█
▓
▒
░
▓
▒
░
Really interesting article in the Times today entitled The Streaming Era Has Finally Arrived. Everything Is About to Change. Basically, it walks through the fact that Disney marked the acceptance of Streaming Media by the giant corporations. Yes, Netflix has been disrupting for awhile but Disney, NBC's Peacock, Apple's TV Plus and Quibi all wave the flag that established media is willing to take the risks associated with streaming destinations. The most fascinating aspects of the article have to do with Consumers and the Behind-the-Scenes deals that are changing due to this shift in thinking.
In terms of Consumers - you and me - there's actually a bit of discomfort around everything being so fragmented. Years ago there was a lot of industry talk about "The Great Unbundling" - no longer would you have to pay a cable company for 100 channels when you only wanted two, you could now directly subscribe to exactly what you want. While this has proven true, it also means a bit of inconvenience - you can't just quickly flip to another "channel" to see what you want, you have to search through your Apps to find it. Hopefully better search and voice companions can help alleviate on this front but I suspect we're going to start seeing more and more of "The Great Rebundling" - ala Amazon Channels - where everything is just packed in together.
The portion of the article that talks about the nitty gritty of film and TV making is especially interesting. I'd never considered the fact that with shorter seasons (10 episodes instead of 21), writers and directors and crews have to move around more often. It's obvious once you say it aloud but it had never struck me. It also means those folks are having more context switching; going from show to show instead of world building on one thing for a longer period of time. It's an interesting balance as I feel like shorter seasons have led to higher quality; tho I certainly understand how it could be hard to maintain.
There's also some nice insights on the financial deals being made with the acceptance of streaming - more upfront payments with no backend share rather than the historical inverse. This may allow for "distribution flexibility" as the article cites but it also means a slow burner like - like Lodge 49 - probably won't reap any rewards if people discover it later in life. Unfortunate.
The article also cites "There are 271 online video services available in the United States.." - this is massively incorrect. There are a whole lot more than that with plenty more being launch every single day. Trust me, I know.
Overall, a good read. Having been immersed in this world for many years now, it's interesting to see it shift into the mainstream. Things aren't that different overall but it's certainly going to put a strain on people's wallets when it comes down to figuring out what to subscribe to.
In terms of Consumers - you and me - there's actually a bit of discomfort around everything being so fragmented. Years ago there was a lot of industry talk about "The Great Unbundling" - no longer would you have to pay a cable company for 100 channels when you only wanted two, you could now directly subscribe to exactly what you want. While this has proven true, it also means a bit of inconvenience - you can't just quickly flip to another "channel" to see what you want, you have to search through your Apps to find it. Hopefully better search and voice companions can help alleviate on this front but I suspect we're going to start seeing more and more of "The Great Rebundling" - ala Amazon Channels - where everything is just packed in together.
The portion of the article that talks about the nitty gritty of film and TV making is especially interesting. I'd never considered the fact that with shorter seasons (10 episodes instead of 21), writers and directors and crews have to move around more often. It's obvious once you say it aloud but it had never struck me. It also means those folks are having more context switching; going from show to show instead of world building on one thing for a longer period of time. It's an interesting balance as I feel like shorter seasons have led to higher quality; tho I certainly understand how it could be hard to maintain.
There's also some nice insights on the financial deals being made with the acceptance of streaming - more upfront payments with no backend share rather than the historical inverse. This may allow for "distribution flexibility" as the article cites but it also means a slow burner like - like Lodge 49 - probably won't reap any rewards if people discover it later in life. Unfortunate.
The article also cites "There are 271 online video services available in the United States.." - this is massively incorrect. There are a whole lot more than that with plenty more being launch every single day. Trust me, I know.
Overall, a good read. Having been immersed in this world for many years now, it's interesting to see it shift into the mainstream. Things aren't that different overall but it's certainly going to put a strain on people's wallets when it comes down to figuring out what to subscribe to.
Comments