
Are Netflix and other streaming services creating a content bubble? - brunoluiz
I was discussing with a friend these days about the possibility&#x2F;idea where Netflix, and other streaming services, could have being creating a content bubble. Too much content have being generated in the last years, but not all of them seems to be that relevant. I really wanted to have access to &quot;dropped series per users&quot; statistics, but I guess these services will never give this info.<p>By the way, I am really like the things that are happening because of content streaming: independent projects are being made possible, more original contents (instead of the standard Hollywood script), more dynamicity and so on. The only thing is that bubbles happen and we may be seeing one in front of our eyes.<p>Or maybe I am just overthinking it?<p>https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=O_dRGQCkPqk
======
ouid
Can you elaborate a little?

I can't tell from the way you phrased your question, but a guess as to what
you are getting at is "How much additional value does Netflix gain from adding
a new series?"

The netflix business model is based on a pretty simple formula. Their library
has value. People who have already subscribed to netflix will continue to pay
them for access to that library until they have exhausted it to their
satisfaction, and then they will leave. You can extract a number from your
database of user interactions which more or less quantifies this business
model, and that number, times the number of expected subscribers is how much
your library is worth.

So if for less than $8/month/person they can continue to expand their library
by more than $8/month/person, they will do so. The system is built on
intrinsic value. It may be argued that that value is speculative, but not
exclusively so.

Additionally, they have really good prospecting for potential shows. They know
what their users li. This translates in no small way to evaluating shows
before they have any data on who likes them (it's not a perfect mapping, but
it's still better than what hollywood has). So the generation of new content
is actually more targeted than it was before. Indicating a content model which
is _less_ speculative, which is, again, less bubbly.

So is netflix a bubble? Maybe, but probably not for the reasons that you or
the woman in the video you linked specified.

------
DigitalSea
There was a content bubble before Netflix existed, it was called cable.
Exclusive content only for cable subscribers and choice has been the norm for
years. If anything, Netflix has changed the game.

~~~
datashaman
Also:

    
    
      Google
      The Internet
      Television
      Radio
      Theatre
    

Whoever puts on the show, decides on the content.

~~~
ljk
Don't forget Facebook, where to even view some local community pages they bug
you to make an account.

------
fil_a_del_fee_a
I purposely do not watch "shows" anymore. I feel like it is a major waste of
time. Bingewatching? Really? Only shows like Mr. Robot are worth my time.
There is just too much out there.

During downtime, I watch reruns of The Office (US) and Parks and Rec. Both of
those shows have no music throughout the show, just dialog. I use that time to
mentally relax, but I am not "into" the show, it is more in the background.

~~~
pasbesoin
After the November election, I started rewatching "The West Wing."

Yes, as a "cast" show it is somewhat unrealistic with respect to the
scope/number of people involved in daily West Wing activity, policy,
administration, etc. And it is purposely idealistic. Nonetheless, it
summarizes and states well many principle and practicalities of the Executive,
Administration, the other two branches of government, and provides a not
insignificant education to the general viewer of how all that works and why.

As well, it portrays the idea of good -- but imperfect -- people doing their
best within an imperfect system.

Next up, perhaps: "The Wire." I started it about a year ago, but I was not in
a place at that time, myself, where I could easily/reasonably take its message
as I've heard/read it described.

"Mr. Robot" I've found excellent at describing a contemporary technical but
also a social milieu, and thoughts on same, with which I'm all too familiar.

Recently, I've been revisiting old/classic movies starring Bogart. There is an
essence of the American character in them, perhaps both reflected and thereby
instantiated down the succeeding years and decades. A taciturn but thorough
awareness and expectation of self-reliance.

Viewing such as this seems to inform me, to some degree. Hopefully not in too
distorted nor misleading a fashion.

A lot of contemporary viewing reflects some contemporary thinking and news
items, but comes with a lot of bulk. There's only so much Marvel content I can
take, for example. It becomes distracting, consuming, rather than informing.

What concerns me in good part now, with the direction paid streaming is going,
is that while production values are increasing, with limited libraries and
historical content, it may be trending towards a contemporary consuming as
opposed to informing.

Yes, we're living in Hell's Kitchen. (Well, I feel that way, more than
infrequently.) But I don't really think we are going to punch our way out of
it.

------
anotheryou
Culturally I could use some good bubbleing. So much bad art I can't stand
anymore.

It's the worst for movies, because it's such an investmen: If I don't cancel
watching it after 5 minutes and only give up on it becoming better after 20
minutes (it might get better...) I ususally sit it through anyways.

Bad paintings in a gallery are easier and like image posts on reddit: you can
just give it a glance and scroll/stroll on.

