3 ms·

In any other industry, having companies compete against each other to create the best product in order to attract customers is the ideal situation... except tel

In any other industry, having companies compete against each other to create the best product in order to attract customers is the ideal situation... except television? People might not like balkanization of content, but it forces different services to compete against each other in a way that produces more and better content overall. More to the point, it's frankly no different to how TV channels used to work in the past.

GeekyBear 5y ago
>it forces different services to compete against each other in a way that produces more and better content overall It seems more like another avenue through which a small number of mega-corporations can control ever increasing shares of the media marketplace to me. In my view, some sort of mandatory licensing scheme would force individually owned production companies to compete against each other to produce the best product.
- dageshi 5y ago
  A small number of mega corporations have always controlled the media marketplace, the difference is streaming is shaking things up and making a new set of mega-corporations in addition to the existing ones.
  - GeekyBear 5y ago
    >A small number of mega corporations have always controlled the media marketplace Always? No. After the deregulation of the Clinton era? Yes. Fun fact: At the start of the Clinton administration, banks could not operate in more than one state.
ghaff 5y ago
I wonder how many people who complain about the balkanization of content across multiple streaming services also weren't a fan of the cable bundle. Presumably, if you had mandatory licensing, you end up with a monopoly or duopoly of streaming services. (Which is more or less what you have in music--though it's arguably a triopoly if you count Amazon.) That's not necessarily bad; it's been pretty much OK (for consumers if not creators) in music. Though it would presumably reduce the incentive to produce tentpole content that brings people to your specific service.

GeekyBear 5y ago

>it forces different services to compete against each other in a way that produces more and better content overall It seems more like another avenue through which a small number of mega-corporations can control ever increasing shares of the media marketplace to me. In my view, some sort of mandatory licensing scheme would force individually owned production companies to compete against each other to produce the best product.

dageshi 5y ago
A small number of mega corporations have always controlled the media marketplace, the difference is streaming is shaking things up and making a new set of mega-corporations in addition to the existing ones.
- GeekyBear 5y ago
  >A small number of mega corporations have always controlled the media marketplace Always? No. After the deregulation of the Clinton era? Yes. Fun fact: At the start of the Clinton administration, banks could not operate in more than one state.

ghaff 5y ago

I wonder how many people who complain about the balkanization of content across multiple streaming services also weren't a fan of the cable bundle. Presumably, if you had mandatory licensing, you end up with a monopoly or duopoly of streaming services. (Which is more or less what you have in music--though it's arguably a triopoly if you count Amazon.) That's not necessarily bad; it's been pretty much OK (for consumers if not creators) in music. Though it would presumably reduce the incentive to produce tentpole content that brings people to your specific service.