Hi churn and low number of paid content possibly due to lack of “normal” content.
What is “normal content ”? Simple: it’s content not dripping in left-leaning woke-ism. About the only show that isn’t featuring LGTBQ characters/plot lines or black actors >13% of total is Ted Lasso. Everything else is a democrat advert.
You had to go there. Is there a certain amount of comments you have to post on sites per day complaining about representation? Not your cup of tea to see shows with less white people in them, fine. Don't go and complain about it. Makes you sound kinda bigoted.
Going from this list: https://www.apple.com/tv-pr/originals/ I got to Losing Alice before I got to anything that resembled what you complained about. Continuing past it yields nothing else aside from a Documentary called "Out on Television". So one show has some LGBT (ladies love story) out of all of the scripted shows and one is documentary. That's two shows with LGBT issues. I count 7 shows either starring black people (Documentary or non-fiction) or telling black stories. So a total of 9 which blacks or gays. 5 shows have women either the focus of the documentary or fiction program. We are at 14. That leaves 38 programs that are indeterminate (nature, documentary, or have white males as their leads). Sorry that isn't enough for you.
Great for you, your perception is that there is a reasonable balance. At least two commenters here think there isn't, therefore showing the content doesn't appeal to everyone. Doesn't mean you need to attack someone because their opinion doesn't match yours, which is apparently the correct one.
Hi churn and low number of paid content possibly due to lack of “normal” content.
What is “normal content ”? Simple: it’s content not dripping in left-leaning woke-ism. About the only show that isn’t featuring LGTBQ characters/plot lines or black actors >13% of total is Ted Lasso. Everything else is a democrat advert.
You had to go there. Is there a certain amount of comments you have to post on sites per day complaining about representation? Not your cup of tea to see shows with less white people in them, fine. Don't go and complain about it. Makes you sound kinda bigoted.
Going from this list: https://www.apple.com/tv-pr/originals/ I got to Losing Alice before I got to anything that resembled what you complained about. Continuing past it yields nothing else aside from a Documentary called "Out on Television". So one show has some LGBT (ladies love story) out of all of the scripted shows and one is documentary. That's two shows with LGBT issues. I count 7 shows either starring black people (Documentary or non-fiction) or telling black stories. So a total of 9 which blacks or gays. 5 shows have women either the focus of the documentary or fiction program. We are at 14. That leaves 38 programs that are indeterminate (nature, documentary, or have white males as their leads). Sorry that isn't enough for you.
Great for you, your perception is that there is a reasonable balance. At least two commenters here think there isn't, therefore showing the content doesn't appeal to everyone. Doesn't mean you need to attack someone because their opinion doesn't match yours, which is apparently the correct one.
One can say that the content available isn't their cup of tea without specifically pointing out their cognitive bias. If one looks at the available content one can easily refute the poster's statistics. All they end up doing is saying I don't like to see certain kinds of people on the screen. If you have a prejudice against seeing on-screen representation that is more in line with demographics that makes the issue yours and not an indictment of the service itself. Tossing around terms like "Woke" and incorrectly using the word Democrat when referring to the Democratic Party shows prejudice and ignorance and needs to be called out. I'm not the one that injected that hot garbage into this forum but because it is there I feel like I can call it out.
The people who built Netflix into what it is today -- a destination for original content -- are Reed Hastings (co-founder) and, in particular, Ted Sarandos, who is now co-CEO/Chief Content Office, and their lieutenants.
Whatever role this guy may have played in the company's history came well before Netflix launched its first originals, circa 2012-2013. He left the company in 2002.
To draw an analogy, in Apple terms, it would be like Steve Wozniak calling out a company for not being like Apple, or emulating its strategy.
I suppose people might be curious as to what he has to say, given who he is, and he may hit on some sensible or obvious points, but why should anyone take him seriously?
Woz was the technical brains behind the outfit in 1977, but how does that translate into the success Apple started to obtain in 2001, the genesis of when mobile devices would propel the company to new heights and mainstream success? Very little, if any. And given his history of failed companies since his time at Apple, Woz would not be the first one to go to for such advice.
It's easy for Randolph to lob stones from afar, but he has no skin in the game, and he was never in the game that's being played by the streaming services. It was Sarandos who lead the charge, with Hastings' support.
Netflix wasn't a streaming + content company until 2013 (remember "House of Cards"?). Apple was already producing and selling AppleTV by then, and there's no reason why, given its software/entertainment/networking chops (Recall iPod/iPhone/iPad? iTunes and iTunes Store? The first radical video search and download interface that basically everyone, including Netflix, subsequently adopted?) why Apple couldn't have got into this sooner, defined the market to become the ones to follow.
Instead they wasted their time clinging to some stupid "it's a hobby" nonsense.
Apple has zero interest in capturing market share. The objective is to further monetize 1.5 billion iOS devices through a portfolio of core services, which include Music, News, Fitness, and AppleTV. Mission accomplished.
I'd wager a lot of money that no one is buying an Apple product because of the free year of AppleTV+. AppleTV+ has no particularly popular exclusives for that to be the case, and even if it was, it's available on non-Apple hardware anyway; entirely voiding the "its to push hardware sales" argument.
They wouldn’t buy an Apple product simply for a free year of AppleTV+, but they would purchase earlier to get it, and it might get a few people off the fence. Mrs Rayz2016 probably would’ve held off on her first Mac purchase if not for the Morning Show.
However, I still think that Apple sees services as a profit driver in its own right, not just an add-on to sell hardware.
AppleTV+ simply doesn't have enough good content. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. Apple should follow/copy Netflix's business model and get the same type of content Netflix gets. Apple can afford it and they have enough active devices to tempt people to use AppleTV+ instead of Netflix.
No way. The vast majority of Netflix's content is junk. Quantity over quantity. Apple is going the other way... An HBO model: fewer but better.
I personally think ATV+ is fine for less than the price of beer a month.
Hi churn and low number of paid content possibly due to lack of “normal” content.
What is “normal content ”? Simple: it’s content not dripping in left-leaning woke-ism. About the only show that isn’t featuring LGTBQ characters/plot lines or black actors >13% of total is Ted Lasso. Everything else is a democrat advert.
Hairbrained nonsense, of course. Guess what? Gays exist in real life, you just didn't know it before.
Comments
I personally think ATV+ is fine for less than the price of beer a month.
Hairbrained nonsense, of course. Guess what? Gays exist in real life, you just didn't know it before.
Plenty of great content:
Ted Lasso
Greyhound
...you sound really paranoid.