4 ms·
The interesting part is competitors can co-exist as long as the user see them as worth the monthly fee. For instance a user can have Amazon Prime and Nintendo O
by hrktb 6y ago
The interesting part is competitors can co-exist as long as the user see them as worth the monthly fee. For instance a user can have Amazon Prime and Nintendo Online, with Spotify, and be happy with the mix. It's not completely zero-sum, even if your attention is finite.
There might be frictions on adding Netflix to this, but Netflix can still be added in with incredibly great content that a user would be willing to pay monthly to keep seeing it (the same way Nintendo Online doesn't need all your attention if you're happy to keep it just for Animal Crossing, for instance)
If find it globally healthier than the alternative advertisement based services, which look to be more cut-throat places.
- permo-w 6y agoI totally agree that subscriptions are a lot healthier than advertising, but for me, as a fairly left-wing person, I think that the gold standard is state-funded media
- hrktb 6y agoI am not completely up to date on the right/left positioning, but I agree state-funded media is needed as a baseline to at least properly convey any purely factual issue (i.e. it's optimal for official info, like which law passed or who won the elections cough). Of course it can't be the only media, nor should be trusted that much more than other media for any generic topic. In particular it shouldn't be trusted to be complete nor people focused, so there is still the need to find other sources that complete the picture with different angles that can be crucial.
- permo-w 6y agoIn relatively free and somewhat uncorrupt nations, yes that makes sense, but I'm actually largely talking about entertainment. In the UK, the BBC makes all sorts of fantastic tv shows and documentaries that have no reliance on advertising or corporate sponsors