2 ms·
> In it, the author (correctly and fairly) skewers Netflix's model of producing huge amounts of low-quality content for an undiscerning audience. I think someb
by RajT88 2y ago
> In it, the author (correctly and fairly) skewers Netflix's model of producing huge amounts of low-quality content for an undiscerning audience.
I think somebody forgot about the before-times, before streaming giants were producing many critically acclaimed TV shows.
I like to spelunk old media, because I get to learn things about culture which I did not appreciate when I was young. I also have a HDHomerun tuner wired up to JellyFin so I still peruse broadcast TV in addition to watching some old broadcast TV shows.
Most TV shows have always been profoundly crappy in the very same way Netflix shows are. We forgot for a hot minute, because the streaming giants were competing with each other for prestige TV shows to drive subscription growth. It feels like to me this is a trend which is getting walked back after some major mergers.
- mathattack 2y agoSpringsteen memorialized this with 57 channels (and nothing on.) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/57_Channels_(And_Nothin%27_On) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/57_Channels_(And_Nothin%27_O...
- RajT88 2y agoHeh: > The title may be a reference to cable television, which carries more channels than terrestrial television. DTV these days is in that ballpark for channels - I think I get about 63. And I'm a good ~40 miles out from a major city. There's probably more if you're closer to the city.