. This translates in no small way to evaluating shows before they have any data on who likes them (it's not a perfect mapping, but it's still better than what hollywood has). So the generation of new content is actually more targeted than it was before. Indicating a content model which is less speculative, which is, again, less bubbly. So is netflix a bubble? Maybe, but probably not for the reasons that you or the woman in the video you linked specified.
- anotheryou 10y agoCulturally I could use some good bubbleing. So much bad art I can't stand anymore. It's the worst for movies, because it's such an investmen: If I don't cancel watching it after 5 minutes and only give up on it becoming better after 20 minutes (it might get better...) I ususally sit it through anyways. Bad paintings in a gallery are easier and like image posts on reddit: you can just give it a glance and scroll/stroll on.
- fil_a_del_fee_a 10y agoI purposely do not watch "shows" anymore. I feel like it is a major waste of time. Bingewatching? Really? Only shows like Mr. Robot are worth my time. There is just too much out there. During downtime, I watch reruns of The Office (US) and Parks and Rec. Both of those shows have no music throughout the show, just dialog. I use that time to mentally relax, but I am not "into" the show, it is more in the background.
- pasbesoin 10y agoAfter the November election, I started rewatching "The West Wing." Yes, as a "cast" show it is somewhat unrealistic with respect to the scope/number of people involved in daily West Wing activity, policy, administration, etc. And it is purposely idealistic. Nonetheless, it summarizes and states well many principle and practicalities of the Executive, Administration, the other two branches of government, and provides a not insignificant education to the general viewer of how all that works and why. As well, it portrays the idea of good -- but imperfect -- people doing their best within an imperfect system. Next up, perhaps: "The Wire." I started it about a year ago, but I was not in a place at that time, myself, where I could easily/reasonably take its message as I've heard/read it described. "Mr. Robot" I've found excellent at describing a contemporary technical but also a social milieu, and thoughts on same, with which I'm all too familiar. Recently, I've been revisiting old/classic movies starring Bogart. There is an essence of the American character in them, perhaps both reflected and thereby instantiated down the succeeding years and decades. A taciturn but thorough awareness and expectation of self-reliance. Viewing such as this seems to inform me, to some degree. Hopefully not in too distorted nor misleading a fashion. A lot of contemporary viewing reflects some contemporary thinking and news items, but comes with a lot of bulk. There's only so much Marvel content I can take, for example. It becomes distracting, consuming, rather than informing. What concerns me in good part now, with the direction paid streaming is going, is that while production values are increasing, with limited libraries and historical content, it may be trending towards a contemporary consuming as opposed to informing. Yes, we're living in Hell's Kitchen. (Well, I feel that way, more than infrequently.) But I don't really think we are going to punch our way out of it.