The Atlantic: Nobody Knows What’s Happening Online Anymore. Why you’ve probably never heard of the most popular Netflix show in the world.::undefined
The Atlantic: Nobody Knows What’s Happening Online Anymore. Why you’ve probably never heard of the most popular Netflix show in the world.::undefined
An insightful thought from a TV critic I read years ago just as streaming was taking off :
There’s no such thing as the best TV show anymore, because there’s so much that’s generally good enough to be a candidate that no one person has watched it all and spent the time to assess it properly.
More broadly, this had happened to western culture with the internet. Previously, with only three tv channels and two major papers, we were all literally on the same page.
I’d go further and say there’s a vertical dimension too in terms of complexity. Society and its various aspects such as technology are now complex enough in total they I don’t think anyone can ever say they understand what’s going on.
One of the worst catalysts of this is when channels started dropping entire seasons of shows at once online to appease le epic binge watching culture. But when everyone watches something new like that at once, there’s no time to actually appreciate anything or discuss the story or build anticipation, it just gets burned through and forgotten within 2 weeks.
It does still allow for catch-up at the end of the run though. I prefer to binge watch, but now I wait a few months for it all to be released and then watch it. Which still doesn’t allow for week to week discussion, but fits my watching patterns better.
Don’t know about you but I have no interest in discussing TV shows with anyone. They’re for my personal enjoyment.
And I absolutely loathe being left on a cliffhanger every week and then having to remember to go back and check every Tuesday or whatever. Most often what happens is that I forget about or lose interest in the show entirely.
Yea for sure.
I think that whole thing of dropping whole seasons and how it’s kinda faded somewhat is an interesting case study of this particular internet culture moment.
Where we think we want more and faster but have lost sight that that’s just a dumb dopamine mentality left unbalanced and unmitigated and that we actually prefer more traditional forms of various things.
At the same time look at novels, when one comes out it doesn’t get released one 10 pages chapter at a time…
Sometimes they do. Dickens and Tolstoy wrote and published serially. So do an awful lot of fanfic writers in the present day.
And then there was the weekly Dracula thing popular on Tumblr a few years ago where they take a non serialized novel (as far as I know) and split it up based on the dates of the correspondence within, going a level further than serialization and delivering the story “real time” as the letters and newspapers were sent/published in the story.
Serial writing used to be a big thing, and even today there’s a reason for the popularity of fanfics and webnovels. Hell, remember Homestuck?
True. But then reading is probably a more self-limiting format than film/tv. At least for most people.
The only reason they’ve gone back to slow drip releases is to milk your engagement and subscription.
Okay and what’s wrong with seeking engagement with whatever they’re making (which every person who makes anything does) and trying to ensure continued subscription, which makes sense given the business? I agree that streaming has generally become ridiculous and diluted, but there’s nothing inherently wrong with wanting people to watch stuff and attempting to ensure a steady revenue stream to do it.
Is watching the whole series not enough? For me it’s removing the option to choose my own pace. People can choose to watch slowly if they want, but you can’t binge if it’s not available. I dont even bother with shows until the whole season is out, so it’s limiting the engagement for me, but that’s my own preference.
A lot of people cancel after watching the series. Releasing over several weeks allows for a continual revenue stream over those weeks. For people who like bingeing, the show is pretty much always up in full at the end of its run.
I use the phrase “societal decoheshion” to describe that. We (whoever that may be) just aren’t all that unified enough in our culture or information sources anymore.
Even just since Reddit became dead to us, my wife (who I met through Reddit) and I went to different platforms, and find ourselves often catching each other up on what our respective corners of the internet are doing.
I think culture just doesn’t respect traditional boundaries anymore. There’s still unity, but it might be with some anonymous individuals from across the globe.
There are tons of young millionaire youtubers who I’ve never heard of. It’s pretty cool actually that there are so many niches to fill.
And plenty of poor low-subscriber channels that are actually really good and could blow up at some point.
I’ve certainly watched some people from before they were big and from memory their content was more or less just as good in the “early” days. Which all up makes for a pile of stuff!
Probably doing stupid things like posting with useful titles and thumbnails without agape mouths…
That seems to be the only kind of trash content that Google is interested in pushing these days.
I can’t remember what channel, but somebody did an experiment with not doing the ridiculous thumbnails and got way fewer views. Which sort of gets at the point of this article: the are huge swaths of people that are clicking on them and that sounds super foreign to a lot of us.
It was Veritaseum. I don’t argue that they’re not effective. I argue that Google has full control of them and Google could easily derate those types of videos to make a better experience for their users. But they do the opposite.
By what mechanism? Manual curation? Do you have any idea how much content is on that platform?
By the same mechanism they use for everything: the algorithm
waves hands magic
Youtube “pushes” whatever gets more views and longer watch time.
If trashy crap is being suggested, that means other people are watching it in increased numbers.
No YouTube pushes what people will click on. They don’t care about the quality of the content, whether the people who watch it actually enjoy it (dislike = “engagement”), or what kind of content people are actually subscribed to because the ads come first.
That’s pretty much what I said.
No it’s not what you said. You specifically mentioned “longer watch time” where clickbait titles and thumbnails result in the opposite, but also plenty of ad views.
Google pushes what you click. Stop watching this kind of content and it’ll probably stop being recommended to you
Not true. I don’t watch it.
And even if I did, it doesn’t mean that I liked it. None of these tech companies’ algorithms seem to account for that little fact, even when I directly express otherwise.
they are not optimizing for your enjoyment, they’'re optimizing for your engagement. they don’t give a fuck if you hate what you’re watching as long as you watch it for longer.
Yes that’s my point.
Don’t know about you but I don’t spend my free time torturing myself.
Well I practically never see these kinds of thumbnails, it’s absolutely influenced by your behaviour whatever it may be.
I do, I learned everything on Facebook. AMA
What is in the vaccine Uncle Jerry?
There IS a best TV show and it’s Six Feet Under and it’s perfect and the ending makes me cri every time and I will FIGHT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES
But srsly it’s a 10/10