Theoretically, having multiple streaming platforms should be good, as it prevents a monopoly. Problem is, they all have monopolies, on specific shows. Choosing the streaming services you want isn’t about choosing the better product, but on which shows you have. All streaming shows should have all shows available. That’s the only way to properly decide which service is worth paying for
Well a well written law would be able to deal with that, but even if my idea had a chance of becoming law, its final text probably would be loopholed to death unfortunately
This is rooted in the early days of cinema, in which theaters were also owned by the studios, and so would only show the stuff the studio produced. Was gonna go into it in my comment, but decided against it to keep it short. Another commenter also mentioned it, and that’s pretty much what I’m proposing. I’m suggesting specifically that they have to show everything in order to also avoid exclusivity deals. Part of that, though, would also be to just not let Netflix produce its own content, but if it didn’t, you’d be able to watch it on amazon anyway
A streaming service’s product is the service of streaming stuff to you. It’s not a studio. Studios make those products. The streaming services give you a platform to watch them. Their product is their website
Theoretically, having multiple streaming platforms should be good, as it prevents a monopoly. Problem is, they all have monopolies, on specific shows. Choosing the streaming services you want isn’t about choosing the better product, but on which shows you have. All streaming shows should have all shows available. That’s the only way to properly decide which service is worth paying for
Back in the days there was a law that movie studios couldn’t also have movie theaters to avoid this specific issue. Now they found the loophole.
I was gonna include that in my original comment, but decided to just end it there for the sake of brevity, but yes, exactly this
I think we should make publisher/distributer combos illegal, that’ll solve the problem real quick.
Want to run a streaming platform? Great, you just can’t be a publisher too
Want to make/publish content? Great, you just can’t run your own streaming platform
It’s how it used to work for the longest time until Comcrap bought TW (Or was it TW buying Comcrap?)
“Cool, Netflix streaming and Natflix publishing are now subsidiaries of Notflix inc. Soon to launch their new 18+ streaming service, Nutflix…”
Well a well written law would be able to deal with that, but even if my idea had a chance of becoming law, its final text probably would be loopholed to death unfortunately
This is rooted in the early days of cinema, in which theaters were also owned by the studios, and so would only show the stuff the studio produced. Was gonna go into it in my comment, but decided against it to keep it short. Another commenter also mentioned it, and that’s pretty much what I’m proposing. I’m suggesting specifically that they have to show everything in order to also avoid exclusivity deals. Part of that, though, would also be to just not let Netflix produce its own content, but if it didn’t, you’d be able to watch it on amazon anyway
But you can argue that part of what makes a streaming service a good product, is the literal product they produce, their content.
A streaming service’s product is the service of streaming stuff to you. It’s not a studio. Studios make those products. The streaming services give you a platform to watch them. Their product is their website