anonym wrote

Netflix used to be the trendsetter when it came to TV shows. Now it's falling behind.

The company keeps canceling its most creative and ambitious original shows before they hit their stride.

The streamer is failing to replicate the success of "Stranger Things" while brewing frustration and disappointment among subscribers who fall in love with niche shows that get axed without warning.

Netflix won't release viewership numbers, but it's clear its strategy is prioritizing short-term quantity over long-term quality.

Netflix is killing its most interesting shows in their infancy and it could be the streaming giant's downfall.

In the seven years that Netflix has produced original content, the world of TV streaming has dramatically changed. Now Netflix is getting left behind in the race it started.

Many of its unique and ambitious shows have been canceled before they could reach their full potential. And Netflix keeps churning out more shows each year, without replicating the breakout success of 2016's "Stranger Things."

Statements from executives have described the cancellations as the result of a cost analysis that tells Netflix a longer-running show won't lead to new subscribers.

Still, with syndicated shows such as "The Office" and "Friends" leaving its platform and a string of disappointing cancellations, including "Glow," Netflix has set itself up for a disaster when it comes to its reputation as a TV-watcher's must-have service. Netflix keeps canceling some of its most interesting and ambitious shows Rian Deet and Hup The Dark Crystal Age of Resistance Netflix Kevin Baker Hup, Deet, and Rian together on "The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance." Kevin Baker/Netflix

In 2020 alone, Netflix has canceled 18 original series. Of those, 14 had only one season.

"The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance" was added to the list of cancellations last month. The first season was an incomplete prequel story to Jim Henson's innovative 1982 film, and it's a shame that the story will go unfinished. While the fantasy series wasn't perfect, the combination of live-action puppetry and CGI elements made it a unique TV show that stood out as a bold and creative endeavor.

Last year, the sci-fi original "The OA" was canceled months after its dramatic and compelling second season aired. The season-two finale set up a dramatic twist with incredible potential for the planned third season. But then Netflix pulled the plug, despite earlier statements from Cindy Holland, its vice president of original programming, about the cocreators' five-season outline. The OA season 2 Brit Marling Netflix Brit Marling was the star and cocreator of "The OA" (along with Zal Batmanglij). Nicola Goode/Netflix

"The OA" had the hallmarks of a great (if divisive) show. It was coproduced by Brad Pitt and had a fantastic score by the Vampire Weekend founding band member Rostam Batmanglij. Zendaya joined the already superb cast in season two, and the scripts told an earnest and unique story.

It's also worth noting how many of the cancellations have been shows with women and people of color prominently behind the scenes or starring. "One Day at a Time," "Tuca and Bertie," "Glow," "I Am Not Okay with This," and "Everything Sucks" are just a few examples of canceled shows with both diverse characters and representation behind the lens. TV shows often need room to breathe before they become truly great — just look at 'Game of Thrones' or 'Schitt's Creek' 13 ned stark Ned Stark in the pilot episode of "Game of Thrones." HBO

"Game of Thrones" wasn't an overnight phenomenon. In its early days, the show was seen as an expensive risk.

The newcomer showrunners David Benioff and D. B. Weiss spent $10 million on their first attempt at a pilot episode, most of which was scrapped. But HBO's copresidents at the time, Richard Plepler and Michael Lombardo, signed off on the series, recognizing its potential.

Pop TV's "Schitt's Creek" also required investment and faith from executives in its early seasons.

—dan levy (@danjlevy) September 21, 2020

"A gentle reminder that TV shows need time and space to lay foundation, to develop, and to grow," Dan Levy, a cocreator and star of "Schitt's Creek," tweeted the morning after the 2020 Emmys, where the series broke records by sweeping all seven comedy awards. "In the wrong hands, this show would have been yanked off the air in Season 1 for 'underperforming.'"

If it had been a Netflix original, "Schitt's Creek" probably wouldn't have made it past season two. Ironically enough, the popularity of "Schitt's Creek" boomed when its first three seasons arrived on Netflix in 2017. Netflix is disregarding the smaller but powerful fandoms it's creating, where people are left crying out for show renewals Glow Debbie and Ruth Netflix season two Netflix also canceled its original comedy/drama series "Glow." Netflix

People falling in love with Netflix shows are getting weary as their favorites get canned time after time. Last summer, "OA" fans protested outside Netflix's Los Angeles headquarters for days, with one woman even going on a hunger strike.

One day after "Glow" was canceled, the show's star Marc Maron said on Instagram that he wanted Netflix to allow its creators to make a movie so they could tell the ending of the story on their own terms. Fans have circulated a petition in hopes of getting Netflix's attention.

And on and on it goes.

There's a hashtag for nearly every canceled Netflix show, with fans replying en masse to every tweet or Instagram post they see on Netflix's verified pages, begging for their beloved shows to come back.

TV lovers in these fandoms can only be burned so many times before they stop investing. Why should a Netflix subscriber spend 10 hours watching a new show if there's a decent chance they'll never see it end? one day at a time The cancellation of "One Day at a Time" caused an uproar. The show was eventually rescued by Pop TV. Adam Rose/Netflix

It doesn't help that Netflix continues to give multimillion-dollar deals to creators — salt in the wound for many fans.

In 2018, the "Hollywood" creator Ryan Murphy landed a reported $300 million contract with Netflix. And Benioff and Weiss reportedly closed a $200 million deal last year; the news of that contract came two days after "The OA" was canceled. Shonda Rhimes and Kenya Barris are also in the six-figure-Netflix-deal club.

The way Netflix accounts for these six-figure deals is complicated, and the average viewer likely isn't sitting down to do research on the company's finances. Still, from the outside it looks as if Netflix is canceling beloved shows for financial reasons while simultaneously shelling out hundreds of millions of dollars for new TV shows that may get only one season. For fans, it's a continuous cycle of heartbreak either way. Netflix won't release viewership numbers, but it's clear its strategy is prioritizing quantity over quality eleven stranger things Millie Bobby Brown stars as Eleven in "Stranger Things." Netflix

One of the most frustrating aspects of Netflix's business model is the lack of transparency when it comes to viewing numbers. We don't know definitively how many people have watched full episodes — let alone full seasons — of any Netflix original.

This leads to a warped understanding of what a "successful" show is for Netflix. When the company cancels a series because of low viewership, what does that mean? How low compared with, say, "Stranger Things"? But also, how is "Stranger Things" performing season over season, and how are originals stacking up against mega-popular network sitcoms like "The Office" and "Friends?"

Without clear answers, we're left to look at the overall strategy. Netflix's running theory seems to be "give subscribers endless options for new shows, and it will keep them paying." The company has released more than 113 new shows in 2020 alone.

But this approach makes Netflix's catalogue much less engaging in the long run.

Even if Netflix isn't losing subscribers en masse, the company is still hurting its reputation. Netflix's problem is its apparent unwillingness to commit long-term to exciting shows with a niche audience Jim Hopper and Joyce Byers David Harbour Winona Ryder in mayor's house Stranger Things 3 Netflix Jim Hopper and Joyce Byers in Netflix's "Stranger Things 3." Netflix

The binge format used to be thrilling. "House of Cards" and "Orange is the New Black" dominated pop-culture conversations as audiences delighted in the ability to marathon a new season in a single weekend (or even a day, for those ambitious watchers). But the novelty of binge-watching has worn off as the volume of new shows and streamers has increased.

Netflix is not only failing to commit to new thrilling, bingeable shows, but losing the syndicated sitcoms that many subscribers would fall back on if nothing new was capturing their attention.

By the end of 2020 in the US, Netflix will have lost "The Office," "Friends," and "Parks and Recreation." With previous tentpole series like "House of Cards" and "Orange is the New Black" concluded, this leaves Netflix with "Stranger Things" (and perhaps "The Witcher") as its only massively popular shows.

With COVID-19 leading to more cancellations, there will surely be a drought of original programming. The next year will be a major test for Netflix's durability in an increasingly competitive market, and it seems as if the company set itself up for failure.


anonym wrote (edited )

It sounds more like you hate white American kids. Doesn't matter what generation they come from, white Americans have always been shit and will always be shit. The world is literally going down in flames / floods because of North American entitlement, privilege and waste. One culture has doomed us all. The boomers were even worse because in the 60s during the Vietnam war they pretended to give a shit, flower power, back to the land, stick it to the man and all that, but the state abolished the draft and by the 80s they were the scummiest generation of all time; the wealth-fetishizing yuppies that kickstarted the global collapse we're in the middle of.


anonym wrote

they aren't forcing anyone

This is what causes all the tensions between anticivs and socialists. Socialists assume anticivs are working to destroy civilization the way socialists work to destroy capitalism via a violent revolution.

But anticivs don't work towards a revolution or think such a thing is in any way attainable. They simply recognize all the factors that have led us here - to this unprecedented mass extinction event we're in the middle of. Not just capitalism / statism - but all manufactured structural systems, starting from the invention of agriculture - which created private property, slavery, policing, wealth / poverty, hunger, greed, etc.


anonym wrote (edited )

I understand that leftists on mainstream social media sites spew the 'primmie garbage, ableist, reactionary, terf, go eat berries' cliches everywhere and it's hard to get out of the habit of the collectivist-shaming games that leftists engage in almost out of habit, but you'll find the political discourse on raddle is a different animal.

That kind of rhetoric gets a lot of push back because it reminds us of the authoritarian circlejerks we came here to escape. It's important to have a developed understanding of the concepts you're critiquing instead of throwing out buzzwords to dismiss the well-thought-out critiques of other users.

There are probably also more anti-civ vegans on this site than anywhere else, so you're barking up the wrong tree by assuming anticivs are carnists. Theyr'e anticivs because they trace the root of hierarchy and misery to civilization instead of merely stopping at capitalism. Which means they spend a lot of time thinking about ways to overcome hierarchical and oppressive systems... so they're more likely to be vegan than your average anarchist as they understand how oppressive agriculture is to both humans and non-humans.


anonym wrote

It was also very petty of you to frame her interaction with you as 'making feminists look bad' when all she was doing was reacting to you demeaning anticivs and talking down to her and making snap judgements about things you seem to be ignorant about.

Hopefully you won't delete this thread so it can be left up as a learning experience.


anonym wrote

Looking at the thread, you said to her:

get off your computer then primmie

You also misgendered her:

jesus fuck man

and then

You should commit primitivist praxis by dying when you're 25

And so then she said to you:

You should prove you're a good feminist by getting yourself killed ASAP so there's one less man to deal with.

So if we break it all down....

You're a man.

She's a woman.

You're attacking primitivists by claiming they're transphobic and stuff.

You're attacking her for being anti-civ. Telling her, a woman, that primitivism removes women's options.

She's trans. Tells you primitive people weren't necessarily transphobic or misogynistic. Gives you a history lesson.

You continue to attack her, and talk over her to say she's just being foolish and doesn't know what she's actually supporting, despite her clearly being very well read on the subject:

you cant reconcile primitivism with the fact that you enjoy and benefit from factors of modern society every day. Deep down you have to know that this is not the answer. Throw out all your condoms and use herbal abortions instead, see how that works out. Im not trying to be the "people who live under capitalism cant criticize capitalism" guy, I know im coming off that way, but seriously this is so dumb.

I think you started it by attacking anti-civs and she's understandably frustrated by the quality of your engagement. Especially because she's giving you real information and you're dismissing it all and instead talking over her.


anonym OP wrote (edited )



They are in the prime of their life, but a growing number of people in Japan have all but disappeared. They're the country's missing workers, people who have been unemployed for protracted periods of time and have given up looking for jobs. They're not even included in unemployment statistics. Japan has 1.03 million missing workers in their 40's and 50's, outnumbering the 720,000 unemployed persons in the same age group. These individuals have a similar profile: many are unmarried, and have to take care of an elderly parent, forcing them to quit regular jobs. This riveting report shows the harsh, hand-to-mouth life these people lead and tries to find solutions for this growing problem.