Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Clickbaitification of Netflix

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 313 posts

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#21

Post by emkoemko »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #11
matheusmoreira wrote: post #3

Would Netflix have to do this if it actually had content people wanted to watch? It's just sad watching it double down on this pulp because every other copyright holder took their ball and went home.

Nobody was ever going to make all TV and movie content available for $9 a month to everyone. The idea that Netflix could last the way it used to be was ridiculous.

i bet eventually they will be doing cross platform streaming rights deals, only one i can think off that might never do that is Disney. Your content can only be consumed so much on a closed platform before it losses its profitability and then you just sell its rights to bring extra profits.

otherwise i can't see how this will be sustainable this is going to be more expensive then tv channels were . Yes the content have much better production value but who will be able to afford so many stream services other then just people hopping after consuming what they wanted to watch.

maybe there will be a pay to watch service that has everything and you just pay for the right to watch the specific content.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#22

Post by jazzyjackson »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #15
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright infringement makes everything ever created available for $0 a month. If streaming services can't do the same, they suck and are failing to compete.

The position that "theft is free, so anything not given away fails to compete" is not a realistic position to argue with.

Too bad theft is an option then, because the paid services must compete with it. There are more dimensions than price.

(Also infringement isn't theft but if you haven't been convinced by now...)

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#23

Post by throwawaysea »

Personally although I do see “sexy” titles on Netflix strewn about, it isn’t a big distraction or problem the way this article makes it out to be. The real problem is that most of the content is B tier straight to video content. I’m drowning in choices and I don’t mean within Netflix but elsewhere - I’m simply not compelled to spend my valuable minutes there and these days I rarely load their app. I’ll probably end up cancelling it, as my household has increasingly returned to analog entertainment (books, conversations) over the pandemic, with other viewing time going to content we deliberately seek out rather than content we casually surf. At one point I was hopeful Netflix could produce first party content that was great. But each promising attempt (for example House of Cards, Marco Polo, or Altered Carbon) fizzles and gets cancelled after a season or two. Today I can’t see myself investing my time into their new content because I don’t want to be disappointed by their eventual cancellation, and I am left wondering who their service is for.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#24

Post by keiferski »

personjerry wrote: post #7

I worked at Facebook for some time, and did a bunch of data work. We had this culture of building something, looking at the results between the experiment groups, and then choosing the statistically more successful one -- i.e. a newsfeed algorithm that had better engagement. This sounds great at first, and certainly is straightforward if you want a promotion. But behind the scenes some of us had this thought that our…

This is the consequence of lack of vision. What is Netflix's long term goal? Ideally, it would be to fund and broadcast fantastic cinema. Yet, I really don't get the impression that contributing to the art form of film is very high up on the metrics chart.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#26

Post by 2Gkashmiri »

personjerry wrote: post #7

I worked at Facebook for some time, and did a bunch of data work. We had this culture of building something, looking at the results between the experiment groups, and then choosing the statistically more successful one -- i.e. a newsfeed algorithm that had better engagement. This sounds great at first, and certainly is straightforward if you want a promotion. But behind the scenes some of us had this thought that our…

i do not understand snapchat and their business model. they started out as a sexting app that deletes the photos and that is where it remained for a long time. i remember news of how "deleted snapchat photos can be undeleted" tutorials and i tried to investigate for fun but i could not understand the UI back then and the tutorials didnt work so i dropped it. Apparently its pretty big these days in the kids and they have "streaks" as you mention. i hear multiple hundred thousand streaks and other things but to what end?

how is snapchat justifying the storage, bandwidth and processing of data? i mean facebook has ads which they earn, same for twitter but what about snapchat? do they have a sustainable revenue stream because no where i heard snapchat had a paid option.

reddit was user funded for a long time with daily goals and all that so that was not an issue mostly but what snapchat done to address that.

snapchat is all the rage in my city, kids who are now on online classes send snaps because i hear about it. everyone knows how to make that twistface pout or whatever but why? genuinely curious about it

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#27

Post by throwawaysea »

monkeybutton wrote: post #5

After reading the article on my phone and hitting the back button to get back here, I'm instead presented with a screen showing more content and pleading me to stay on the site (Keep on reading!). Talk about the kettle calling the pot black.

I was very confused by what was happening when I encountered that screen. Is there a way to block the overriding of back buttons, particularly on smartphones?

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#28

Post by matheusmoreira »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #15
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright infringement makes everything ever created available for $0 a month. If streaming services can't do the same, they suck and are failing to compete.

The position that "theft is free, so anything not given away fails to compete" is not a realistic position to argue with.

Theft is not free, copying data is. They're the ones making everything worse for everybody because they can't deal with that reality. These streaming services can't even manage to produce a video player with decent controls, we had better software in the 90s.

Also, copyright infringement is not theft. It's copyright infringement and it's only a problem if you accept the notion that copyright is a legitimate system to begin with.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#29

Post by pjc50 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #15
matheusmoreira wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copyright infringement makes everything ever created available for $0 a month. If streaming services can't do the same, they suck and are failing to compete.

The position that "theft is free, so anything not given away fails to compete" is not a realistic position to argue with.

It's the only realistic position. Heck, it's the only reason streaming services can exist; without piracy pressure everything would be pay per view or pay per stream at far higher rates.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#30

Post by dannyr »

YouTube is pretty much like this but it's the creators selecting the thumbnails.

The most common thumbnail I see is a picture of someone looks like they are blown away with their hands on their head and their mouth wide open.

Post reply on HN