Leftists immediately seized on the streaming model as a strategy to disconnect their unpopular propaganda from market forces. It’s basically socialism in entertainment; non-woke content drives viewership and subscriptions, and then that money is redistributed to woke creators who produce garbage content that is insulated from any appraisal by the free market. Leftist creators rely on subsidies generated by “productive” content.
Well put. It's like the BBC model in the UK. Force everyone with a TV to pay a "subscription" to support the channel so they don't have to factor in pesky market forces before shoehorning in woke garbage.
Governments funding the arts is similar to this, isn't it? Tax productive people working in productive industries, and use those taxes to pay people to loaf around and work on vanity projects - most of which, these days, will be little more than propaganda.
Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos says that “part “of the reason the streamer has long been tight-lipped about viewership data — even when it came to disclosing numbers to those creating the TV shows and films for the platform — is because of the talent’s own concerns about feeling “pretty trapped” by ratings and box office performance.
“We can’t keep pushing woke bullshit if we’re honest about how dead the viewership is”
“It was part of our promise with creators. At the time we started creating original programming, our creators felt like they were pretty trapped in this kind of overnight ratings world and weekend box office world defining their success and failures,” Sarandos said during a prerecorded analyst interview that went live Wednesday, following Netflix’s report on its third-quarter financial results. “And as we all know, a show might have enormous success down the road and it wasn’t captured in that opening box office. So part of this was the relationship with talent, not just the business aspects of it. And I do think that, over time, people are much more interested in this. We’re on the continuum today of, how much data do we publish? I think we’ve been leading the charge starting everyone down the path of a Top 10, publishing our Top 10 list and our annual wrap up list and everything to give a lot of transparency to the viewing. And I just expect will be more and more transparent.”
Every single outside rerun your company brings in devastates your “original content”, even that shitty show Suits blew up when you picked it up because of how bad your content is.
Elsewhere during the interview with Netflix leadership, Sarandos spoke to the importance of third-party content at Netflix amid the immense popularity that USA Network drama “Suits” saw on the platform over the summer. The co-CEO noted that licensing third party content has always been “part of our strategy,” and he expects more to “pop right into the center of the culture” as titles including HBO’s “Six Feet Under” and “True Blood” come to Netflix.
Holy shit, he admits it at the end… they’re paying their competitors to license their 20 year old shows just to stay competitive.
I can't watch that show because of that actor that plays Louis. He looks like if aliens decided to create a Jew based solely on Hitlers description of them in Mein Kampf. Like a literal human rat. Even has a bald spot just the right size for the tiny hat. He might have good acting ability but I just can't stand looking at him because he's so ugly.
At the time we started creating original programming, our creators felt like they were pretty trapped in this kind of overnight ratings world and weekend box office world defining their success and failures,
But that's how it's supposed to be. If you're just creating art for art's sake with no expectation of external reward, that's one thing, but if you're creating a product, or even a piece of art specifically designed for consumption and influence, it's supposed to live and die by how successful it is with consumers.
I'm the kind of guy who wishes there was more room for experimentation and artistry in the media, but even I know that creating a delusional idea of success and failure that's completely divorced from actual success and failure is what leads to the shambling monstrosity of an industry that we have now, which nobody likes, which is defined by failure after failure, and which, ironically, has no artistic integrity to speak of because the only purpose it serves is to push subversion.
How can you expect to be shielded from the performance/impact of your work and still call yourself a professional? Or even a creator at all? This isn't some auter so confident and in tune with his own work who doesn't care what others think - it's cowards hiding from any solid metric of feedback. Because they know they're hacks, but they want plausible deniability of that knowledge.
“And as we all know, a show might have enormous success down the road and it wasn’t captured in that opening box office.
The garbage you are producing are not going to find success down the road. It is despised for a reason and that reason is because it is subversive garbage. It will not stop being subversive garbage. It's not a diamond in the rough that awaits discovery. It's a stinking turd that nobody sane wants to be around.
People making trash entertainment want everything. They expect to be have the freedom to "create their vision" (no matter how terrible) while still getting rich off streaming.
Pick one: starving artist or successful person creating what the audience wants.
The concept of "cult hit" has ruined entertainment considerably since its acceptance.
Because that's what he is arguing. That his shows that don't perform well immediately might totally become super big hits years down the line so it eventually works out to the same success.
So of course every loser creative type thinks they will create the next non-mainstream accepted masterpiece, aiming for a cult following from the outset (which is why they promote the parasocial fandoms so heavily) to blow up their product. Because they know it has no actual objective value to sell it into success with the normies and the mainstream.
Leftists immediately seized on the streaming model as a strategy to disconnect their unpopular propaganda from market forces. It’s basically socialism in entertainment; non-woke content drives viewership and subscriptions, and then that money is redistributed to woke creators who produce garbage content that is insulated from any appraisal by the free market. Leftist creators rely on subsidies generated by “productive” content.
Well put. It's like the BBC model in the UK. Force everyone with a TV to pay a "subscription" to support the channel so they don't have to factor in pesky market forces before shoehorning in woke garbage.
Governments funding the arts is similar to this, isn't it? Tax productive people working in productive industries, and use those taxes to pay people to loaf around and work on vanity projects - most of which, these days, will be little more than propaganda.
“We can’t keep pushing woke bullshit if we’re honest about how dead the viewership is”
Every single outside rerun your company brings in devastates your “original content”, even that shitty show Suits blew up when you picked it up because of how bad your content is.
Holy shit, he admits it at the end… they’re paying their competitors to license their 20 year old shows just to stay competitive.
I can't watch that show because of that actor that plays Louis. He looks like if aliens decided to create a Jew based solely on Hitlers description of them in Mein Kampf. Like a literal human rat. Even has a bald spot just the right size for the tiny hat. He might have good acting ability but I just can't stand looking at him because he's so ugly.
But that's how it's supposed to be. If you're just creating art for art's sake with no expectation of external reward, that's one thing, but if you're creating a product, or even a piece of art specifically designed for consumption and influence, it's supposed to live and die by how successful it is with consumers.
I'm the kind of guy who wishes there was more room for experimentation and artistry in the media, but even I know that creating a delusional idea of success and failure that's completely divorced from actual success and failure is what leads to the shambling monstrosity of an industry that we have now, which nobody likes, which is defined by failure after failure, and which, ironically, has no artistic integrity to speak of because the only purpose it serves is to push subversion.
How can you expect to be shielded from the performance/impact of your work and still call yourself a professional? Or even a creator at all? This isn't some auter so confident and in tune with his own work who doesn't care what others think - it's cowards hiding from any solid metric of feedback. Because they know they're hacks, but they want plausible deniability of that knowledge.
The garbage you are producing are not going to find success down the road. It is despised for a reason and that reason is because it is subversive garbage. It will not stop being subversive garbage. It's not a diamond in the rough that awaits discovery. It's a stinking turd that nobody sane wants to be around.
Artists know that they will not be millionaires.
People making trash entertainment want everything. They expect to be have the freedom to "create their vision" (no matter how terrible) while still getting rich off streaming.
Pick one: starving artist or successful person creating what the audience wants.
THEY SHOULD! THEIR INCOME FUCKING DEPENDS ON IT!
Laughs in ESG funding
Ahahaha
Protected feelings are not a human right
“What are you doing watching television on Christmas Eve?”
“They’re paying your salary, you ass!”
“Around here folks call me ‘Mr. Cross!’”
It's called "accountability". Something everyone on the left despises.
Honestly the artsy types are the biggest bunch of brats. Imagine any other profession describing themselves being 'trapped' by expecting results.
“Nobody is watching our woke bullshit.”
Because RACISM
OGH EGH OGH EGH OGH!! OGH EGH OGH EGH OGH EGH OGH!!!
The concept of "cult hit" has ruined entertainment considerably since its acceptance.
Because that's what he is arguing. That his shows that don't perform well immediately might totally become super big hits years down the line so it eventually works out to the same success.
So of course every loser creative type thinks they will create the next non-mainstream accepted masterpiece, aiming for a cult following from the outset (which is why they promote the parasocial fandoms so heavily) to blow up their product. Because they know it has no actual objective value to sell it into success with the normies and the mainstream.