this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
169 points (93.8% liked)

Technology

34870 readers
27 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


But with the most recent round of services like Disney Plus, Hulu, Peacock, and Paramount Plus raising their prices — during Hollywood’s ongoing double labor strike, no less — to meet the demand of shareholders for never-ending profits, the time has come for all of us to seriously rethink our relationships with the platforms that have become “the new cable.”

Over the weekend, the Financial Times published a bit of analysis about the current state of streaming that should only come as a surprise to those who haven’t been paying attention to how most of the major Subscription Video On Demand (SVOD) platforms, and many smaller ones like Starz, Shudder, and BritBox, have hiked up their prices in the past year.

After years of burning through mountains of cash to fill their catalogs with original programming, the big SVOD services are now charging their subscribers more than ever because it’s increasingly difficult to draw in new customers — and because the mere perception of growth is no longer enough to keep their shareholders happy.

But much like the practice of memory-holing films and series just for tax write-offs, the push to goose subscription numbers by imposing new restrictions on old customers also highlights how this late stage of the streaming wars is being defined by the prioritization of profit margins over user experience.

Even though the streamers love being seen and celebrated as pop cultural tastemakers, Netflix — like its competition — is a company in the business of making money that owes much of its success to the way consumers have bought into the idea of it being absolutely necessary to keep up with every single new film or show that hits the internet.

To make things even trickier, the success of those streaming hits and others like them was undoubtedly influenced by the degree to which viewers were regularly flocking to social media platforms like Twitter to discuss them — a habit that feels like it’s on the decline in the era of Elon Musk’s X.


I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Funny thing is. If we all did things collectively we'd have a fully functional society.

We obviously don't.

So instead most people say fuck it. I don't care and do what they want. This we get fragmentation until the end of time.

If we all just said nope. Not doing that until you implement this. Someone does it and we all benefit.

Everyone on here always has excuses. It's easier it's this it's that. We therefore get stuck in a feedback loop of nothing changes. Just different variations of the same old thing.

[–] P1r4nha@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not saying I disagree, but isn't that an anti-federalist argument on a federated social media platform?

[–] Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Gonna need to dumb it down for me.

I'm not educated enough in the different types of governing or whatever this is in regards to. Sorry