44 ms·
Careful now. Taken at face value, this paints a pretty 'fun' portrait of Netflix. I'm NOT doubting the WSJ, especially after the Theranos articles, they do rea
by Balgair 8y ago
Careful now.
Taken at face value, this paints a pretty 'fun' portrait of Netflix. I'm NOT doubting the WSJ, especially after the Theranos articles, they do really good reporting and have the back-ups. The firewall between Mr. Murdoch and Ms. Ramachandran and Mr. Flint's reporting should be considered as good as it gets. At least, it was for Mr. Carryrou despite it costing Mr. Murdoch literally millions of dollars.
However, follow the money on this article. Disney just bought 21st Century Fox in late August. Disney is purported to be setting up it's own streaming services as soon as the contracts with Netflix run out [0]. News Corp. owns the WSJ. Though 21st Century Fox and News Corp. are different companies after the split in 2013, this article sure isn't something Disney is going to object to.
Look, again, I'm NOT doubting that any of this is true. In fact, as it's coming out of the WSJ, I'm pretty certain it is true. All I'm saying is that this article really helps out Disney. Especially as it's trying to ramp up streaming services.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWkDZ51yrUg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWkDZ51yrUg
- dunpeal 8y ago> Look, again, I'm NOT doubting that any of this is true. In fact, as it's coming out of the WSJ, I'm pretty certain it is true. So you are "certain the article is true", then why does it matter that the companies used to have some tenuous corporate relation over 5 years ago? With how consolidated media is nowadays, especially news media, this really is nothing to see here.
- mulmen 8y agoI don't get it, what are you suggesting?