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

101–110 of 313 posts

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#101

Post by robbedpeter »

Ozzie_osman wrote: post #18
robbedpeter wrote: post #2

Movie posters have used salacious and sensational words and imagery for as long as they've existed. If anything, Netflix titles have been slowly working toward parity to that standard, as opposed to devolving to actual clickbait.

I see your point, but movie posters didn't live in your home and didn't have the power of mass personalization. An analogy might be junk food. Sure, it's advertised in all sorts of tempting ways in supermarkets, but imagine if your refrigerator suddenly gained the ability to show, prepare, and serve you customized/personalized junk food whenever you opened it.

Movie posters were ubiquitous in homes, a favorite of teenagers, often the racier the better.

I see your point, but I don't see a problem with Netflix content using sensationalism to drive clicks. In fact, it's probably one of the vanishingly few legitimate uses of that type of visual manipulation. They pull visually stimulating stills from the content itself, combined with text that gives you a quick indication of what's in store. I take issue with low effort or misleading titles, but it's a constrained medium in a commercial context. Not a lot of ways to vary the interface.

The article just seems like a silly take, to me.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#102

Post by yarcob »

This is why I quit my Netflix subscription.

The algorithm seems to have picked up the fact that I like watching SciFi and Zombie movies, so my Netflix homepage was this dark place filled with Sci Fi and Zombie movies.

One problem with this is that Netflix only has a handful of good SciFi and Zombie movies, and I've seen them all. So the homepage was filled with movies I've seen already, or the dime-a-dozen copycat movies that just rehash some ideas from popular movies in a slightly different way.

The much bigger problem is that even though I like watching Zombie movies, I actually enjoy lots of different movies. But somehow the Netflix algorithm only ever shows me this one genre.

So I cancelled my Netflix subscription, and went back to occasionally renting a film on iTunes or Amazon. I watch less now, but I end up watching more diverse and more interesting films.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#103

Post by Gunax »

ricardobeat wrote: post #94
Gunax wrote: post #40

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 sug…

Take the Big Lebowski thumbnail on his screenshot. While that scene is in the movie, it’s not at all central to the plot. It’s not that remarkable or even show the main character. There is no shooting. But a man aggressively pointing a gun gets you curious, more than the actual movie poster. It’s clickbait because it is simply picking the image most likely to elicit a reaction - and misrepresenting the nature of the…

Yea so the Lebowski one was the only one I really agree with, and even that's is a stretch. We have to believe that the title is actually mistepresenting the genre... Maybe but it's still liated as a comedy.

The other 2 examples did not make any sense to me at all.

I guess to summarise what I mean: of course people want to make good covers. It seems these accusations depend on us really assuming a very nefarious intent. It just feels like any art couod be clickbait by that. Eg. If they used an image if a bowling ball, I could say 'Well, this movie isnt about bowling!'

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#104

Post by teekert »

I really hate it that when I'm digesting an episode of Rick and Morty I have to scramble for the remote or I'm watching some completely uninteresting series about a family in the 19th century or something. I just want the end screen and sounds to finish and then turn off the telly and go to bed. In stead I feel slapped in the face.

Consistently my watching experience ends with (increasingly large) negative feelings. How can that be a good choice for a company offering watching experiences?

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#105

Post by joe_fishfish »

yarcob wrote: post #102

This is why I quit my Netflix subscription. The algorithm seems to have picked up the fact that I like watching SciFi and Zombie movies, so my Netflix homepage was this dark place filled with Sci Fi and Zombie movies. One problem with this is that Netflix only has a handful of good SciFi and Zombie movies, and I've seen them all. So the homepage was filled with movies I've seen already, or the dime-a-dozen copycat mo…

I'm in the same boat as you. My question is, does this hyperoptimisation of preferences actually work for anyone other than children? I guess Netflix thinks it does.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#106

Post by ggm »

arcturus17 wrote: post #97
ggm wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a million nitpicks in the city, this is just one of them. Netflix and Amazon both have a strong interior belief this smart referral thing is good and who knows: A/B testing may even validate it. I just know that recommendations in books film and music creep me out, maybe it's an analogue of "uncanny valley" but being told "you may also like" kills the mood for me. Dammit, I want to like what I like, not wha…

I thought you were talking about search results and not algorithmic recommendations. I think most recommendations for video services is done through collaborative filtering and similar ML techniques, meaning you get recommended what other profiles similar to you have watched. It may be possible to infer a profile of "people who like the Office (UK) but will not like the Office (US)" but I imagine it may present chall…

> I thought you were talking about search results and not algorithmic recommendations.

I don't personally see a distinction in irritation or creepiness here. They can't know I don't want experimental art streetcar or a modern remake. So I have to be a bit forgiving.

Amazon do something more loathesome: they proffer "in the style of" before hits for the actual author.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#107

Post by m12k »

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…

Humans are instinctively drawn to a lot of things that are really bad for us in significant amounts, because we are designed to fit into an environment where those things are scarce. Sugar, fat, inactivity, "interesting news", outrage. These all steal our attention because that response helped our ancestors survive and pick out these rare but important treats. But in typical human fashion we've now crafted a world that gives us these things all the time, and it's making us sick and miserable as a result.

"But we're just giving the people what they want" some might say. Well, depends on the definition of "want". In a taste test, junk food would win over broccoli for me, hands down - but it's broccoli that ends up on my table more often than not, because it's what makes me happier and healthier in the long run. It wasn't until my thirties before I realized just how sluggish I got after eating junk food. But if Facebook was running our diets, their algorithm would long since have "optimized" its way to junk food for all of us.

Sometimes the worst thing you can do is give people exactly what they ask for. Being healthy in a world like the one we've created requires much, much more restraint and self-discipline than it used to. "The algorithm" is basically the digital incarnation of the little devil on our shoulder whispering that we should treat ourselves.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#108

Post by watwut »

pizza234 wrote: post #45
keiferski wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm of the opposite opinion. They're executing their vision perfectly. Netflix is very aggressively pursuing the bottom line, and they're not doing it differently from a drug dealer. It's not random that the term "Netflix binge" exists. Netflix interface is designed to shove content at the users' face at all costs, and in a very disrespectful way. Here there are some disgusting dark patterns: - it took them a long ti…

Those dont seem like dark patterns to me. They dont make you more hooked up, they make you annoyed and make you leave. These are just bad UI.

If they are designed, they are designed to make you watch less.

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#109

Post by dlvktrsh »

throwawaysea wrote: post #27
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?

I don't know the technicality of it but yes there definitely is

Re: The Clickbaitification of Netflix

#110

Post by barneybooroo »

sgt wrote: post #73
barneybooroo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your outrage that they’re commissioning content that reflects a diversity of experience?

They're shoving the agenda down our throats. A lot of shows become overly politicized, with messages of trans rights, BLM, and other stuff being injected to such a degree that it becomes too much and frankly artificial. I'm not against political and societal messages in TV shows and movies - that has been done for decades, but not if it takes away from the writing and quality of the show. We see that in extreme level…

Is "the agenda" not a bit of a conspiratorial way of looking at it though?

It's been notoriously difficult for creators to find mainstream outlets to tell stories about, to use your examples, trans and black lives, that aren't watered down out of fear of alienating a white, heterosexual audience. It's politicised in so much as defending your right to exist in the public sphere is always political, but is that a problem?

I love that we're starting to see stories that show more perspectives. It doesn't mean every show or movie will be amazing, but when has that ever been true? I don't think it follows that doing this "takes away" from the quality of the writing. A badly written show is a badly written show.

Post reply on HN