281–290 of 343 posts
How can this work in practice? Can the 30% be from any EU country? I'm Irish, we don't produce that much stuff. If it has to represent 30% of the catalogue, that catalogue is going to have to shrink massively.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or Toronto, aka "NYC on your favorite TV show"
LA is the more frequent stand-in for NYC on TV (e.g., CSI NY, Brooklyn 99, etc.). Humorously enough, Toronto frequently fills in for LA on lower-budget TV productions (e.g., Supergirl, anything on SyFy).
They pushed through GDRP and are now on a regulation high or something...
Hopefully it won't affect us in the UK, but my fear would be that it leads to more walls being put up around content and services for EU Internet users, as has happened with GDPR.
> The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided (individual EU Member States could choose to set the content bar even higher, at 40%) 30% for each country seems really high to me. As usual for regulation, there will likely be high unintended consequences. While in the US and elsewhere…
I'm quite positive what will instead happen is psuedo-companies will prop up in each country, whose specific purpose is to produce a sufficient number of garbage but 'local' film, to license to each streaming provider, to meet the requirement. If netflix has a catalogue of 600, and belgium only has 90 films, then 210 pieces of shit will be produced to fluff it up (and likely explicitly ignored by the recommendation a…
Lots of countries have minimum local content provisions. And in none of those countries have their been companies whose sole job it is to produce garbage content. You know why ? Because (a) nobody wants to work or be involved with garbage, (b) the cost of producing garbage is often the same as producing something amazing, (c) its hard for writers to have the motivation to deliberately write garbage.
Often local content (due to their being less money) are really thoughtful, low budget dramas/thrillers which aren't expensive. And contribute greatly to teaching the world how people live. Case in point: Nordic police dramas. They also can be hugely popular/profitable internationally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no economics without politics, and vice versa. The EU as a single market has great potential. But that needs uniform and standardized access, which is politics. And no, it wouldn't work without the political overlay (or foundations), because member states are already each in a non pure market state, and it would take a very long time for those politically disjoint markets to standarize and uniformize. And the…
As irrelevant as Australia, Japan, Canada, South Korea? I think I could handle that.
Yet they have the fundamentals to be at least at Australian and Canadian levels of prosperity.
Everyone here actively despises the local film industry. We do not need to inflict Dutch television on the world. Thats torture. Good shows should earn their ratings, not be force fed- if your culture is so great France and Germany you wouldn't need these subsidies. Netflix is not a public broadcaster.
The problem with this line of thinking is that it will pretty much never be cost-efficient to make a German language movie with a limited market compared to a English movie. No matter how great it is. It is even worse for smaller countries like Finland or Netherlands. There will NEVER be comparable ratings for a Dutch comedy show vs Modern Family with a global audience. So unless regulated, investments will shift to…
Why should protectionism be embraced for cultural exports when the EU was literally established to eliminate protectionism for other exports?
> The proposals will require that streaming services give over at least 30% of their on-demand catalogues to original productions made in each EU country where a service is provided (individual EU Member States could choose to set the content bar even higher, at 40%) 30% for each country seems really high to me. As usual for regulation, there will likely be high unintended consequences. While in the US and elsewhere…
But there are only two languages with large demographics in the USA: English and Spanish. If the FCC created a regulation that said streaming services must support at least 30% Spanish, I think that would be an improvement, and it would also be easy for the streaming services to hit that goal. Perhaps you could argue that smaller language groups should also be supported. According to the 2010 USA Census, there were 2…
> So the move — which will probably draw loud and hair-raising screams from U.S. commentators — is, nonetheless, A Good Thing. I'm in EU. A Good Thing is letting me watch whatever the fuck I want. It's a real dystopia if the state decides which movies you should or shouldn't watch.
> A Good Thing is letting me watch whatever the fuck I want While I disagree in part with this, it is not forcing you on the chair and autoplaying a cult movie. You still watch what you want.