Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai signs multi-year Apple TV+ deal

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited March 8
Nobel Peace Prize laureate and women's rights activist Malala Yousafzai is continuing her relationship with Apple by agreeing to a multi-year programming deal for Apple TV .




The deal, announced by Apple on Monday, will have Malala and her production company Extracurricular working with Apple on new Apple TV+ programming. This is said to cover dramas, comedies, documentaries, animation, and children's series, with a view to inspiring people around the world.

"I believe in the power of stories to bring families together, forge friendships, build movements, and inspire children to dream," said Malala. "I couldn't ask for a better partner than Apple to help bring these stories to life. I'm grateful for the opportunity to support women, young people, writers, and artists in reflecting the world as they see it."

Malala joins an ever-growing roster of celebrities and other major names working with Apple to produce content for its streaming service. The list includes Oprah Winfrey, Steven Spielberg, Jon Stewart, Martin Scorsese, and Idris Elba.

Apple has supported Malala repeatedly over the years, including supporting the Malala Fund in 2018 to help provide education to girls living in developing countries. Malala also visited Apple Park in August 2018 to discuss the partnership with CEO Tim Cook and VP of Environment, Policy, and Social Initiatives Lisa Jackson.

In 2019, Cook and Malala met once again to discuss teaching girls to code and the role of technology in education.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 28
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    buttesilverelijahgsocalbrianselleringtonlkrupp
  • Reply 2 of 28
    cloudguycloudguy Posts: 323member
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    buttesilverelijahgsocalbrianselleringtonmobirdVaporStain
  • Reply 3 of 28
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    That's an easy decision for me.  Apple TV+ has a bunch of shows that are on my "must watch" list; well above the number on Prime.  $5 is a deal.  But just like with Prime, millions of people get it for free as a side-effect of buying some other Apple/Amazon thing.  There's nothing wrong with that.
    ronnjony0byronlStrangeDaysOfer
  • Reply 4 of 28
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    Beer, easy. 
    edited March 8 socalbrianselleringtonVaporStain
  • Reply 5 of 28
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 1,966member
    Netflix has a subtle way of increasing awareness of societal issues as part of a broader story arc. It makes people who wouldn't normally think about those issues take note, and it fits with the story. Apple's obsession with ramming unadulterated wokeness down people's throats only makes those who are already rabid progressives worse, and people who are more centrist just ignore this kind of programming altogether; and IMO, it taints their view of Apple. If Cook wants to commandeer a company to push societal change and his progressive agenda, he's chosen the wrong one to do it with.
    edited March 8 socalbrianselleringtonmobirdJanNL
  • Reply 6 of 28
    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Serious question.  Have you ever watched any ATV+ programming or actually looked at the lineup?  I ask because your rhetoric doesn't match the programming that's actually there.  The following sentence is not a criticism, it's an observation:  Apple's programing is just as demographically formulaic as all the rest of the streaming services.   Apple has programming to appeal to young kids, teens, young/middle/older adults.  Just like the others. They have comedies, dramas, thrillers, documentaries, musicals, action fare and more.  Just like the others.  The content goes from G rated all the way to R rated.  Just like the others.

    What the others have that Apple doesn't is an extensive back catalog of content.  Consequently, the content they do have, is hyper-examined and judged against a mistaken narrative that their content is HR "sanitized" for correctness.  There's nothing to support the narrative.  It has never been that way.  From day one, there has been more adult oriented content on ATV+ than any other category.  Still that way now. 
    edited March 8 ronnRayz2016jony0byronlStrangeDaysjcs2305
  • Reply 7 of 28
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,665member
    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Serious question.  Have you ever watched any ATV+ programming or actually looked at the lineup?  I ask because your rhetoric doesn't match the programming that's actually there.  The following sentence is not a criticism, it's an observation:  Apple's programing is just as demographically formulaic as all the rest of the streaming services.   Apple has programming to appeal to young kids, teens, young/middle/older adults.  Just like the others. They have comedies, dramas, thrillers, documentaries, musicals, action fare and more.  Just like the others.  The content goes from G rated all the way to R rated.  Just like the others.

    What the others have that Apple doesn't is an extensive back catalog of content.  Consequently, what they do have is hyper-examined and judge against a mistaken narrative that their content is HR "sanitized" for correctness.  There's nothing to support the narrative.  It has never been that way.  From day one, there has been more adult oriented content on ATV+ than any other.  Still that way now. 
    Very simple. They’re making TV for the kind of customers they want. The company hasn’t changed all that much since they  coined the phrase ‘Think Different’. 
    jony0Oferfastasleep
  • Reply 8 of 28
    Rayz2016 said:
    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Serious question.  Have you ever watched any ATV+ programming or actually looked at the lineup?  I ask because your rhetoric doesn't match the programming that's actually there.  The following sentence is not a criticism, it's an observation:  Apple's programing is just as demographically formulaic as all the rest of the streaming services.   Apple has programming to appeal to young kids, teens, young/middle/older adults.  Just like the others. They have comedies, dramas, thrillers, documentaries, musicals, action fare and more.  Just like the others.  The content goes from G rated all the way to R rated.  Just like the others.

    What the others have that Apple doesn't is an extensive back catalog of content.  Consequently, what they do have is hyper-examined and judge against a mistaken narrative that their content is HR "sanitized" for correctness.  There's nothing to support the narrative.  It has never been that way.  From day one, there has been more adult oriented content on ATV+ than any other.  Still that way now. 
    Very simple. They’re making TV for the kind of customers they want. The company hasn’t changed all that much since they  coined the phrase ‘Think Different’. 
    There's absolutely nothing different about Apple's programming though... thematically or philosophically.  For every show on ATV+ there's an analog on the other major streaming services.  Apple has ever major category of content that can be found on any streaming service 'cept maybe anime, but I'd bet good money once the catalog starts to fill out that category will be there as well.  The only service that really is different is Disney+.  They really don't have adult/mature content.  They farm all of that out to Hulu.  

    The kind of customer that Apple wants is the kind willing to pay for a subscription.  Just like the others.  Their content is varied to appeal to a wide audience.  Just like the others.  To ascribe a deeper meaning to Apple's content choices doesn't really make sense.  They are buying from the same pool of content as all the others.
    jony0byronl
  • Reply 9 of 28
    mknelsonmknelson Posts: 663member
    CloudTalkin said:
    There's absolutely nothing different about Apple's programming though... thematically or philosophically.  For every show on ATV+ there's an analog on the other major streaming services.  Apple has ever major category of content that can be found on any streaming service 'cept maybe anime, but I'd bet good money once the catalog starts to fill out that category will be there as well.  The only service that really is different is Disney+.  They really don't have adult/mature content.  They farm all of that out to Hulu.  

    The kind of customer that Apple wants is the kind willing to pay for a subscription.  Just like the others.  Their content is varied to appeal to a wide audience.  Just like the others.  To ascribe a deeper meaning to Apple's content choices doesn't really make sense.  They are buying from the same pool of content as all the others.
    In Canada at least Disney+ just added Star. You need up update your profile to accept an MA rating before you can access the new shows.
    CloudTalkinjony0Ofer
  • Reply 10 of 28
    cloudguycloudguy Posts: 323member
    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Serious question.  Have you ever watched any ATV+ programming or actually looked at the lineup?  I ask because your rhetoric doesn't match the programming that's actually there.  The following sentence is not a criticism, it's an observation:  Apple's programing is just as demographically formulaic as all the rest of the streaming services.   Apple has programming to appeal to young kids, teens, young/middle/older adults.  Just like the others. They have comedies, dramas, thrillers, documentaries, musicals, action fare and more.  Just like the others.  The content goes from G rated all the way to R rated.  Just like the others.

    What the others have that Apple doesn't is an extensive back catalog of content.  Consequently, what they do have is hyper-examined and judge against a mistaken narrative that their content is HR "sanitized" for correctness.  There's nothing to support the narrative.  It has never been that way.  From day one, there has been more adult oriented content on ATV+ than any other.  Still that way now. 
    Serious answer ... like you need to watch a project to know what it is about. An action movie starring GOPers like Arnold Schwarzennegar, Sylvester Stallone, Adam Sandler, Bruce Willis, Chuck Norris, Kelsey Grammer or Chuck Norris is going to be pro-military and pro-law enforcement. By the same token, it is easy to tell where things like The Morning Show, Little America, Visibile and anything produced by Oprah Winfrey is going to be about. We also have reviews - including on this very site - and if any of these shows defied expectations instead of confirming them, we would know by now. Adult-oriented content ... compare the number of adults who watch "The Mandalorian" and "WandaVision" to the ones who watch "Girls" and "Killing Eve" ... it isn't close. 

    The others don't merely have "an extensive back catalog of content" but instead are still to this day actively producing the sort of broad-based content that Apple isn't. Like Apple couldn't have signed deals with the likes of Adam Sandler, Kevin James, David Ayer, Eli Roth etc. Or reboots - not subversive ones mind you - of popular 80s and 90s entertainment like Fuller House. Here is what you need to realize: at one point Netflix had BoJack Horseman - a modern deconstructive parody of 80s sitcoms - and Fuller House - a faithful reboot of the "worst" example of the sort of show that BoJack Horseman savagely skewered - on at the same time. Critics loved the former as a great example of your "adult entertainment" but audiences - almost exclusively adults who grew up watching the original show - loved the latter. They were aimed at vastly different demographics but were both hits. So  you had one demographic cohort subscribing to Netflix to see BoJack Horseman but an entirely different one subscribing to see Fuller House.

    The folks who run Apple TV+ on the other hand would fall over themselves for the chance to make another BoJack Horseman tomorrow but would never greenlight Fuller House, those Adam Sandler projects or the current Kevin James NASCAR show in a million years. Even Ted Lasso - the closest thing on Apple TV besides Defending Jacob that anyone can claim for a broad based mainstream show - is still about a London soccer coach who is the typical modern fails upward/succeeds in spite of himself male character. Would Apple TV+ ever produce a revival of "Coach", about an American football team set in the midwest about a guy who is actually successful in his professional and personal life because he is good at both? Despite its potential for attracting a huge audience from multiple demographics - as the original show did during its 9 year run - nope. Because the folks in Cupertino believe that a show to teach kids Taoism and Buddhism (Stillwater) is ... more socially important I guess.
    elijahgmobird
  • Reply 11 of 28
    cloudguycloudguy Posts: 323member
    There's absolutely nothing different about Apple's programming though... thematically or philosophically.  For every show on ATV+ there's an analog on the other major streaming services. 
    You are only half right. For every TV show there's an analog on the other major services ... but the other major services have tons of shows that do not and will not have Apple TV+ competitors. And no, this isn't just "back catalog" stuff. It is new shows that were developed, greenlit and went into production since Apple TV+ started airing their own shows. Further we can follow Amazon Prime, Hulu, Netflix, Disney+ and even some of the smaller/more obscure streaming networks and see that their upcoming projects are aimed at a wide swath. Some are broad-based cross demographic projects while others - though more narrow and targeted - nevertheless target different demographics. (And when I say "demographics" I mean more than merely age groups and especially more than just buying the rights to "Peanuts" and "Fraggle Rock" so you can say "see we have kids/family programming too!") Meanwhile, nearly all the upcoming Apple TV+ projects are aimed at the same narrow demographic as their original batches.

    Look, I know that you like the Apple TV+ programming. And that you wish that the other channels were more like Apple TV+ in their programming choices. But the reality is that you aren't the market. So if Apple keeps this up, 90% of the U.S. population will have no interest in their network. Also, the result of more outlets becoming like Apple TV+ in their programming would be even more alienation from Hollywood TV and movies in favor of foreign entertainment, YouTube and social media. This has been happening for decades already anyway: network TV ratings are a tiny fraction of what they were 20 years ago (which themselves were much reduced from what they were 20 years prior) and so are movie ticket sales. And when you put the declining TV ratings and movie ticket sales in the context of the fact that the U.S. population has actually doubled in that time you realize that things are actually worse. 

    Streaming is actually capitalizing on this by producing entertainment that traditional Hollywood never would. (The Mandalorian, for example, was just an 80s action/adventure show akin to MacGyver or Magnum P.I.) By simply producing the same stuff that 90% of America has no interest in watching - what really looks like failed ABC and CBS pilots a lot of the time - it really seems like the folks who are running Apple TV+ do not realize what makes streaming viable in the first place. 
    socalbrianelijahgmobird
  • Reply 12 of 28
    cloudguy said:
    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Serious question.  Have you ever watched any ATV+ programming or actually looked at the lineup?  I ask because your rhetoric doesn't match the programming that's actually there.  The following sentence is not a criticism, it's an observation:  Apple's programing is just as demographically formulaic as all the rest of the streaming services.   Apple has programming to appeal to young kids, teens, young/middle/older adults.  Just like the others. They have comedies, dramas, thrillers, documentaries, musicals, action fare and more.  Just like the others.  The content goes from G rated all the way to R rated.  Just like the others.

    What the others have that Apple doesn't is an extensive back catalog of content.  Consequently, what they do have is hyper-examined and judge against a mistaken narrative that their content is HR "sanitized" for correctness.  There's nothing to support the narrative.  It has never been that way.  From day one, there has been more adult oriented content on ATV+ than any other.  Still that way now. 
    Serious answer ... like you need to watch a project to know what it is about. An action movie starring GOPers like Arnold Schwarzennegar, Sylvester Stallone, Adam Sandler, Bruce Willis, Chuck Norris, Kelsey Grammer or Chuck Norris is going to be pro-military and pro-law enforcement. By the same token, it is easy to tell where things like The Morning Show, Little America, Visibile and anything produced by Oprah Winfrey is going to be about. We also have reviews - including on this very site - and if any of these shows defied expectations instead of confirming them, we would know by now. Adult-oriented content ... compare the number of adults who watch "The Mandalorian" and "WandaVision" to the ones who watch "Girls" and "Killing Eve" ... it isn't close. 

    The others don't merely have "an extensive back catalog of content" but instead are still to this day actively producing the sort of broad-based content that Apple isn't. Like Apple couldn't have signed deals with the likes of Adam Sandler, Kevin James, David Ayer, Eli Roth etc. Or reboots - not subversive ones mind you - of popular 80s and 90s entertainment like Fuller House. Here is what you need to realize: at one point Netflix had BoJack Horseman - a modern deconstructive parody of 80s sitcoms - and Fuller House - a faithful reboot of the "worst" example of the sort of show that BoJack Horseman savagely skewered - on at the same time. Critics loved the former as a great example of your "adult entertainment" but audiences - almost exclusively adults who grew up watching the original show - loved the latter. They were aimed at vastly different demographics but were both hits. So  you had one demographic cohort subscribing to Netflix to see BoJack Horseman but an entirely different one subscribing to see Fuller House.

    The folks who run Apple TV+ on the other hand would fall over themselves for the chance to make another BoJack Horseman tomorrow but would never greenlight Fuller House, those Adam Sandler projects or the current Kevin James NASCAR show in a million years. Even Ted Lasso - the closest thing on Apple TV besides Defending Jacob that anyone can claim for a broad based mainstream show - is still about a London soccer coach who is the typical modern fails upward/succeeds in spite of himself male character. Would Apple TV+ ever produce a revival of "Coach", about an American football team set in the midwest about a guy who is actually successful in his professional and personal life because he is good at both? Despite its potential for attracting a huge audience from multiple demographics - as the original show did during its 9 year run - nope. Because the folks in Cupertino believe that a show to teach kids Taoism and Buddhism (Stillwater) is ... more socially important I guess.
    This wall of text amounts to old man rhetoric about shows from days gone past.  There's no sound basis for your opinion presented here.  You simply proclaim Apple wouldn't make this, Apple wouldn't make that sans any foundational reasoning for that opinion.  It's a rather prosaic not-so-hot take.  You think the content is homogenized.  I think the content follows the same formula as all the other services.  Our opinions differ.  
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 13 of 28
    crowleycrowley Posts: 7,424member
    I broadly disagree with the wall of text up there, but there does seem to be an imbalance in Apple TV+ in that there’s loads of drama shows, but relatively little comedy. I hope that gets some attention.
  • Reply 14 of 28
    AppleishAppleish Posts: 300member
    Probably should have classified this as political and closed comments. Looking forward to Malala's programming.

    AppleTV+ is worth the five bucks for Ted Lasso alone. Apple One brings it down to four.

    They have a few more excellent shows/films and are getting better all the time.
    edited March 8 byronlStrangeDays
  • Reply 15 of 28
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 1,966member
    cloudguy said:
     it really seems like the folks who are running Apple TV+ do not realize what makes streaming viable in the first place. 
    I agree with all of your post except this - I'm sure they do know what makes streaming viable, but as with their other products marketshare isn't really a concern, as long as they can bumble along with their agenda they don't really care. It's Cook's attempt at a legacy. At the current rate I don't ever see AppleTV+ breaking even, so they'll continue to roll the (negative) profits into the "services" segment to hide up how it's doing.
  • Reply 16 of 28
    Is Apple serious about the Apple TV+ subscription streaming service?
    edited March 8
  • Reply 17 of 28
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,052member
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.
    Nuts. There's plenty of quality entertainment, definitely worth more the price of a craft beer for us.

    • Ted Lasso
    • For All Mankind
    • Losing Alice
    • The Morning Show
    • Mythic Quest
    • Tehran
    • Servant
    • See
    • Defending Jacob
    • Home Before Dark
    • Greyhound
    • Palmer
    edited March 8
  • Reply 18 of 28
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,052member

    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Nah, you're just confusing Netflix "Throw an infinite amount of licensed crap on the wall" w/ a more curated library akin to HBO's direction. Quality, not quantity.
    jony0
  • Reply 19 of 28
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 1,966member

    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Nah, you're just confusing Netflix "Throw an infinite amount of licensed crap on the wall" w/ a more curated library akin to HBO's direction. Quality, not quantity.
    Who's the one making money out of their streaming service, whose service has become a byword for streaming and is revered in society; and therefore has to be doing better than quantity over quality? Apple's entry into a market doesn't automatically mean everything else is suddenly shit. Except of course when iPhones and Macs were unveiled, and to a certain extent the Watch too. They all made the rest look like toys. AppleTV+ decidedly does not do that.
    edited March 8
  • Reply 20 of 28
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,052member

    cloudguy said:
    cloudguy said:
    Pay $4.99 for a month of “Entertainment” on Apple TV+ ? or buy a Beer?

    Decisions decisions.   

    Beer me.

    This won't exactly broaden the base of Apple TV viewers. They just keep piling on with more of the same stuff. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu and Disney+ all have content to attract a wide variety of viewers. Sure, Netflix has Patriot Act and Chelsea Handler but they also have Adam Sandler, Kevin James and action movies like Extraction. Disney+ has Hamilton but they also have the Avengers movies. Amazon Prime: they have the usual awards bait stuff but they also have Jack Ryan. So long as their programming is dominated by things that Apple's own HR department wants to watch to pick up ideas on what to include in their training videos, Apple is going to have to keep giving the service away for free.
    Serious question.  Have you ever watched any ATV+ programming or actually looked at the lineup?  I ask because your rhetoric doesn't match the programming that's actually there.  The following sentence is not a criticism, it's an observation:  Apple's programing is just as demographically formulaic as all the rest of the streaming services.   Apple has programming to appeal to young kids, teens, young/middle/older adults.  Just like the others. They have comedies, dramas, thrillers, documentaries, musicals, action fare and more.  Just like the others.  The content goes from G rated all the way to R rated.  Just like the others.

    What the others have that Apple doesn't is an extensive back catalog of content.  Consequently, what they do have is hyper-examined and judge against a mistaken narrative that their content is HR "sanitized" for correctness.  There's nothing to support the narrative.  It has never been that way.  From day one, there has been more adult oriented content on ATV+ than any other.  Still that way now. 
    Serious answer ... like you need to watch a project to know what it is about. An action movie starring GOPers like Arnold Schwarzennegar, Sylvester Stallone, Adam Sandler, Bruce Willis, Chuck Norris, Kelsey Grammer or Chuck Norris is going to be pro-military and pro-law enforcement. By the same token, it is easy to tell where things like The Morning Show, Little America, Visibile and anything produced by Oprah Winfrey is going to be about. We also have reviews - including on this very site - and if any of these shows defied expectations instead of confirming them, we would know by now. Adult-oriented content ... compare the number of adults who watch "The Mandalorian" and "WandaVision" to the ones who watch "Girls" and "Killing Eve" ... it isn't close. 

    The others don't merely have "an extensive back catalog of content" but instead are still to this day actively producing the sort of broad-based content that Apple isn't. Like Apple couldn't have signed deals with the likes of Adam Sandler, Kevin James, David Ayer, Eli Roth etc. Or reboots - not subversive ones mind you - of popular 80s and 90s entertainment like Fuller House. Here is what you need to realize: at one point Netflix had BoJack Horseman - a modern deconstructive parody of 80s sitcoms - and Fuller House - a faithful reboot of the "worst" example of the sort of show that BoJack Horseman savagely skewered - on at the same time. Critics loved the former as a great example of your "adult entertainment" but audiences - almost exclusively adults who grew up watching the original show - loved the latter. They were aimed at vastly different demographics but were both hits. So  you had one demographic cohort subscribing to Netflix to see BoJack Horseman but an entirely different one subscribing to see Fuller House.

    The folks who run Apple TV+ on the other hand would fall over themselves for the chance to make another BoJack Horseman tomorrow but would never greenlight Fuller House, those Adam Sandler projects or the current Kevin James NASCAR show in a million years. Even Ted Lasso - the closest thing on Apple TV besides Defending Jacob that anyone can claim for a broad based mainstream show - is still about a London soccer coach who is the typical modern fails upward/succeeds in spite of himself male character. Would Apple TV+ ever produce a revival of "Coach", about an American football team set in the midwest about a guy who is actually successful in his professional and personal life because he is good at both? Despite its potential for attracting a huge audience from multiple demographics - as the original show did during its 9 year run - nope. Because the folks in Cupertino believe that a show to teach kids Taoism and Buddhism (Stillwater) is ... more socially important I guess.
    Serious question -- are you this absolutely dense IRL? You haven't ever watched a single one of the shows yet you feel qualified to declare they're part of an HR agenda...the same stupid, debunked rumor w/ the Tim Cook "Be nicer!" notes that turned out to absolutely not be true whatsoever. There was all sorts of adult-oriented content in the shows from launch day. Try "See", where you can find masturbation, cursing, and heads being cleaved in two.

    Get fucking real.
    fastasleep
Sign In or Register to comment.