261–270 of 424 posts
I brought popcorn, who are we rooting for?
The best outcome would be for all of the bids to fail, all the streaming services would bleed money due to people sick of the siloing, and for there to be multiple streaming services competing on experience because they all have access to the same catalog. The second best outcome would be the cartoon villain Larry not getting what he wants.
Meet the new boss…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly don't think cbs paramount would be any better, if anything, wb content would be further paywalled and tiered off
Which is why the model that would actually be good for consumers and the model that absolutely no content producer wants which is splitting content creation from distribution isn't going to happen. Let a bunch of companies compete over being the best streaming platform and then let those companies all compete for licensing deals for content. I think a big copyright holders in a strange way actually don't want a repea…
Sony does that now
I mean, the way things are going, it's unlikely in both the cases. But I would get more time to collect everything I want by then with Paramount. Also, under Paramount WB Archive would be in the spotlight far more than under Netflix.
I dont know the political angle. But if the DVDs and Blurays still keeping rolling under Paramount for WB Archives, I want Paramount to get it. It's super unlikely that Netflix will let the WB Archive live with physical media. I mean, the way things are going, it's unlikely in both the cases. But I would get more time to collect everything I want by then with Paramount. Also, under Paramount WB Archive would be in th…
I don’t think they want the film division but the vast number of cable channels that Discovery owns. Giving them a rather large control of the American mind share.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't that imply that Netflix was planning to do the same (for their party)? Or are you saying Netflix is innocent here
No, it doesn't imply that. Saying party X plans to do something implies nothing about what party Y plans to do.
but that's not the whole thing being said.
Party X may have been planning on something, but party Y threw a wrench in the middle, causing party X to have to make some response. By implication, party X believes party Y to be throwing a wrench, hence, party X must act. Therefore, party Y also must be planning something that counteracts party X's desires. If it weren't so, party X would not act (as that costs money).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are given a choice on what they eat as well and many also eat junk food, despite it largely being agreed upon that junk food is not good for you. Both cheap entertainment and junk food cede your autonomy to large corporations whose main goal is to make you addicted to their product and extract the maximal amount of money. This is purely subjective, but I believe that the path to personal fulfillment does not i…
As someone who has begun to fall into the "Machine Zone"[1] with gaming and stream watching (and trying to get back out) I'm feeling many of the things you're describing. I struggle with defining the line for myself because a lot of my own hobbies and goals are creative - making music, building a video game, performing improv comedy. And those things are naturally in want of an audience. Does it mean that I'm part of…
If you haven’t already I would check out the book “Hooked” as well to learn more about the addictive patterns that are put out there to trap you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Has WB or Netflix ever been critical of the government?
HBO Max still airs “Last Week with John Oliver”. Even Paramount still has “South Park” and the creators are basically daring Paramount to cancel them.
But its possible to starve them of talent, funding and eventually let them wither into obscurity, by not promoting nor giving it the opportunity to flourish.
But there's still youtube even if these incumbent media outlets are compromised - independents can still create and distribute there. This is very different from the airwaves or cable.
Reading the comments -- it is amazing how quick it takes to from allegedly a democracy governed by a rule of law to a corrupt oligarchy. I personally understand the reasons, but it's a bit "funny" given all the grand-standing before about the founding fathers, checks and balances etc.
The mercenary values become quite plain sometimes. They have told us who they are, these people who are now brazenly about money and power. It's up to us not to forget, and to vote accordingly, and to call BS when we see it. Otherwise we lose our democracy.
too many people are too comfortable - both with not voting, but also to vote blindly.
> we lose our democracy.
it's half-way into the grave imho.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are given a choice on what they eat as well and many also eat junk food, despite it largely being agreed upon that junk food is not good for you. Both cheap entertainment and junk food cede your autonomy to large corporations whose main goal is to make you addicted to their product and extract the maximal amount of money. This is purely subjective, but I believe that the path to personal fulfillment does not i…
I disagree with your premise that your non-preferred form of entertainment is equivalent to eating junk food. I’m sorry that you were addicted to playing video games (truly) but I think your past experience is preventing you from thinking rationally about this. People can find fulfillment from many different things, including the ones that you personally don’t find fulfilling. One's fulfillment is also irrelevant wit…
I typed out my ideas as they came to me, so I may have missed the mark. The core idea I want to portray is that you can choose not to play the game of for profit corporations. You can walk away.