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

31–40 of 313 posts

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#31

Post by tornato7 »

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.

Netflix REALLY went for quantity over quality with their library. I'm certain that there are some great shows in there, but I have to start ten different series just to find one I like.

On the other end of the spectrum, the Disney+ library is rather small, but I find at least half the shows to be enjoyable, so that's where I turn to first.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#32

Post by tomnipotent »

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…

> The data/engineering/product loops at tech companies favor boosting short-term metrics

I think this hits the nail on the head. Leadership is hard, and executives can be many layers removed from the frontline. It seems that A/B tests and family have proven a really effective vehicle to communicate across leadership levels what has happened, why it happened, and the impact it had on the business. I'm definitely guilty as charged of having participated in this "pyramid scheme".

Teams get a tool to structure work and determine success/fail. Managers get a tool to detail exact impact to leadership on how they're solving business problems. Executives get a tool showing how teams are being deployed on thoughtful projects with an iterative and rigorous scientific approach that helps increase confidence around deploying capital. The board gets some slides during the quarterly meeting and maybe might even see some charts showing growth and less cash burn.

Eventually over longer periods like a year, executives will notice different trends than what the short-term numbers are showing and will have to make real hard decisions about how to steer the ship.

It's a hell of a hamster wheel.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#33

Post by anon9001 »

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 can only fill up so much time with garbage like that before I'm bored.

Don't sell yourself short! You're surrounded by tons of people that never get their fill of content. Just relax and let it happen ;)

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#34

Post by dmitriid »

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.

"Video streaming giant Netflix had a total net income of over 2.76 billion U.S. dollars in 2020, whilst the company's annual revenue reached 25 billion U.S. dollars" [1]

Yes, they can last the way it used to be. Well, they did slightly increase the price because they were forced to spend ridiculous amounts of money on their own content, but they are doing just fine.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272561/netflix-net-incom...

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#35

Post by ggm »

If I search for "streetcar named desire" I want a finder which says "nope, but here's the other work by {Elia Kazan, Tenesee Williams, Marlon Brando, Carl Malden, Jessica Tandy, Kim Hunter}

Oddly, I don't want "here's the abortive experimental 1970s film shot in Russia by a drug crazed student also called "streetcar"

But.. from Netflix's PoV, its equally likely I did want that because they know I watch e.g. Luis Bunel films

So.. how can they know? Answer: they can't. They simply can't get my mood right, all the time. Sometimes, they will do well and guess. Sometimes, they do really badly.

Another take: How many fans of the british "Office" wanted to be told to watch the American "Office" ?

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#36

Post by kryz »

Optimizing the monetization of attention to serve corporate objectives. Short term priorities for short term goals (quarterly earnings).

The incentive structure is functioning properly, it’s just the wrong one to build something enduring and truly great

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#37

Post by krige »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #12
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

At the core it's a matter of convenience.

When there's only one service to pay for or even two or three most people don't have a problem with paying a fee to have access to everything they want to watch.

But when there's fifteen services to pay for, even if they collectively cost less than the above example, many simply give up and turn back to piracy.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#38

Post by HWR_14 »

tornato7 wrote: post #31
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.

Netflix REALLY went for quantity over quality with their library. I'm certain that there are some great shows in there, but I have to start ten different series just to find one I like. On the other end of the spectrum, the Disney+ library is rather small, but I find at least half the shows to be enjoyable, so that's where I turn to first.

Netflix started out with a huge amount of content. I'm sure they're scared that no longer seeming to have everything will hurt their subscriber base. One way to make it look like you still have everything is to have an overwhelming amount of stuff.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#40

Post by Gunax »

I am not sure I understand what clickbait actually is. It seems to be a term a lot of people use, but in many different ways, and often in a 'I know it when I see it' sort of way.

The author claims that basically any sexiness constitutes clickbait, that a hammer is clickbait, and wield is a gun is clickbait. I think only the last of those is plausible. Title images really give very little information, and usually suggest only what genre the film is.

If Netflix is nefarious, why even put genre labels on? Afterall, wouldn't that discourage people from watching films with outside of their genre?

And the best example they can come up with is that a show about norse mythology has as it's cover art... a hammer? As in the object that we associate with Norse mythology? What exactly did you expect? Okay, no hammers--better show a man instead. 'oh why are you putting a man there when it's about mythology?' You can't win.

I get the impression the author just wanted to beat on Netflix and tech in general.

Post reply on HN