Could Netflix (etc.) simply add 10,000 home movies submitted from Europe (or European test patterns) and call it a day? Or will it be based on what people actually watch, which would be much more challenging.
I'll be happy if it results in more diverse widely available programming, and appreciation of different locales, etc. HBO's Sharp Objects with Amy Adams takes place in a rural town in America-- it's one of few times I've seen industrial hog farm, and that shift in perspective is one reason I prefer this backdrop of realism to the usual cheaply produced US major network fodder. MHz World broadcast some great European and Asian prime TV shows. Europe is one of the world's best settings, full of contrasts and dramas. EU getting eaten up by hegemony of non-EU tech companies. I can see why they want to preserve a percentage of their culture.
Easier for Netflix and Amazon who have back-catalogues. Apple's focus on original-content only may face difficulties - especially after Brexit, since the content will have to be from a non-english speaking country after that point.
Not an issue at all.Apple's on demand catalogue is already very diverse. Original content doesn't change that. Apple has back catalogues like all the main streaming services--they are all licensing most of the same content as except for the relatively small percentage of exclusive content, the vast majority of producers/content owners are anxious to get anyone to pay them to stream their content. They can license just about anything they want from any European country as well.
What back-catalogue do they currently have - the service hasn't even launched yet? I'm sure I read here on AI that they were focussing on Apple-original content only - happy to be shown otherwise as I've previously commented that they'll need back catalogue material to build value into the service.
I'll be happy if it results in more diverse widely available programming, and appreciation of different locales, etc. HBO's Sharp Objects with Amy Adams takes place in a rural town in America-- it's one of few times I've seen industrial hog farm, and that shift in perspective is one reason I prefer this backdrop of realism to the usual cheaply produced US major network fodder. MHz World broadcast some great European and Asian prime TV shows. Europe is one of the world's best settings, full of contrasts and dramas. EU getting eaten up by hegemony of non-EU tech companies. I can see why they want to preserve a percentage of their culture.
If you mean studio v on location then I don't understand what that has to do with this article since "Hollywood" films all over the world both on location and in studios.
Useless government intrusion. Stop interfering with tech, losers.
I don't think this can be classified as 'tech' interference. This has to do with production quotas so that creative film and video production is protected and made viable in more than one territory. If all content was produced in California, would that be OK? If everything was produced there because it was less expensive we might all lose out in the long run. Creative diversity is as important in movie and television as it is in music and visual art. Having said that this probably has more to do with protecting local industry than cultural diversity. And most countries other than the US have pretty strict production guidelines and quotas.
Easier for Netflix and Amazon who have back-catalogues. Apple's focus on original-content only may face difficulties - especially after Brexit, since the content will have to be from a non-english speaking country after that point.
Useless government intrusion. Stop interfering with tech, losers.
Im no free market capitalist but in this case I agree. If European stuff is good enough, it will sell. The loss of Britain is a big issue though, as they could easily get the content from the BBC or Channel 4's excellent back catalogue
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
Under the rules, streaming services would be required to fund content produced in Europe, including commissioning its own content, acquiring existing series from regional producers, or by contributing to national film funds. The latter is already occurring in Germany by way of an additional surcharge to the subscription fee, which Netflix failed to stop in court.
Looks like the bold part is an opt out clause for now.
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
I have heard Steve Jobs worked for the gov-t’s office for innovations in mobile technology, glass screen division, if memory serves well. Oh wait, he didnt. Thank god, the govt improved the tech so much since the time of the first computer, so now we can buy laptops that are billions of times faster than the first one. Oh wait, it didnt. Good thing the govt improved production of the chipsets so we can enjoy those performance bumps and power consumption improvements in laptops at quite reasonable prices...oh wait, they did not.
Maybe its because my netflix is set to french but I see a lot of international content on Netflix. What I like about netflix is a lot of shows have a french audio track.
That being said, there asian content offen only have subtitles. They should add audio tracks too.
Dubbed Asian programs are awful. Much more enjoyable with subtitles.
What are you talking about? I grew up watching Kung Fu Movies from an Antenna as a Kid. It was all dubbed with Engish soundtracks. You watch their mouths move for a bit and then hear what they are saying. It was part of the experience. Way back then, there was no Internet. We didn't have Cable, and only got some Broadcast channels with an Antenna and had to use a device that turned the antenna depending on what channel we wanted to watch. I remember one called "The Man with the Golden Arms". I guess when there's a lot of fighting, the dialog isn't as important. But still,...
Under no circumstances should streaming services have the origin of their content dictated to them by a foreign government. This is yet another example of overreaching EU policy and a sample of why the UK is pulling out. My suggestion to steaming services is to cut all content from their service that originates from EU countries effective on the date the regulation takes place. The loss of revenue to EU produces and distributors would be catastrophic, would result in many films and TV shows never being produced as potential revenue from steaming services impacts the ability to raise funds to produce content. The regulation would kill an industry rather than help it, and the tirade directed at the EU regulators would likely have an immediate effect. Just the threat of this would likely kill the legislation. Sure the EU would threaten to block all streaming from American companies, but that would only serve to further inflame resistance to the regulation.
Government at it's Finest - I somewhat understand the EU's position, but they are not going to tell me what I am going to watch. I will pick the best and not watch the rest. Same for news shows.
This is difficult for me to wrap my head around the effects. When government starts telling business what to do, there is a problem coming down the road. Government rarely solves a problem, but usually creates problems instead. "Follow the Money" is what works. Not profitable - don't do it.
If I work all day at a project (for example) and at the end of the project , I break even or make little money, it was not worth my effort. i.e., I do something else next time.
If is is profitable to produce 30% of content in the EU, people will do it. If it is not, they will not do it - and should not do it.
I currently live in a small town with a chicken processing plant - we probably all buy poultry. Some do not buy pork, etc. But it came to light that the Muslims want the industry to say a "Mou-La" over the chickens being processed. I don't have the spelling correct, but is sounds to me just like I wrote it: Mou-La" or $ to the Muslim priests who do this. The company allows this. It is a $1k payment to the priests for doing this. I don't know if it is $1k per shift or $1k per / 24 hours, but they do it is the point. Here is an example of what is not cost efficient. The Muslims demand a payment and prayer over the chickens - to be eaten by them. They don't yet demand that the chickens be labeled "Moo-La" chicken, but they will do it one day. Being a Christian, I asked our lower paid Methodist Minister if he would be willing to say a prayer over the Chickens on behalf of Christians, and we both decided it would be a good bonus for him - certainly more than he makes now.
The point is, when special interests start getting involved in business decisions and dictate the outcomes, it is not good. The Chinese might not want to eat these chickens since they think Muslims are not a religion , but people who have a mental type illness (or so that is what I just read). So, if the Chinese do not want to eat Moo-La Chickens, I might not want to eat them either - I think Muslims are for world domination .
The EU should stay out of this business and let the producers make the decisions and the people will vote with their $'s or pocketbooks. EU , US , etc. need to stick to government needs & not tell business what to do - they cannot handle their own problems, much less someone else's business. Government only has the powers we the people give them - they need to stick to the basics, National Defense, etc. Not Welfare, not Medical Care for Free, Not anything that is beyond the basics. Government needs to shrink , not grow.
The EU needs to concentrate on what they do best . . . now what was it they do well ?
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
I have heard Steve Jobs worked for the gov-t’s office for innovations in mobile technology, glass screen division, if memory serves well. Oh wait, he didnt. Thank god, the govt improved the tech so much since the time of the first computer, so now we can buy laptops that are billions of times faster than the first one. Oh wait, they didnt. Good thing the govt improved production of the chipsets so we can enjoy those performance bumps and power consumption improvements in laptops at quite reasonable prices...oh wait, they did not.
internet, GPS, touchscreen, battery, voice recognition, unix, the C language ( which Objective C is based on) and lots more. Hard to think of anything in the original iPhone that didn't have some beginnings in government work. In fact its hard to think of anything that is core to Computer Science in general that didn't begin in some gov or university lab somewhere,.
Under no circumstances should streaming services have the origin of their content dictated to them by a foreign government. This is yet another example of overreaching EU policy and a sample of why the UK is pulling out. My suggestion to steaming services is to cut all content from their service that originates from EU countries effective on the date the regulation takes place. The loss of revenue to EU produces and distributors would be catastrophic, would result in many films and TV shows never being produced as potential revenue from steaming services impacts the ability to raise funds to produce content. The regulation would kill an industry rather than help it, and the tirade directed at the EU regulators would likely have an immediate effect. Just the threat of this would likely kill the legislation. Sure the EU would threaten to block all streaming from American companies, but that would only serve to further inflame resistance to the regulation.
Under no circumstances should streaming services have the origin of their content dictated to them by a foreign government.
If you want to sell your goods in that country/union then it's not a "foreign government" from their PoV. Their gov't, their terms. Even if it's stupid—like Brexit—you only have the options to abide by their rules or not do business with them.
Austrian radio has a mandated quota for IIRC 30% domestic productions, and they have a thriving indie domestic music scene as a result, with absolutely great stuff that wouldn't have had a chance at airplay otherwise.
In contrast, German radio has 98% commercial sludge.
Only worry I have is that streaming services may opt to withhold major content to reach the quota, rather than invest in local productions.
Comments
Could Netflix (etc.) simply add 10,000 home movies submitted from Europe (or European test patterns) and call it a day? Or will it be based on what people actually watch, which would be much more challenging.
Im no free market capitalist but in this case I agree. If European stuff is good enough, it will sell. The loss of Britain is a big issue though, as they could easily get the content from the BBC or Channel 4's excellent back catalogue
Government is great for investment. We literally wouldn't have the iPhone without it. Or the internet.
However dictating what we watch or buy, thats something else and never works.
( your muslim analogy doesn't compare, thats private company initiatives)
Under the rules, streaming services would be required to fund content produced in Europe, including commissioning its own content, acquiring existing series from regional producers, or by contributing to national film funds. The latter is already occurring in Germany by way of an additional surcharge to the subscription fee, which Netflix failed to stop in court.
Looks like the bold part is an opt out clause for now.
Thank god, the govt improved the tech so much since the time of the first computer, so now we can buy laptops that are billions of times faster than the first one. Oh wait, it didnt.
Good thing the govt improved production of the chipsets so we can enjoy those performance bumps and power consumption improvements in laptops at quite reasonable prices...oh wait, they did not.
What are you talking about? I grew up watching Kung Fu Movies from an Antenna as a Kid. It was all dubbed with Engish soundtracks. You watch their mouths move for a bit and then hear what they are saying. It was part of the experience. Way back then, there was no Internet. We didn't have Cable, and only got some Broadcast channels with an Antenna and had to use a device that turned the antenna depending on what channel we wanted to watch. I remember one called "The Man with the Golden Arms".
I guess when there's a lot of fighting, the dialog isn't as important. But still,...
Yeh, that is not going to happen.
Austrian radio has a mandated quota for IIRC 30% domestic productions, and they have a thriving indie domestic music scene as a result, with absolutely great stuff that wouldn't have had a chance at airplay otherwise.
In contrast, German radio has 98% commercial sludge.
Only worry I have is that streaming services may opt to withhold major content to reach the quota, rather than invest in local productions.