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

Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

hollywoodreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 416 posts

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#221

Post by sen »

gniv wrote: post #125

All these discussions are very US-centric. Netflix made more money from outside US than US (4477M vs 3350M) and membership went up in Asia. I agree that the US-made content on Netflix is not as good as it used to be, but the foreign content is quite good. Plus virtually every country except US is used to read subtitles, so shows have a big audience. For example a lot of great shows nowadays come from Korea, and I ass…

We get a lot of Korean Netflix content in Australia and I’ve quite liked it. It’s something different we’d never get through our own TV networks or the mostly-US streaming networks we have access to.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#222

Post by xmprt »

rendall wrote: post #147
spanktheuser wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

There are some good ways to have a political message in your content, and there are terrible ways, especially if it feels "shoe-horned". I'm not GP and am not precisely sure what was meant by pop , but I took it to mean "un-nuanced, insincerely-held". There are people such as yourself who seem eager to label "ugly minded" any questions about the quality of content that promotes A Message even if the Message is simpli…

If pop politics is something considered "insincerely-held" then how can the viewer/audience decide if something is pop politics.

I got into an argument once with a few people a while back about gay rights and they dismissed my points as pop politics but it's hard to argue that you're being sincere when they don't believe you. And there isn't much nuance that you can give to the topic.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#223

Post by Cipater »

switchbak wrote: post #170
dillondoyle wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's telling that the comments calling out people complaining about representation are all greyed out. Sorry. HN has been surprisingly me lately in the viewpoints people are willing to say out loud on a public forum. or at least minimally a few vocal commenters. IDK if it's just feeling empowered not to hide anymore or perhaps progress we've made is creating stronger 'protective' reactions. It's scary though.

If it scares you that people are willing to air their discontent about not liking preachy political messages in their entertainment, I'm not sure what to take from that. Personally I think having a diverse set of views in a public forum was the whole point of having public forums.

>Personally I think having a diverse set of views in a public forum was the whole point of having public forums.

The comment you responded to had a view that was diverse enough for you to comment on it.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#224

Post by imgabe »

Spivak wrote: post #120
boredumb wrote: post #72

A pile of mid tier content that i'd flick through before exiting out after an episode Automatic previews Increasing pop politics seemingly shoe horned into everything I'd turn on Horrible comedians that were akin to ted talks/lectures or made for people who don't actually enjoy stand up comedy. Documentaries that were more ideological than interesting Signing and hiring ex politicians Searching is a chore and recomme…

> Increasing pop politics seemingly shoe horned into everything I'd turn on :( I know this is a tangent but it’s always sad to see representation treated as inherently political. Like this is the first time in my life I’ve ever seen mainstream shows portray wlw relationships. Or shows portray the reality of how common and casual sexual assault is. Or characters that that struggle with depression as more than just an…

The whole idea of representation was that minorities were unable to enjoy media because it didn't contain characters that looked like them or that had life experiences that they could relate to.

So Hollywood bent over backwards to shoehorn in representation everywhere they could and now they find that the majority of people don't like these shows and movies that are all about people who don't look like them and have experiences they can't relate to. This is surprising somehow?

Personally, I never had a problem enjoying a good story regardless of how different the characters are from me, but it seems a lot of people only want to watch things about themselves. The studios also seem to put a lot more emphasis on checking the correct boxes rather than telling a good story.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#225

Post by asdff »

dillondoyle wrote: post #145
solarhoma wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It becomes a problem though when shows are catering to what 1% (or less) of the population looks like or is diagnosed with. This is what people are getting upset with. Representation is fine. But when every new show you turn on has half of the cast as a trans person, a non-binary person, and a whatever else it gets old. It gets old when historical shows and films have distorted facts or figures to, again, fill some q…

Gen-z identifies as 20% queer. Each new generation is more willing/able to live their truth. Wouldn't surprise me if we land somewhere around 25-30%. In large part thanks to representation in shows and movies. The us is rapidly diversifying too in terms of race, yet still even more under represented in media. Glaad says only ~10% queer characters on broadcast, and was a decline from previous study. Specifically compa…

I think people wouldn't have so many issues with this if it didn't feel so patronizing. Sometimes castings feel more like HR checking all the boxes than representing a demographic, and on top of that the marketing will still typically put the white character's head front and center with the token characters on the sides. Los Angeles County where most stuff is filmed and produced is majority latino now. Let's see some movies where the cast is entirely that demographic vs. just one character in the swiss army knife of a cast demography for a change.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#226

Post by [deleted] »

qq66 wrote: post #214
ggm wrote: post #119

I'm just here to say how nice the tcp/ip tuning team is. The content may be a battle zone but their internet technology is focussed on tcp optimisations which make sense. They have amazing instrumentation in the kernel, and they give back to FreeBSD. I don't work for them, I have met them. Nice guys.

Netflix had great streaming tech years before anyone else did. I wonder why they decided that the right move was to compete on content. If they had just set up a platform where any content provider could sell their content (on a monthly or one-off basis) for a small cut like 15%, they might have become the default "TV store."

[deleted]

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#227

Post by fhklp »

dillondoyle wrote: post #164
user3939382 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gen Z isn’t the world. US lgbt pop is 7% according to Wikipedia and that sounds high to me, maybe college kids experimenting with their identity in response to woke culture. I’d guess it’s more like 3-4%

Being gay or trans or non binary or whatever is not contagious. There is no reason for differing %, except the trend is very clear: The older the generation the fewer % are out. It's because people are more supported and more able to come out. More people aren't gay. More people are able to live their truth publicly. * and based on your comment I will leap that you aren't a part of this community. The ugly truth is i…

No post body was provided.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#228

Post by Liquix »

lrem wrote: post #207
avl999 wrote: post #73

One thing I appreciate Netflix for is atleast they are willing to do the bare minimum and give me 720p on Linux. I am also an Amazon Prime subscriber but Amazon is literally forcing me to pirate their shows because they refuse to serve more than 480p on Linux. Was trying to watch Jack Reacher last weekend and the quality was so bad that it was probably 360p, gave up after 3 episodes and ended up torrenting the season…

I begrudgingly accepted this sad future and got a smart tv. The software is as awful as I assumed it will be. But every single platform trusts LG and just streams 4k without me even needing to keep up with updates.

Please vote with your wallet and never purchase a "smart" TV. They're cheaper because the data they harvest from your network (and the always-on microphone) is extremely profitable.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#229

Post by edmundsauto »

lawik wrote: post #200
colechristensen wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I likewise would like to watch a nature documentary once in a while which didn’t feel obligated to mention impending doom at least once every five minutes. If anybody had anything to say about said doom above a fifth grade level, I might watch that too.

I was surprised how hard it was to find nature documentaries that mostly showed nature and animals and not talking heads very concerned about the planet. I'm all aboard but it wasn't what I wanted to show my 1.5 year-old. I wanted her to see cool animals. This was across a few platforms, had to really dig.

I would also like to see a Nike documentary that focuses on the cool shoes and doesn’t mention anything about the child labor used to make them.

Not covering a recant and pertinent fact is also an agenda.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#230

Post by ralusek »

asdff wrote: post #219
qq66 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix had great streaming tech years before anyone else did. I wonder why they decided that the right move was to compete on content. If they had just set up a platform where any content provider could sell their content (on a monthly or one-off basis) for a small cut like 15%, they might have become the default "TV store."

They had to. Consumers don't care about streaming tech; in their eyes all the services are the same levels of fine. They do care about content and once content producers started rolling their own streaming services, cutting Netflix out, and pulling their content, they had to do something to keep their shelves looking stocked.

This isn't true. I and many others really had a hard time with a few. HBO Go, for example, particularly at the beginning, was too shite to use. Had tons of content I wanted, and I never used it. But I agree that once you pass "good enough," there are diminishing returns.
Post reply on HN