I am someone who does make an effort to try new things and even I constantly feel the pull to choose something mediocre in a “safe” genre I like (mystery, for example), rather than take a risk on a documentary or drama that is of much higher quality. Instead of challenging myself to learn more about the world or face some new/complex themes that I can reflect on, I’ll choose some derivative slop and get halfway through before bailing.
I mean if this was uniformly true, then Netflix, Apple-TV and HBO etc would also be similarly struggling. It’s not as if Channel 4 puts out challenging content themselves anymore to test that suggestion themselves.
I mean if this was uniformly true, then Netflix, Apple-TV and HBO etc would also be similarly struggling.
Struggling in what way? Netflix, Apple TV and HBO are all losing by a mile to YouTube. Channel 4 also has a much bigger share of the audience than Apple TV or HBO (which isn’t even listed). It’s doing better than most.
But I guess I interpreted this argument as about more than just viewer share in the UK. All of these services use algorithmic recommendation systems to feed more of the same to their audiences, which pushes people towards the same shows and types of shows, which result in trends that influence production. All of this waters down the quality and variety of content and results in an echo chamber that doesn’t reflect the true diversity and creativity of humanity. The criticisms in the article weren’t based on the financial success of Beast Games, but rather its lack of artistic merit and value to society.
Struggling in what way? Netflix, Apple TV and HBO are all losing by a mile to YouTube. Channel 4 also has a much bigger share of the audience than Apple TV or HBO (which isn’t even listed). It’s doing better than most.
Well I’m speaking beyond the UK here. There’s clearly still an appetite for content that isn’t just brief brainrot. I think the wider impact of Youtube is absolutely eating into the audience for Channel 4 and further, terrestrial television because for the most part the content from them in the last decade or so was never that much more high-art than a lot of Youtube in the first place.
I mean if this was uniformly true, then Netflix, Apple-TV and HBO etc would also be similarly struggling. It’s not as if Channel 4 puts out challenging content themselves anymore to test that suggestion themselves.
Struggling in what way? Netflix, Apple TV and HBO are all losing by a mile to YouTube. Channel 4 also has a much bigger share of the audience than Apple TV or HBO (which isn’t even listed). It’s doing better than most.
But I guess I interpreted this argument as about more than just viewer share in the UK. All of these services use algorithmic recommendation systems to feed more of the same to their audiences, which pushes people towards the same shows and types of shows, which result in trends that influence production. All of this waters down the quality and variety of content and results in an echo chamber that doesn’t reflect the true diversity and creativity of humanity. The criticisms in the article weren’t based on the financial success of Beast Games, but rather its lack of artistic merit and value to society.
Well I’m speaking beyond the UK here. There’s clearly still an appetite for content that isn’t just brief brainrot. I think the wider impact of Youtube is absolutely eating into the audience for Channel 4 and further, terrestrial television because for the most part the content from them in the last decade or so was never that much more high-art than a lot of Youtube in the first place.