7 ms·

I agree. The wake-up call for me that the streaming promise was hollow was when PBS Video went on line. I imagined it steadily growing to cover the entire back

I agree. The wake-up call for me that the streaming promise was hollow was when PBS Video went on line. I imagined it steadily growing to cover the entire back catalog of PBS. What a fabulous public resource that would be. Alas, no, it's a tiny slice of stuff with limited availability windows. We supplement streaming Netflix with our local library system, which has a fairly deep collection.

mixmastamyk 8y ago
Same here, once wanted to view some old Frontline from the 80's. Nope.
- philg_jr 8y ago
  Ugh, the catalog of Frontline is insanely huge. What, am I supposed to pay $24.99 per DVD of previous episodes? uh, no, I will not. Please PBS, give us real access to your catalog.
  - mixmastamyk 8y ago
    Agreed. Went back to watch the "US of secrets" on Netflix last year, gone. It was on Kanopy last I checked at least. WTF does public television think its doing with this strategy? Makes me want to pull funding.
delinka 8y ago
It costs lots of money to digitize and host the old stuff. And the non-profit organization doesn't lend itself well to selling access - it takes time and effort (read "money") to research with the lawyers whether "selling" or "membership fees" or whatever other business model is legally acceptable under the organization's structure. But since new content is shot in digital, and edited digitally, it's a minor step to convert for streaming and also broadcast so they just stick to that.
- briandear 8y ago
  It’s a bit annoying though when people complain about cutting federal funding for PBS under the guise of “saving Big Bird,” yet the taxpayer doesn’t have access to the fruits of those tax dollars. Similar to publicly funded research being hidden behind paywalls. If PBS has the money (some from taxes) to make the programming, they should have enough to provide the content for free either via their own streaming services or via commercial services.
  - khrbrt 8y ago
    At the very least, declare it all public domain, and provide BitTorrent links. Maybe something like Popcorn Time for PBS and other public domain works
    - ghaff 8y ago
      They're often not public domain works and are not fully funded by taxpayers.
      - mcny 8y ago
        So maybe we should require it to be public domain? We complain about the government using proprietary software like Microsoft Windows so why not complain about royalties and copyright licensing agreements? The whole industry makes no sense to me. It makes no sense to be that Netflix doesn't own full, unrestricted rights to house of cards without paying anyone anything extra after the work is completed (residual).
        justincormack 8y ago
        They could but it would cost more to make as the people would want to be paid more without a residual.
  - mtberatwork 8y ago
    They do have a free streaming service and they do stream stuff through YouTube. The availability of a show will depend on the licensing restrictions they have from the content producers though. It's the member stations that are the ones who are producing all of the content (or licensing it from other broadcasters (e.g. BBC) and production houses (e.g. Ken Burns).
ajmurmann 8y ago
In Germany it was even worse. The public broadcasters launched a huge portal where you could watch pretty much everything in their catalog. The private broadcasters sued and won and now content is only available for two weeks after it was shown on TV. We paid for it to be produced by tax money, yet private companies were allowed to lock it up!
- cabaalis 8y ago
  What argument was used for forcing a copying decision upon the copyright holders?
  - WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
    "Fuck you, pay me?"
  - solstice 8y ago
    I think it was something along the lines of unfair business practices due to public broadcasters being able to use taxpayer money...
    - rorykoehler 8y ago
      Tbh that is one of the worst used of tax payers money in Germany. I wish I could opt out
- Thlom 8y ago
  In Norway the public broadcaster have everything available for streaming. Well, as long as it's produced by the broadcaster at least. When it's produced by external studios things can get a bit complicated, but it seems like they've achieved agreements with most studios that produce content for the broadcaster the last couple of years. Even content the broadcaster have bought is usually available for at least two weeks, but I imagine it depends on the contract with the rights holder.
  - Arnt 8y ago
mtberatwork 8y ago
PBS Passport [1] is what you are looking for if you want to watch content that's outside of the original availability window. [1] https://help.pbs.org/support/solutions/articles/12000043556-what-is-pbs-passport- https://help.pbs.org/support/solutions/articles/12000043556-...
- balt_s 8y ago
  Wow only 60 USD/year! They're practically giving this publically-funded resource away!
  - 1123581321 8y ago
    PBS is only about half funded by public sources. Apologies if I misread your comment.
  - vel0city 7y ago
    As the other commentator has stated, the vast majority revenue for PBS is by member contributions, donations of broadcast rights, and distribution fees. In 2018, members gave $197,552,000 while public grants and contributions were $105,336,000. A quick look at their revenues suggests that public grants and contributions only make up ~16% of revenues for PBS. Without asking for $60/year for Passport (which you also get if you're a member) they wouldn't be able to do most of what they do. https://bento.cdn.pbs.org/hostedbento-prod/filer_public/PBS_About/Files%20and%20Thumbnails/Finances/PBS%20Consolidated%20FS%202018.pdf https://bento.cdn.pbs.org/hostedbento-prod/filer_public/PBS_...

mixmastamyk 8y ago

Same here, once wanted to view some old Frontline from the 80's. Nope.

philg_jr 8y ago
Ugh, the catalog of Frontline is insanely huge. What, am I supposed to pay $24.99 per DVD of previous episodes? uh, no, I will not. Please PBS, give us real access to your catalog.
- mixmastamyk 8y ago
  Agreed. Went back to watch the "US of secrets" on Netflix last year, gone. It was on Kanopy last I checked at least. WTF does public television think its doing with this strategy? Makes me want to pull funding.

delinka 8y ago

It costs lots of money to digitize and host the old stuff. And the non-profit organization doesn't lend itself well to selling access - it takes time and effort (read "money") to research with the lawyers whether "selling" or "membership fees" or whatever other business model is legally acceptable under the organization's structure. But since new content is shot in digital, and edited digitally, it's a minor step to convert for streaming and also broadcast so they just stick to that.

briandear 8y ago
It’s a bit annoying though when people complain about cutting federal funding for PBS under the guise of “saving Big Bird,” yet the taxpayer doesn’t have access to the fruits of those tax dollars. Similar to publicly funded research being hidden behind paywalls. If PBS has the money (some from taxes) to make the programming, they should have enough to provide the content for free either via their own streaming services or via commercial services.
- khrbrt 8y ago
  At the very least, declare it all public domain, and provide BitTorrent links. Maybe something like Popcorn Time for PBS and other public domain works
  - ghaff 8y ago
    They're often not public domain works and are not fully funded by taxpayers.
    - mcny 8y ago
      So maybe we should require it to be public domain? We complain about the government using proprietary software like Microsoft Windows so why not complain about royalties and copyright licensing agreements? The whole industry makes no sense to me. It makes no sense to be that Netflix doesn't own full, unrestricted rights to house of cards without paying anyone anything extra after the work is completed (residual).
      - justincormack 8y ago
        They could but it would cost more to make as the people would want to be paid more without a residual.
- mtberatwork 8y ago
  They do have a free streaming service and they do stream stuff through YouTube. The availability of a show will depend on the licensing restrictions they have from the content producers though. It's the member stations that are the ones who are producing all of the content (or licensing it from other broadcasters (e.g. BBC) and production houses (e.g. Ken Burns).

ajmurmann 8y ago

In Germany it was even worse. The public broadcasters launched a huge portal where you could watch pretty much everything in their catalog. The private broadcasters sued and won and now content is only available for two weeks after it was shown on TV. We paid for it to be produced by tax money, yet private companies were allowed to lock it up!

cabaalis 8y ago
What argument was used for forcing a copying decision upon the copyright holders?
- WrtCdEvrydy 8y ago
  "Fuck you, pay me?"
- solstice 8y ago
  I think it was something along the lines of unfair business practices due to public broadcasters being able to use taxpayer money...
  - rorykoehler 8y ago
    Tbh that is one of the worst used of tax payers money in Germany. I wish I could opt out
Thlom 8y ago
In Norway the public broadcaster have everything available for streaming. Well, as long as it's produced by the broadcaster at least. When it's produced by external studios things can get a bit complicated, but it seems like they've achieved agreements with most studios that produce content for the broadcaster the last couple of years. Even content the broadcaster have bought is usually available for at least two weeks, but I imagine it depends on the contract with the rights holder.
- Arnt 8y ago

mtberatwork 8y ago

PBS Passport [1] is what you are looking for if you want to watch content that's outside of the original availability window. [1] https://help.pbs.org/support/solutions/articles/12000043556-what-is-pbs-passport- https://help.pbs.org/support/solutions/articles/12000043556-...

balt_s 8y ago
Wow only 60 USD/year! They're practically giving this publically-funded resource away!
- 1123581321 8y ago
  PBS is only about half funded by public sources. Apologies if I misread your comment.
- vel0city 7y ago
  As the other commentator has stated, the vast majority revenue for PBS is by member contributions, donations of broadcast rights, and distribution fees. In 2018, members gave $197,552,000 while public grants and contributions were $105,336,000. A quick look at their revenues suggests that public grants and contributions only make up ~16% of revenues for PBS. Without asking for $60/year for Passport (which you also get if you're a member) they wouldn't be able to do most of what they do. https://bento.cdn.pbs.org/hostedbento-prod/filer_public/PBS_About/Files%20and%20Thumbnails/Finances/PBS%20Consolidated%20FS%202018.pdf https://bento.cdn.pbs.org/hostedbento-prod/filer_public/PBS_...