8 ms·

The article is really long so I've just skimmed over it, but overall I think the biggest change is the non-ad-driveness of Netflix. When I recall, how I've spen

The article is really long so I've just skimmed over it, but overall I think the biggest change is the non-ad-driveness of Netflix. When I recall, how I've spent 15 minutes watching ads, for each 45 minutes of movie-time, I'm really horrified how anybody could waste their time like that. (and people still do) At the same time, I think this encourages higher-quality content overall, because in standard television, the product are ad-views. You put up content only so that people watch the ads. Like clickbait articles in the internet. This is especially so, as people got used to the formula of the television dictating when to watch your movies. Here they give you quality content, because the subscription payment is the actual value for them, and they know they'll lose it if you don't put up good enough content. (to keep up the analogy, it's like subscription based online magazines like NYT or nautilus, the content differs diametrically) On another note, I really like the data driven approach described here. The metric of people turning off an episode of a series midways, without ever coming back to it.

lotsofpulp 8y ago
While I could never watch ad interrupted media again, some of the stuff on Netflix runs longer than it should either to pad their statistics for how much media they have or to focus on product placement shots. There's a balance, and it can swing into the "make something drag on" longer than it should territory too. But it's still way better than the old TV model.
- cube2222 8y ago
  Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that's the case sometimes, but so far I've experienced it being a really small part. Though recently I've watched a series (can't recall which unfortunately) which took at least 10 hours, which I've felt should really have only taken at most 4-5 and it totally felt like it was only to keep me watching for a longer time.
  - Fnoord 8y ago
    Curious which series that was. Can you check your history?
    - PuffinBlue 8y ago
      Not the person you asked but Lost in Space is a good example (IMO of course).
    - cube2222 8y ago
      Can't seem to find any history feature on Netflix, and watch it again didn't help.
- drb91 8y ago
  This could also be a matter of taste. I happen to like “long form” media because of the detailing it enables; this almost certainly isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.
  - cube2222 8y ago
    I'm not sure if that's what the parent meant. I'm on the same side, I'm not really watching movies anymore, there's too little depth to the world there. It's amazing how much you can make the world and characters deep and interesting in series. It's the same situation as movies vs books. The problem is when there really only is enough interesting content for 4-5 hours and you feel like half the series is there only as a filler. Handmaid's tale is an example that comes to my mind. I like the series overall, but it's 2-3x times as long as it should be in my opinion.
    - zf00002 8y ago
      Most of the true crime documentaries really suffer from padding. They are often 8-10 hour long episodes that really could have been done in 1 or 2.
      - natecavanaugh 8y ago
        I have to concur with this 100%, most true crime shows from Netflix have felt padded, something where I feel like if the podcast Criminal can make an enthralling episode about an event, the TV versions should be adding a lot more for the 10 hour version. In fact, the only "true crime" series I can think of actually completing is American Vandal, which was not only engaging but laugh out loud hilarious as it mocked itself. I'm truly curious to see if they can capture it in a season 2 without it being a repeat of the same. Of course, there could be some personal taste and behavioral patterns that endear the audible versions of that format more compelling (I usually listen to podcasts during times when I'm not able to be distracted with a phone, articles and texts, such as when I'm driving, yard work, or walking the dog). It could just be that the format for TV relies far more on imagery and visual cues when produced for the screen. I do know that I really haven't seen a real true crime TV series keep me engaged beyond an episode or three, which probably just means I fall out of a different "taste cluster", but there are just some shows that can use visual imagery to enhance a non-fictional topic (Vox's Explained comes to mind here). Unless there is a lot of in-depth information, and a way to make it salient to the story, it's hard for me to value the time commitment. Likewise, even fictional shows with short seasons can feel tedious at times, which for me, many happen to be British shows, though not all (I enjoyed Safe, but got really bored during Collateral and The Fall, both of which I've heard great things, but much of the storylines just ended up feeling as if scenes were there to "enhance the tension", but served some other purpose). Again maybe super personal and cultural, but I do love long format television, just please give me a reason to keep caring about the outcome without having to wind down some plot rabbit hole). I might just be impatient and a typical American who is affixed with getting "a hook" somewhere in the first 3 episodes, or I'm probably going to give something else a try. And there are quite a few really good foreign series that I enjoyed, (such as The Rain and 3%) and then some domestic and international shows that put me in the same taste cluster as shows like Dark, The OA and Sense8 that really just never connect. I'm not sure if that's a padding issue per se, but I guess anything that you're not really getting into just feels tedious after a while.
- jedberg 8y ago
  > to pad their statistics for how much media they have or to focus on product placement shots. The important point here though is that this has nothing to do with Netflix. They don't demand a certain length nor do they require product placement. That's all on the producers and creators of the show. If the show runners want to make a bunch of money with product placement, that's their creative tradeoff.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    I thought since Netflix paid for the content they produce, they would benefit at least some amount from the product placement, such as Toyota in Narcos. I don't blame them, it is business after all, but I notice when it pulls you out of the moment.
- ghaff 8y ago
  Once you've created a concept, characters, and "world," it's really tempting to run with it for a long time. Check out just about any genre literature. See also sequelitis in movies. I don't disagree but creating a unique concept takes a lot of work and time--for which there's generally less money in TV than in film--and a lot of fans will consume it endlessly.
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  I've noted several times that the lack of a time limit leads to Netflix shows carrying content better off on the cutting room floor. Both television and movies have considerations for length that force cuts that... Really I've come to find value in. Some of Netflix's Marvel shows for example, are great, but could really use a more aggressive editor.
  - gmueckl 8y ago
    The Defenders' individual series tend to be on the boring side. The focus tends to shift to things that hardly seem relevant to me. However, I have not watched another Netflix series yet that suffers from the same problem.
solatic 8y ago
The article directly attributes the ability to scale content to not being locked down by time slots. A conventional network has only a few primetime time slots per weekday evening, and that fundamentally limits the number of new shows (and renewals of old shows) that an individual network can produce. Netflix isn't limited by time slots; if conventional network A shows a sci-fi show at 8 PM on Monday night and conventional network B shows a different sci-fi show at 8 PM on Monday night, they compete with each other for viewers. If Netflix releases both shows at the same time, viewers will stream one show and then stream the other show after they finish the first - not a competition, but a value-add. Neither A nor B can show both a drama and an action show at the same time on the same network, they would have to collude and share profits. Netflix can release both simultaneously to different audiences. Netflix's streaming model is strictly better than the broadcast model. It has little to do with the revenue sourcing.
ksec 8y ago
I actually like ads. Just not too much of it. It is the same for me from Newspaper, TV or Web. However I just don't want crap, poor quality, not well thought out, repetitive ads.

lotsofpulp 8y ago

While I could never watch ad interrupted media again, some of the stuff on Netflix runs longer than it should either to pad their statistics for how much media they have or to focus on product placement shots. There's a balance, and it can swing into the "make something drag on" longer than it should territory too. But it's still way better than the old TV model.

cube2222 8y ago
Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that's the case sometimes, but so far I've experienced it being a really small part. Though recently I've watched a series (can't recall which unfortunately) which took at least 10 hours, which I've felt should really have only taken at most 4-5 and it totally felt like it was only to keep me watching for a longer time.
- Fnoord 8y ago
  Curious which series that was. Can you check your history?
  - PuffinBlue 8y ago
    Not the person you asked but Lost in Space is a good example (IMO of course).
  - cube2222 8y ago
    Can't seem to find any history feature on Netflix, and watch it again didn't help.
drb91 8y ago
This could also be a matter of taste. I happen to like “long form” media because of the detailing it enables; this almost certainly isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.
- cube2222 8y ago
  I'm not sure if that's what the parent meant. I'm on the same side, I'm not really watching movies anymore, there's too little depth to the world there. It's amazing how much you can make the world and characters deep and interesting in series. It's the same situation as movies vs books. The problem is when there really only is enough interesting content for 4-5 hours and you feel like half the series is there only as a filler. Handmaid's tale is an example that comes to my mind. I like the series overall, but it's 2-3x times as long as it should be in my opinion.
  - zf00002 8y ago
    Most of the true crime documentaries really suffer from padding. They are often 8-10 hour long episodes that really could have been done in 1 or 2.
    - natecavanaugh 8y ago
      I have to concur with this 100%, most true crime shows from Netflix have felt padded, something where I feel like if the podcast Criminal can make an enthralling episode about an event, the TV versions should be adding a lot more for the 10 hour version. In fact, the only "true crime" series I can think of actually completing is American Vandal, which was not only engaging but laugh out loud hilarious as it mocked itself. I'm truly curious to see if they can capture it in a season 2 without it being a repeat of the same. Of course, there could be some personal taste and behavioral patterns that endear the audible versions of that format more compelling (I usually listen to podcasts during times when I'm not able to be distracted with a phone, articles and texts, such as when I'm driving, yard work, or walking the dog). It could just be that the format for TV relies far more on imagery and visual cues when produced for the screen. I do know that I really haven't seen a real true crime TV series keep me engaged beyond an episode or three, which probably just means I fall out of a different "taste cluster", but there are just some shows that can use visual imagery to enhance a non-fictional topic (Vox's Explained comes to mind here). Unless there is a lot of in-depth information, and a way to make it salient to the story, it's hard for me to value the time commitment. Likewise, even fictional shows with short seasons can feel tedious at times, which for me, many happen to be British shows, though not all (I enjoyed Safe, but got really bored during Collateral and The Fall, both of which I've heard great things, but much of the storylines just ended up feeling as if scenes were there to "enhance the tension", but served some other purpose). Again maybe super personal and cultural, but I do love long format television, just please give me a reason to keep caring about the outcome without having to wind down some plot rabbit hole). I might just be impatient and a typical American who is affixed with getting "a hook" somewhere in the first 3 episodes, or I'm probably going to give something else a try. And there are quite a few really good foreign series that I enjoyed, (such as The Rain and 3%) and then some domestic and international shows that put me in the same taste cluster as shows like Dark, The OA and Sense8 that really just never connect. I'm not sure if that's a padding issue per se, but I guess anything that you're not really getting into just feels tedious after a while.
jedberg 8y ago
> to pad their statistics for how much media they have or to focus on product placement shots. The important point here though is that this has nothing to do with Netflix. They don't demand a certain length nor do they require product placement. That's all on the producers and creators of the show. If the show runners want to make a bunch of money with product placement, that's their creative tradeoff.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  I thought since Netflix paid for the content they produce, they would benefit at least some amount from the product placement, such as Toyota in Narcos. I don't blame them, it is business after all, but I notice when it pulls you out of the moment.
ghaff 8y ago
Once you've created a concept, characters, and "world," it's really tempting to run with it for a long time. Check out just about any genre literature. See also sequelitis in movies. I don't disagree but creating a unique concept takes a lot of work and time--for which there's generally less money in TV than in film--and a lot of fans will consume it endlessly.
ocdtrekkie 8y ago
I've noted several times that the lack of a time limit leads to Netflix shows carrying content better off on the cutting room floor. Both television and movies have considerations for length that force cuts that... Really I've come to find value in. Some of Netflix's Marvel shows for example, are great, but could really use a more aggressive editor.
- gmueckl 8y ago
  The Defenders' individual series tend to be on the boring side. The focus tends to shift to things that hardly seem relevant to me. However, I have not watched another Netflix series yet that suffers from the same problem.

solatic 8y ago

The article directly attributes the ability to scale content to not being locked down by time slots. A conventional network has only a few primetime time slots per weekday evening, and that fundamentally limits the number of new shows (and renewals of old shows) that an individual network can produce. Netflix isn't limited by time slots; if conventional network A shows a sci-fi show at 8 PM on Monday night and conventional network B shows a different sci-fi show at 8 PM on Monday night, they compete with each other for viewers. If Netflix releases both shows at the same time, viewers will stream one show and then stream the other show after they finish the first - not a competition, but a value-add. Neither A nor B can show both a drama and an action show at the same time on the same network, they would have to collude and share profits. Netflix can release both simultaneously to different audiences. Netflix's streaming model is strictly better than the broadcast model. It has little to do with the revenue sourcing.

ksec 8y ago

I actually like ads. Just not too much of it. It is the same for me from Newspaper, TV or Web. However I just don't want crap, poor quality, not well thought out, repetitive ads.