9 ms·

I believe we’re in a content bubble. All the old television networks, Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, and others are pumping out more mediocre TV than anyone w

I believe we’re in a content bubble. All the old television networks, Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, and others are pumping out more mediocre TV than anyone wants or cares to consume. The quality is too low and the quantity is too high. It’s telling to me that the most-watched shows on these networks are often sitcoms from the 90s and 00s, despite a mountain of newer content going unnoticed. A shakeout would be a good thing.

999900000999 5y ago
Actually I think it's about finding your niche. I loved Disjointed on Netflix, but I understand it's too silly for many. If I want to find Ukrainian rom coms,I can find it . This was unheard of 20 years ago.
- FalconSensei 5y ago
  > If I want to find Ukrainian rom coms,I can find it Now you got me curious
ehsankia 5y ago
I disagree. There are still massive and popular shows. Look at Marvel shows, Ted Lasso, The Crown, etc. But since the field is saturated, there's also a focus on niche content that appeal to a specific underserved population. Content that have a small but strong fanbase. Just because it doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean it's mediocre.
terafo 5y ago
What's great about this amount of content being produced is the globalization of content production. The biggest hit of last year was made in Korea. More and more shows on Netflix are being made globally. It will become more prevalent as various streaming services try to get an edge over competition by cutting costs this way.
- f1refly 5y ago
  The countries in which shows are made in in completly irrelevant. They only do it to capture the maximum amount of national culture funds, but the content is still the same bland garbage noone asked for.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
jimbob45 5y ago
I think you're onto something but from the wrong angle. Netflix/Amazon/Hulu are paying these content creators up-front to be create these shows with no added payoff if the show ends up being a huge hit. There's then no incentive for the creators to put any extra effort into making the show since they won't get rewarded for it. Of course, this is all hypothesis and there are certainly counterexamples that can be brought up. Now, I think these creators are banking their effort/ideas in the hopes that theaters will make a comeback at some point. However, at some point it will become clear that theaters are dead and that there will need to be a new business model (or acceptance of the current model) that creators will simply need to accept.
- Gustomaximus 5y ago
  > There's then no incentive for the creators to put any extra effort into making the show since they won't get rewarded for it. This seems flaws logic. Many people have pride in their work regardless. And even if selfish reasoning they know a hit gets renewed season or goes on their resume for better future earnings.
  - Hokusai 5y ago
    > Many people have pride in their work regardless. On my experience, the only reason the world works is because many people has pride in their jobs and go beyond their pay grade to make things work. And rarely are the better paid as they are more worried about good results that better pay for themselves. When I find people like that I try to help them as a sign of gratitude.
- stonemetal12 5y ago
  >payoff if the show ends up being a huge hit They get to charge more (or determine if it even exists) for season 2+ if it is a huge hit. Also for a lot of Netflix's original content it is licensing streaming rights, not full ownership. I have seen news reports that they own 10% or less of their "Netflix Originals". So merchandising rights remain with the original owners\creators of the content.
AlwaysRock 5y ago
I don't think we are. I agree the the amount of just okay content that is being released seems overwhelming. But people are watching it. And its more targeted to specific demographics. I have friends who love X netflix show because its the first time someone like the is the actual target audience and that is reflected by the show. I don't love the show and that is okay because I'm not who they are trying to reach. I realized as a 20-50 middle income white guy I was the target demographic for 90%+ of the shows on television. Even if I thought X new sitcom was garbage at least I could relate to it. Now that isnt true so that show probably seems even less appealing than it did before. So I just dont watch it. That's fine. And once in a while a squid games, BEHIND HER EYES, or damn it even love is blind pops up and I get to enjoy bingeing a show with family/friends. More content is coming out and it is more targeted. Those that are hits get renewed and those that flop dont. It's the same system as always but more targeted.
- rchaud 5y ago
  Too few of these shows last long enough for them to generate future value via syndication. Networks will buy a one-off movie, but not a single 10-episode season of something for a very niche audience.
  - soco 5y ago
    I'm actually wondering what is the future of those networks anyway...
  - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
    A future streaming service will pick up the good ones. The benefit to killing off traditional syndication is that it removes future losses from royalties.
    - gamblor956 5y ago
      Networks don't pay out royalties for syndicated shows. The production studio that owns the show pays out the royalties, based on the income they receive from the channels syndicating the show. (Fox TV, for example, made Modern Family, which aired on ABC. Fox TV pays out the royalties received from the channels that syndicate reruns of the show, not ABC.)
golergka 5y ago
May be it's just more people viewing his own thing, instead of the whole audience running to the number one show? The long tail?
- ehsankia 5y ago
  Exactly, GP is mistaking niche content with mediocre content. It's similar to indie games. A game like The Witness may not have the same audience as the latest Call of Duty, but the people who love that game really fucking love it. When any field gets too saturated, the best way to shine is to focus on underserved niches.
  - FalconSensei 5y ago
    I find that many times that people complain about lack of good content, they aren't willing to get a least a bit out of their comfort zone and try something different. Netflix (and others) have shows and movies from so many countries, so many genres.
ozzythecat 5y ago
> All the old television networks, Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, and others are pumping out more mediocre This is a subjective statement. You might even dislike shows on a particular service, but to say all of them are “objectively bad” and you think people watch more of “90s sitcoms” tells me that you probably prefer 90s sitcoms. :) I’m basically cycling between these providers each month. The Expanse, The Morning Show, Hawkeye, Succession, For All Mankind. Last year was the most television I’ve watched since I was a kid.
- potatolicious 5y ago
  It also sounds like a case of rose-tinted glasses - I watched many of those 90s sitcoms as they came out, and most of them are definitely mediocre! And this fact was noticed contemporaneously - remember all of the very serious thinkpieces opining that people were rotting their brains in front of the TV watching content so brain-dead that you need a laughtrack to tell the audience when to laugh. Personally I think that was just snobbery - the mediocre sitcoms were fine and perfectly ok entertainment and there was no need for any kind of moral panic - but let's not pretend that that was some kind of golden age of sophisticated content.
- nostromo 5y ago
  I don't actually watch those shows - I watched them a long time ago. I've just noticed that for many years, Netflix would show that their most-watched show was The Office. And I'm sitting here thinking -- all of this new content and the thing people are watching is over a decade old? South Park, Family Guy, Friends, Sienfield... I've seen these promoted by multiple services as the most-watched shows available.
  - numpad0 5y ago
    People prefers to watch videos of normal people doing normal people things over everything else? I can’t laugh at my straw man either but that is horrifying.
  - gowld 5y ago
    When a show has 10 long seasons, it's going to have more watch time than each of 10 single/mini series.
lordnacho 5y ago
Couldn't it just be that media from those times were less fragmented, and everyone who watches modern stuff just happens to watch different things?
omegalulw 5y ago
Pretty much. I can't remember the last time I opened Netflix and didn't struggle to find something to watch. That said, I think more and more people are realizing this so I'm hopeful things would improve. For example, one of the most underrated streaming services IMO is HBO Max - they don't have a lot of content but the quality of of what they have is pretty good.
mattmcknight 5y ago
I think we're in a subscription bubble. I don't consume enough content per month to make most of these subscriptions worthwhile- only YT Premium and Spotify to skip the ads. Yet when there is something I want to watch, I have to subscribe to a massive bundle of garbage for month to see it.
- gowld 5y ago
  Are you also upset that stores sell products you don't want, forcing you to pay rent for them? It doesn't matter what you don't watch, garbage or not.
  - mattmcknight 5y ago
    Well, I suppose I don't go to stores that require subscriptions. The better analogy is the only way to buy a bagel for breakfast is to order a $30 all you can eat buffet every day forever. I just don't value bagels at $30. I want a la carte. I don't think a 30-60 minute show is worth $14.99. Other things are only available on $50+/month live TV services. So, I end up waiting until there are a few things I want to watch on a subscription service, then buying or trialing it for a month, and cancelling. It's just annoying.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
cletus 5y ago
The part I agree with is many companies are throwing huge amounts of money at original content creation and some of these will get burned. The poster child for this (IMHO) is Netflix who has spent so much on this that they've had to raise prices to untenable levels, which is hurting retention in the US and Canada in particular. I disagree with your claim about people are primarily watching old content (source?). Just looking at one list for Netflix [1], it's all fairly recent shows with the notable exception of Seinfeld. It's actually astounding what a money-making machine Seinfeld is 25 years after being on the air. Even before streaming, Seinfeld reruns would get >1m viewers on cable. It's crazy. I actually believe the last 20 years have been (and seemingly continue to be) the golden age of television. Technology finally made practical heavily serialized content and TV enables types of content not possible in movies. Movies are just limited to ~3 hours in length (director's cuts of Dances with Wolves notwithstanding). Movies are for short stories. TV is for books. This is a structural change in the industry and despite the Big Brother-esque mediocrity we've also seen over this period, it's undeniable that we've seen some of the greatest entertainment ever to grace a screen in the last 20 years. [1]: https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/tv-ratings-seinfeld-you-squid-game-my-name-1235115452/ https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/tv-ratings-seinfeld-you-squ...
- nostromo 5y ago
  > I disagree with your claim about people are primarily watching old content (source?). I realize this is just one data point, but the most-streamed show in 2020 was The Office, close to a decade after its last episode was released. https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/the-office-most-streamed-tv-show-2020-nielsen-1234883822/ https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/the-office-most-stream...
  - pixl97 5y ago
    Could we be conflating causality here? Could it be that older shows that existed before networks were fractured up by separate streaming services are going to be the most watched now because they were also the most watched then. The last shared societal interactions. Maybe these shows were not particularly good, but there was a lack of options individualized so strongly.
sfifs 5y ago
Are you sure you are not judging by the standards of mass market broadcast production vs what these companies seem to be doing in terms of producing content for smaller, more targeted but still profitable target audiences? In the broadcast world, the relevant "inventory" (ie. TV Network Channel time slot) is very limited and precious. Therefore only content with production quality that appeals to a large enough audience to attract advertisers gets greenlit. In the past year, my family has binge watched "blown away" a glass blowing competition, 3 series about weird/exotic vacation rentals/hotels, 2 children's mysteries serises, standup comedy by specific comediens, a series about music production and composition styles of different artists and a series about design. All of these above ran multiple seasons, so clearly there's sufficient profitable viewership for multiple seasons to be made even though it's very likely NONE of them would make mainstream broadcast TV. We didn't see any of the "big/popular" shows. The only reason we have cable TV connection at all now is when my parents or in-laws visit, they get very bored without their.regular TV channels.
sfifs 5y ago
Are you sure you are not judging by the standards of mass market ad supported broadcast production vs what these companies seem to be doing in terms of producing content for long tail of smaller but still profitable subscription interest based target audiences? In the broadcast world, the relevant "inventory" (ie. TV Network Channel time slot) is very limited. Therefore only content with production quality that appeals to a large enough audience to attract advertisers gets greenlit. There's no such limitations in subscription supposed the digital content delivery (aka OTT) economic model. You only have to get sufficient audience to at least recoup your production costs and the minimal per stream delivery costs. In the past year, my family has binge watched "blown away" a glass blowing competition, 3 series about weird/exotic vacation rentals/hotels, 2 children's mysteries serises, standup comedy by specific comediens, a series about music production and composition styles of different artists and a series about design. All of these above ran multiple seasons, so clearly there's sufficient profitable viewership for multiple seasons to be made even though it's very likely NONE of them would make mainstream broadcast TV. We didn't see any of the "big/popular" shows which do make it to broadcast TV. I'm very sure there are enough households like mine that drives multiple seasons of the above "niche" shows. The only reason we have cable / broadcast TV connection at all now is when my parents or in-laws visit, they get very bored without their regular TV channels.
- autokad 5y ago
  this 'long tail' discussion has been a huge fallacy. if you look at the type of content netflix is trying to produce, its really not that diverse. its mostly very left leaning dystopian. They also operate very much like a broadcast TV station in the way they cancel shows very fast despite not having limits of airtime slots. while you site a few cherry picked series that lasted a few years, netflix is really quick to cancel shows. Honestly the original content Netflix spits out has less diversity than broad cast tv, and they have about as much patience to keep those shows 'on the air'.
  - notafraudster 5y ago
    Netflix is not especially quick to cancel shows. The modal broadcast show got 1 season pretty consistently during the entire broadcast era. Most years the first cancelled broadcast show occurs after 1-2 episodes have aired. Netflix does tend to leave shows with fewer episodes than traditional broadcast runs because the new norm is 8-10 episodes per season rather than 22-26; this has been reflected in significantly higher per-episode budgets, a much broader and deeper talent pool on screen, and a move towards serialized storytelling that started with HBO. Netflix actually has extremely diverse programming on all levels. By genre, by budget, by language, by subject matter, by age rating, by quality, Netflix covers absolutely every quadrant. What is "left leaning dystopian"? Never mind, I don't want to know. It's embarrassing.
schleck8 5y ago
There is a great video on why many of the streaming providers have started airing "trash tv"/reality tv shows. It's in German, but you can auto translate subtitles on PC https://youtube.com/watch?v=nD5YLLPpWMg https://youtube.com/watch?v=nD5YLLPpWMg
unexpected 5y ago
I would like to offer a more nuanced spin - there's a large quantity of great, original content out there, but the era of the sitcom is over. We're in peak prestige tv - every new show requires you to have watched the whole season and requires a big time commitment and emotional investment (game of thrones being the quintessential example of this). ...yet the last few years have been quite hard! All of us are navigating a COVID environment where working remotely, educating kids, and entertaining ourselves have all blended together. There's a bifurcation of eyeballs - I simply don't have the time or emotional bandwidth to watch "prestige tv", but it's very easy for me to put on friends, or the office, or seinfeld, and carry on with my day!
didip 5y ago
Is this statement true? I don't watch a lot of entertainment myself, but even I have heard of The Squid Game drama on Netflix. And that counts as a new content.
rg111 5y ago
They have algorithmized TV production. They collect shit-ton of data on everything of the users, and track eyeballs (not literally, I think)- what are people watching, what are people binging, etc. They are forming clusters of users based on demographic, purchase power, etc, and mapping those clusters to features in content. And if a certain overall kind or discreet feature is worth the amount of eyeball it is attracting, a designed, soulless series gets created with those features, or two. This is what modern, app-TV feels to me. No art, no quality. Just content tailor-made and factory produced to match the taste of favored demographics with purchase power. And they not only want to match. They want to maximize. They want the maximum amount of people to watch something, not small amounts of people finding their niche. I cannot tolerate this kind of content, and I am unsubscribed to all services except Amazon Prime for free delivery of goods. That doesn't mean there aren't some good TV. I would consider Bosch to be quality TV, and Ozark is okay-ish. The Expanse, too. But I am done with conveyor-belt driven app-TV. I will just binge The Wire when I am sick. Thank you.
- some-guy 5y ago
  I think this is a bit of an overgeneralization. There is _plenty_ of media (movies, television, music) that came out over the years that was absolutely terrible. Networks at the time also were very data-driven with their decisions, they just didn't have as much data to work with.
- Rd6n6 5y ago
  Pop music, Hollywood movies, and book publishing have done this for years. There is just more data than before. It is about as soulless as it ever was, but maybe less so: there have been some great shows in the last decade (not as many great movies though)
- Bombthecat 5y ago
  Games are going the same route.. It feels rare that you get a unique game with complex mechanics.. All of them are dumped down to make them easier..
- smugglerFlynn 5y ago
  “Tracking eyeballs, what a joke!” Reed Hastings was furious after that call ended. Conversation still ringed in his ears. Another journalist implying how bad tech giants exploit the data, “spy” (gasp!) on customers. He opened the cabinet, took a whiskey bottle, and poured single malt into a heavy glass. His office was quiet again, anger subsided, and he was finally able to relax. Today’s call was fourth this week, maybe fifth. For the past couple of month all the media was hunting for were stories on ad targeting, behavior tracking, privacy breach… Everyone and their dog implied that there is full-on spying on every single customer to drive the views. People who had no idea how this worked, who invested zero hours into building something meaningful, while spending all their life magnifying the rage through social media. “I wonder if there is a trendy hashtag already, something like #trackingate?” — Mr. Reed caught himself spiraling again into the unpleasant memories of his latest conversations with the press. Poor fellas haven’t been able to scratch even the surface of how it all works. “You don’t need to track every eyeball. Just a select few of them. Carefully selected.” Mr. Reed smirked, eyed a precious glass jar filled with white jelly marbles, and closed the cabinet door.
tyingq 5y ago
I agree. There's a ton of stuff where either the acting or writing makes it unwatchable. Or potentially good foreign (to me) language content where the quality of the dubbing and/or english captions make it useless to me. There is clearly a quantity > quality thing going on. It also hides some of the good stuff because you can't typically filter, sort, or search based on things like reviews.
pictur 5y ago
now there are TV shows and movies that only have message concerns. quality content no longer really exists. netflix has lowered the quality bar a lot
varelse 5y ago
It's a golden age to me and I don't know how long it will last. But I'm all there for the spin-off shows that would have once been fanfic on Usenet and little more. Have you seen Peacemaker? It's utterly amazing and I'm happy to wade through oceans of crap to get to gems like this. I am genuinely beginning to wonder if James Gunn made The Suicide Squad sequel so he could make a TV series out of Peacemaker.
WheatM 5y ago
pille 5y ago
> It’s telling to me that the most-watched shows on these networks are often sitcoms from the 90s and 00s, despite a mountain of newer content going unnoticed. There was also huge glut of forgettable content back then. Most 90s and 00s shows were low quality crap too. No one is watching those now. The handful of shows that survived and made it onto today’s streaming services are the greatest of that era.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
  Nobody remembers Capital Critters, Fish Police, or Family Dog.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
This keeps happening in every space. A barrier to entry is lowered, everybody cheers, and pretty soon we are awash in absolute garbage. Less is more.
Rd6n6 5y ago
Great content is x% of all content. If you want more great shows, the industry will need to make a ton of shows and most won’t be great. We’ve had a decade of really amazing tv, it’s no wonder there is some mediocre work in there too. We also just spent 2 years in semi-lockdown, it’s hard to make movies and tv in that situation, there were a lot of delayed great projects
- GenerocUsername 5y ago
  That's making some unfounded assumptions. Good content is not a fixed % of total. So if you increase total you might just water down the % of good content... Or worse, if practices focus on quantity entirely you may end up with 0% good content. Even shows I used to enjoy seem to have taken a steep decline since about 2018.
  - Rd6n6 5y ago
    It’s not one person on a throne making decisions for the entire industry. Many different organizations are all making tv shows and movies, so you tend to get a mix even if the large companies focus on bad content The things in decline imho are due to studios taking their best people off the project to kick start new ones
    - GenerocUsername 5y ago
      True, but industries tend to follow each-others trends for better or worse at least in short-term cycles. Its entirely possible for a whole industry to lean towards a bad solution for 5 years before course correcting. The most recent has been the proliferation of Streaming services and original content to try and own unique content per-platform. Netflix and HBO did well from 2014-2017, and everyone else hopped onto the bandwagon to mediocre effect since
- FalconSensei 5y ago
  > We’ve had a decade of really amazing tv, it’s no wonder there is some mediocre work in there too. Agree. We remember the good shows from the previous decades, but there was a lot of thrash
watwut 5y ago
I can't help ... series are better then they ever been. And while I hate superheroes comic book movie genre with passion, many people love that.
mc32 5y ago
I want vintage 80s, 90s and early 2000s TV. TV that still had some manners, modesty and didn’t say everything out loud. It wasn’t all loud, brash and uncouth.
etempleton 5y ago
The natural course will be the consolidation of streaming platforms. There is room for 3-4 big players and then various specialty niche players. Right now you have about 10 going for a very general audience and there is no way that that will work.
ienfoiwekd 5y ago
kumarvvr 5y ago
Perhaps in a subscription model, where some good content is spread amongst many providers (with almost all providers having exclusive ones), mediocrity will be the ultimate stable point. As the subscription money keeps flowing, there is an incentive to publish a minimum number of new series / shows / what not, and there are only so many good ideas at any given time. Add to that, there is no clear profit/loss equation for online streaming (even though you have viewership numbers, there is no definite link between retention and viewership numbers for a given content. As an example, I just saw Eternals on Disney+, just because of the marketing and branding, but felt bored of it. Clearly I am adding to the viewership, but not to the pull factor that keeps me on the provider)

999900000999 5y ago

Actually I think it's about finding your niche. I loved Disjointed on Netflix, but I understand it's too silly for many. If I want to find Ukrainian rom coms,I can find it . This was unheard of 20 years ago.

FalconSensei 5y ago
> If I want to find Ukrainian rom coms,I can find it Now you got me curious

ehsankia 5y ago

I disagree. There are still massive and popular shows. Look at Marvel shows, Ted Lasso, The Crown, etc. But since the field is saturated, there's also a focus on niche content that appeal to a specific underserved population. Content that have a small but strong fanbase. Just because it doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean it's mediocre.

terafo 5y ago

What's great about this amount of content being produced is the globalization of content production. The biggest hit of last year was made in Korea. More and more shows on Netflix are being made globally. It will become more prevalent as various streaming services try to get an edge over competition by cutting costs this way.

f1refly 5y ago
The countries in which shows are made in in completly irrelevant. They only do it to capture the maximum amount of national culture funds, but the content is still the same bland garbage noone asked for.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

jimbob45 5y ago

I think you're onto something but from the wrong angle. Netflix/Amazon/Hulu are paying these content creators up-front to be create these shows with no added payoff if the show ends up being a huge hit. There's then no incentive for the creators to put any extra effort into making the show since they won't get rewarded for it. Of course, this is all hypothesis and there are certainly counterexamples that can be brought up. Now, I think these creators are banking their effort/ideas in the hopes that theaters will make a comeback at some point. However, at some point it will become clear that theaters are dead and that there will need to be a new business model (or acceptance of the current model) that creators will simply need to accept.

Gustomaximus 5y ago
> There's then no incentive for the creators to put any extra effort into making the show since they won't get rewarded for it. This seems flaws logic. Many people have pride in their work regardless. And even if selfish reasoning they know a hit gets renewed season or goes on their resume for better future earnings.
- Hokusai 5y ago
  > Many people have pride in their work regardless. On my experience, the only reason the world works is because many people has pride in their jobs and go beyond their pay grade to make things work. And rarely are the better paid as they are more worried about good results that better pay for themselves. When I find people like that I try to help them as a sign of gratitude.
stonemetal12 5y ago
>payoff if the show ends up being a huge hit They get to charge more (or determine if it even exists) for season 2+ if it is a huge hit. Also for a lot of Netflix's original content it is licensing streaming rights, not full ownership. I have seen news reports that they own 10% or less of their "Netflix Originals". So merchandising rights remain with the original owners\creators of the content.

AlwaysRock 5y ago

I don't think we are. I agree the the amount of just okay content that is being released seems overwhelming. But people are watching it. And its more targeted to specific demographics. I have friends who love X netflix show because its the first time someone like the is the actual target audience and that is reflected by the show. I don't love the show and that is okay because I'm not who they are trying to reach. I realized as a 20-50 middle income white guy I was the target demographic for 90%+ of the shows on television. Even if I thought X new sitcom was garbage at least I could relate to it. Now that isnt true so that show probably seems even less appealing than it did before. So I just dont watch it. That's fine. And once in a while a squid games, BEHIND HER EYES, or damn it even love is blind pops up and I get to enjoy bingeing a show with family/friends. More content is coming out and it is more targeted. Those that are hits get renewed and those that flop dont. It's the same system as always but more targeted.

rchaud 5y ago
Too few of these shows last long enough for them to generate future value via syndication. Networks will buy a one-off movie, but not a single 10-episode season of something for a very niche audience.
- soco 5y ago
  I'm actually wondering what is the future of those networks anyway...
- kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
  A future streaming service will pick up the good ones. The benefit to killing off traditional syndication is that it removes future losses from royalties.
  - gamblor956 5y ago
    Networks don't pay out royalties for syndicated shows. The production studio that owns the show pays out the royalties, based on the income they receive from the channels syndicating the show. (Fox TV, for example, made Modern Family, which aired on ABC. Fox TV pays out the royalties received from the channels that syndicate reruns of the show, not ABC.)

golergka 5y ago

May be it's just more people viewing his own thing, instead of the whole audience running to the number one show? The long tail?

ehsankia 5y ago
Exactly, GP is mistaking niche content with mediocre content. It's similar to indie games. A game like The Witness may not have the same audience as the latest Call of Duty, but the people who love that game really fucking love it. When any field gets too saturated, the best way to shine is to focus on underserved niches.
- FalconSensei 5y ago
  I find that many times that people complain about lack of good content, they aren't willing to get a least a bit out of their comfort zone and try something different. Netflix (and others) have shows and movies from so many countries, so many genres.

ozzythecat 5y ago

> All the old television networks, Netflix, Amazon, Disney, Apple, and others are pumping out more mediocre This is a subjective statement. You might even dislike shows on a particular service, but to say all of them are “objectively bad” and you think people watch more of “90s sitcoms” tells me that you probably prefer 90s sitcoms. :) I’m basically cycling between these providers each month. The Expanse, The Morning Show, Hawkeye, Succession, For All Mankind. Last year was the most television I’ve watched since I was a kid.

potatolicious 5y ago
It also sounds like a case of rose-tinted glasses - I watched many of those 90s sitcoms as they came out, and most of them are definitely mediocre! And this fact was noticed contemporaneously - remember all of the very serious thinkpieces opining that people were rotting their brains in front of the TV watching content so brain-dead that you need a laughtrack to tell the audience when to laugh. Personally I think that was just snobbery - the mediocre sitcoms were fine and perfectly ok entertainment and there was no need for any kind of moral panic - but let's not pretend that that was some kind of golden age of sophisticated content.
nostromo 5y ago
I don't actually watch those shows - I watched them a long time ago. I've just noticed that for many years, Netflix would show that their most-watched show was The Office. And I'm sitting here thinking -- all of this new content and the thing people are watching is over a decade old? South Park, Family Guy, Friends, Sienfield... I've seen these promoted by multiple services as the most-watched shows available.
- numpad0 5y ago
  People prefers to watch videos of normal people doing normal people things over everything else? I can’t laugh at my straw man either but that is horrifying.
- gowld 5y ago
  When a show has 10 long seasons, it's going to have more watch time than each of 10 single/mini series.

lordnacho 5y ago

Couldn't it just be that media from those times were less fragmented, and everyone who watches modern stuff just happens to watch different things?

omegalulw 5y ago

Pretty much. I can't remember the last time I opened Netflix and didn't struggle to find something to watch. That said, I think more and more people are realizing this so I'm hopeful things would improve. For example, one of the most underrated streaming services IMO is HBO Max - they don't have a lot of content but the quality of of what they have is pretty good.

mattmcknight 5y ago

I think we're in a subscription bubble. I don't consume enough content per month to make most of these subscriptions worthwhile- only YT Premium and Spotify to skip the ads. Yet when there is something I want to watch, I have to subscribe to a massive bundle of garbage for month to see it.

gowld 5y ago
Are you also upset that stores sell products you don't want, forcing you to pay rent for them? It doesn't matter what you don't watch, garbage or not.
- mattmcknight 5y ago
  Well, I suppose I don't go to stores that require subscriptions. The better analogy is the only way to buy a bagel for breakfast is to order a $30 all you can eat buffet every day forever. I just don't value bagels at $30. I want a la carte. I don't think a 30-60 minute show is worth $14.99. Other things are only available on $50+/month live TV services. So, I end up waiting until there are a few things I want to watch on a subscription service, then buying or trialing it for a month, and cancelling. It's just annoying.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

cletus 5y ago

The part I agree with is many companies are throwing huge amounts of money at original content creation and some of these will get burned. The poster child for this (IMHO) is Netflix who has spent so much on this that they've had to raise prices to untenable levels, which is hurting retention in the US and Canada in particular. I disagree with your claim about people are primarily watching old content (source?). Just looking at one list for Netflix [1], it's all fairly recent shows with the notable exception of Seinfeld. It's actually astounding what a money-making machine Seinfeld is 25 years after being on the air. Even before streaming, Seinfeld reruns would get >1m viewers on cable. It's crazy. I actually believe the last 20 years have been (and seemingly continue to be) the golden age of television. Technology finally made practical heavily serialized content and TV enables types of content not possible in movies. Movies are just limited to ~3 hours in length (director's cuts of Dances with Wolves notwithstanding). Movies are for short stories. TV is for books. This is a structural change in the industry and despite the Big Brother-esque mediocrity we've also seen over this period, it's undeniable that we've seen some of the greatest entertainment ever to grace a screen in the last 20 years. [1]: https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/tv-ratings-seinfeld-you-squid-game-my-name-1235115452/ https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/tv-ratings-seinfeld-you-squ...

nostromo 5y ago
> I disagree with your claim about people are primarily watching old content (source?). I realize this is just one data point, but the most-streamed show in 2020 was The Office, close to a decade after its last episode was released. https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/the-office-most-streamed-tv-show-2020-nielsen-1234883822/ https://variety.com/2021/digital/news/the-office-most-stream...
- pixl97 5y ago
  Could we be conflating causality here? Could it be that older shows that existed before networks were fractured up by separate streaming services are going to be the most watched now because they were also the most watched then. The last shared societal interactions. Maybe these shows were not particularly good, but there was a lack of options individualized so strongly.

sfifs 5y ago

Are you sure you are not judging by the standards of mass market broadcast production vs what these companies seem to be doing in terms of producing content for smaller, more targeted but still profitable target audiences? In the broadcast world, the relevant "inventory" (ie. TV Network Channel time slot) is very limited and precious. Therefore only content with production quality that appeals to a large enough audience to attract advertisers gets greenlit. In the past year, my family has binge watched "blown away" a glass blowing competition, 3 series about weird/exotic vacation rentals/hotels, 2 children's mysteries serises, standup comedy by specific comediens, a series about music production and composition styles of different artists and a series about design. All of these above ran multiple seasons, so clearly there's sufficient profitable viewership for multiple seasons to be made even though it's very likely NONE of them would make mainstream broadcast TV. We didn't see any of the "big/popular" shows. The only reason we have cable TV connection at all now is when my parents or in-laws visit, they get very bored without their.regular TV channels.

sfifs 5y ago

Are you sure you are not judging by the standards of mass market ad supported broadcast production vs what these companies seem to be doing in terms of producing content for long tail of smaller but still profitable subscription interest based target audiences? In the broadcast world, the relevant "inventory" (ie. TV Network Channel time slot) is very limited. Therefore only content with production quality that appeals to a large enough audience to attract advertisers gets greenlit. There's no such limitations in subscription supposed the digital content delivery (aka OTT) economic model. You only have to get sufficient audience to at least recoup your production costs and the minimal per stream delivery costs. In the past year, my family has binge watched "blown away" a glass blowing competition, 3 series about weird/exotic vacation rentals/hotels, 2 children's mysteries serises, standup comedy by specific comediens, a series about music production and composition styles of different artists and a series about design. All of these above ran multiple seasons, so clearly there's sufficient profitable viewership for multiple seasons to be made even though it's very likely NONE of them would make mainstream broadcast TV. We didn't see any of the "big/popular" shows which do make it to broadcast TV. I'm very sure there are enough households like mine that drives multiple seasons of the above "niche" shows. The only reason we have cable / broadcast TV connection at all now is when my parents or in-laws visit, they get very bored without their regular TV channels.

autokad 5y ago
this 'long tail' discussion has been a huge fallacy. if you look at the type of content netflix is trying to produce, its really not that diverse. its mostly very left leaning dystopian. They also operate very much like a broadcast TV station in the way they cancel shows very fast despite not having limits of airtime slots. while you site a few cherry picked series that lasted a few years, netflix is really quick to cancel shows. Honestly the original content Netflix spits out has less diversity than broad cast tv, and they have about as much patience to keep those shows 'on the air'.
- notafraudster 5y ago
  Netflix is not especially quick to cancel shows. The modal broadcast show got 1 season pretty consistently during the entire broadcast era. Most years the first cancelled broadcast show occurs after 1-2 episodes have aired. Netflix does tend to leave shows with fewer episodes than traditional broadcast runs because the new norm is 8-10 episodes per season rather than 22-26; this has been reflected in significantly higher per-episode budgets, a much broader and deeper talent pool on screen, and a move towards serialized storytelling that started with HBO. Netflix actually has extremely diverse programming on all levels. By genre, by budget, by language, by subject matter, by age rating, by quality, Netflix covers absolutely every quadrant. What is "left leaning dystopian"? Never mind, I don't want to know. It's embarrassing.

schleck8 5y ago

There is a great video on why many of the streaming providers have started airing "trash tv"/reality tv shows. It's in German, but you can auto translate subtitles on PC https://youtube.com/watch?v=nD5YLLPpWMg https://youtube.com/watch?v=nD5YLLPpWMg

unexpected 5y ago

I would like to offer a more nuanced spin - there's a large quantity of great, original content out there, but the era of the sitcom is over. We're in peak prestige tv - every new show requires you to have watched the whole season and requires a big time commitment and emotional investment (game of thrones being the quintessential example of this). ...yet the last few years have been quite hard! All of us are navigating a COVID environment where working remotely, educating kids, and entertaining ourselves have all blended together. There's a bifurcation of eyeballs - I simply don't have the time or emotional bandwidth to watch "prestige tv", but it's very easy for me to put on friends, or the office, or seinfeld, and carry on with my day!

didip 5y ago

Is this statement true? I don't watch a lot of entertainment myself, but even I have heard of The Squid Game drama on Netflix. And that counts as a new content.

rg111 5y ago

They have algorithmized TV production. They collect shit-ton of data on everything of the users, and track eyeballs (not literally, I think)- what are people watching, what are people binging, etc. They are forming clusters of users based on demographic, purchase power, etc, and mapping those clusters to features in content. And if a certain overall kind or discreet feature is worth the amount of eyeball it is attracting, a designed, soulless series gets created with those features, or two. This is what modern, app-TV feels to me. No art, no quality. Just content tailor-made and factory produced to match the taste of favored demographics with purchase power. And they not only want to match. They want to maximize. They want the maximum amount of people to watch something, not small amounts of people finding their niche. I cannot tolerate this kind of content, and I am unsubscribed to all services except Amazon Prime for free delivery of goods. That doesn't mean there aren't some good TV. I would consider Bosch to be quality TV, and Ozark is okay-ish. The Expanse, too. But I am done with conveyor-belt driven app-TV. I will just binge The Wire when I am sick. Thank you.

some-guy 5y ago
I think this is a bit of an overgeneralization. There is _plenty_ of media (movies, television, music) that came out over the years that was absolutely terrible. Networks at the time also were very data-driven with their decisions, they just didn't have as much data to work with.
Rd6n6 5y ago
Pop music, Hollywood movies, and book publishing have done this for years. There is just more data than before. It is about as soulless as it ever was, but maybe less so: there have been some great shows in the last decade (not as many great movies though)
Bombthecat 5y ago
Games are going the same route.. It feels rare that you get a unique game with complex mechanics.. All of them are dumped down to make them easier..
smugglerFlynn 5y ago
“Tracking eyeballs, what a joke!” Reed Hastings was furious after that call ended. Conversation still ringed in his ears. Another journalist implying how bad tech giants exploit the data, “spy” (gasp!) on customers. He opened the cabinet, took a whiskey bottle, and poured single malt into a heavy glass. His office was quiet again, anger subsided, and he was finally able to relax. Today’s call was fourth this week, maybe fifth. For the past couple of month all the media was hunting for were stories on ad targeting, behavior tracking, privacy breach… Everyone and their dog implied that there is full-on spying on every single customer to drive the views. People who had no idea how this worked, who invested zero hours into building something meaningful, while spending all their life magnifying the rage through social media. “I wonder if there is a trendy hashtag already, something like #trackingate?” — Mr. Reed caught himself spiraling again into the unpleasant memories of his latest conversations with the press. Poor fellas haven’t been able to scratch even the surface of how it all works. “You don’t need to track every eyeball. Just a select few of them. Carefully selected.” Mr. Reed smirked, eyed a precious glass jar filled with white jelly marbles, and closed the cabinet door.

tyingq 5y ago

I agree. There's a ton of stuff where either the acting or writing makes it unwatchable. Or potentially good foreign (to me) language content where the quality of the dubbing and/or english captions make it useless to me. There is clearly a quantity > quality thing going on. It also hides some of the good stuff because you can't typically filter, sort, or search based on things like reviews.

pictur 5y ago

now there are TV shows and movies that only have message concerns. quality content no longer really exists. netflix has lowered the quality bar a lot

varelse 5y ago

It's a golden age to me and I don't know how long it will last. But I'm all there for the spin-off shows that would have once been fanfic on Usenet and little more. Have you seen Peacemaker? It's utterly amazing and I'm happy to wade through oceans of crap to get to gems like this. I am genuinely beginning to wonder if James Gunn made The Suicide Squad sequel so he could make a TV series out of Peacemaker.

WheatM 5y ago

pille 5y ago

> It’s telling to me that the most-watched shows on these networks are often sitcoms from the 90s and 00s, despite a mountain of newer content going unnoticed. There was also huge glut of forgettable content back then. Most 90s and 00s shows were low quality crap too. No one is watching those now. The handful of shows that survived and made it onto today’s streaming services are the greatest of that era.

Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
Nobody remembers Capital Critters, Fish Police, or Family Dog.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

This keeps happening in every space. A barrier to entry is lowered, everybody cheers, and pretty soon we are awash in absolute garbage. Less is more.

Rd6n6 5y ago

Great content is x% of all content. If you want more great shows, the industry will need to make a ton of shows and most won’t be great. We’ve had a decade of really amazing tv, it’s no wonder there is some mediocre work in there too. We also just spent 2 years in semi-lockdown, it’s hard to make movies and tv in that situation, there were a lot of delayed great projects

GenerocUsername 5y ago
That's making some unfounded assumptions. Good content is not a fixed % of total. So if you increase total you might just water down the % of good content... Or worse, if practices focus on quantity entirely you may end up with 0% good content. Even shows I used to enjoy seem to have taken a steep decline since about 2018.
- Rd6n6 5y ago
  It’s not one person on a throne making decisions for the entire industry. Many different organizations are all making tv shows and movies, so you tend to get a mix even if the large companies focus on bad content The things in decline imho are due to studios taking their best people off the project to kick start new ones
  - GenerocUsername 5y ago
    True, but industries tend to follow each-others trends for better or worse at least in short-term cycles. Its entirely possible for a whole industry to lean towards a bad solution for 5 years before course correcting. The most recent has been the proliferation of Streaming services and original content to try and own unique content per-platform. Netflix and HBO did well from 2014-2017, and everyone else hopped onto the bandwagon to mediocre effect since
FalconSensei 5y ago
> We’ve had a decade of really amazing tv, it’s no wonder there is some mediocre work in there too. Agree. We remember the good shows from the previous decades, but there was a lot of thrash

watwut 5y ago

I can't help ... series are better then they ever been. And while I hate superheroes comic book movie genre with passion, many people love that.

mc32 5y ago

I want vintage 80s, 90s and early 2000s TV. TV that still had some manners, modesty and didn’t say everything out loud. It wasn’t all loud, brash and uncouth.

etempleton 5y ago

The natural course will be the consolidation of streaming platforms. There is room for 3-4 big players and then various specialty niche players. Right now you have about 10 going for a very general audience and there is no way that that will work.

ienfoiwekd 5y ago

kumarvvr 5y ago

Perhaps in a subscription model, where some good content is spread amongst many providers (with almost all providers having exclusive ones), mediocrity will be the ultimate stable point. As the subscription money keeps flowing, there is an incentive to publish a minimum number of new series / shows / what not, and there are only so many good ideas at any given time. Add to that, there is no clear profit/loss equation for online streaming (even though you have viewership numbers, there is no definite link between retention and viewership numbers for a given content. As an example, I just saw Eternals on Disney+, just because of the marketing and branding, but felt bored of it. Clearly I am adding to the viewership, but not to the pull factor that keeps me on the provider)