Netflix's Problem

 

A lot of people are getting mad at Netflix. First they raise their prices, then they go and announce plans to split into two companies. Oh the Humanity! How could they treat us so? The comments against Netflix are staggering. In my opinion, too many people are focused on the price aspect (they doubled the price and now I have to go to TWO websites?). The point is, they're not trying to be greedy, Netflix is looking too far into the future. Yes, I said that Netflix is looking too far into the future.

Netflix is made up of tech geeks and early adopters who, I'm sure, are all streaming television. They may have even done what my household has recently done, cut all pay TV sources and go streaming only. When I tell most people that we have no cable and no satellite and we get all content via streaming or an OTA (over-the-air) antenna they don't get it. I'm asked questions like, "so can you get TBS with that antenna," or "how do you get ESPN?" I don't. I get network TV for free (yes they still broadcast it) and stream everything else. I can only assume that many of those making decisions at Netflix have done the same thing. They are likely streaming using Netflix to provide the majority of their entertainment content. If they're like my family, they're also relying less and less on the DVD service.

So what does this have to do with the split and all the changes? I think Netflix is imagining a world in the near future where everyone gets more content like this and sees no reason to ever get another DVD in the mail again. Face it, eventually, all of the content on DVDs is going to be sold digitally like music. Netflix is anticipating that by splitting into two companies. With streaming enabled TVs and DVD players becoming the norm, streaming is set to take off. With postal rates about to increase and Saturday delivery about to go away, service via mail is going to get more complicated. Additionally, new competition from kiosks like Red Box may make take over what is left of an increasingly less lucrative physical DVD business.

A lot of people are upset because they don't want to wait for content to get to streaming/streaming has a poor selection of movies/streaming quality stinks/etc. Again, Netflix is making a play based on the future. As more and more consumers stream, the companies that own the rights to this content are going to see the need to stream more content more quickly. Who cares about DVDs being the first thing out if nobody watches them anymore? All of these problems will eventually go away and fix themselves. Broadband will get better, the selection will get better, etc. The only danger here is if broadband companies start to throttle bandwidth or find a way around net neutrality. 

The thing most people don't realize is that Netflix is thinking like a successful technology company NOT a consumer services company. By looking to the future, they're anticipating how people will act tomorrow. Maybe their methods weren't the smoothest, but they're trying to distance themselves from DVDs in the mail and make a play for streaming entertainment directly to the consumer. By doing so, they're betting on the long-term viability of the company and trying to anticipate how the market will change instead of reacting too late (like Blockbuster).

Here Comes the Future and it's Blech

By now, I'm sure you've read (or at least seen) Douglas Coupland's predictions for the near future. Granted, he admits they're coming from a radical pessimist. Today, I saw another article that might be the first sign of them coming true.  According to a study by Edelman (featured in a Fast Company article), brands matter as much as ethnicity and religion in terms of identifying oneself. I commented to my wife that Coupland's made me feel like the future was going to be like the 7th grade all over again: malaise coupled with cliques of horrible, stupid people with no values. Apparently that's the case as Millenials think what they buy and use defines them.

I understand that brands have meaning and people often adopt a brand because of that meaning. But I'm not going to say that the brands I use are important in how I identify myself or others. I already feel like that dog chained outside the grocery store.

What is It?

Google_baby

 

There was a thought provoking op-ed piece by William Gibson in the Times yesterday about Google. In light of all the product announcement hysteria that went on yesterday, the measured wonderment of what Google is and what it might be offered a stark contrast to consumerism cult of Apple. Apple is making more stuff for us to buy. Google is changing how we fundamentally interact with information and the rest of the world. 

Lately it seems that every article is pronouncing the death of something old or traditional. The death of the book, the death of television, even the death of the internet. These are the easy pronouncements. Decrying big change that you'll never be called to prove or illustrate moving forward is easy. I've grown weary of the hype machine that seems to be flipping stories and ideas as quickly as pancakes. The idea that everything new is good and exciting. Everything old unnecessary and bad. The bravado that comes with creating the fiction of the future with clumsy fingers.

Gibson, however, deftly writes with uncertainty. Gibson's most powerful line is shrouded in ambiguity:

We have yet to take Google's measure.

Maybe that's what we could all use for now.  A little uncertainty. A little more consideration over time. A pace that allows for the true measure of ideas to unfold and our brains the time and luxury of reacting in a meaningful way.

Killing the Past Doesn't Help the Future (or Why I'm Tired)

Why does every article I read lately feature the death of something or the end of another thing? We keep hearing that the past is dead. Murdered by progress.  Good riddance because we'll never need it again. The hipster hordes want to stamp out the imagery and completely remake the world in their image and ideal. Is this the insecurity of my generation coming to the forefront? Or is it a younger generation living entirely in the now and wanting to stamp out nostalgia?

Media_httpwwwdocument_eaeec
 If it's the end of everything like newspapers, what will happen to those scenes in movies when the spy is sitting on a bench, passing time reading a newspaper. You know the one, the spy is waiting for his next meet up (maybe he never lowers the paper) or is using the newspaper to conceal his identity. If we kill the past, a newspaper might make the spy stand out as suspicious. It's interesting that in fiction, various technologies always look forced or dated. The iPad in someone's hands in a movie today might be this generation's version of the 70's porno mustache. Does our culture really need to move that fast and constantly be up to date?

Can we all agree to stop with the hipster aesthetic? I don't need everything to be the apex of design and functionality. It all makes me tired. Is the need to murder the past borne from the same hell that gave us jumpsuits, disco, and the pet rock? Is it the cousin of the Swatch watch and acid wash jeans?

It's accelerating. Maybe not in the way Douglas Coupland imagined, but things are getting faster and faster. On the one hand we're awash in information. It's delivered to us in both raw and curated forms: Information Democracy. On the other hand, the zombies haven't vanished. They're still here cycling through meaningless trends and the need to be first (at a much quicker pace). Instead of raising the discourse, the fad-hogs are just hungrier. The rest of us? We're just more tired. While we never worked to keep up, it's become more of an arduous task to fight it off.

So as I hear more often that I'm weird for not liking soccer or NASCAR, for continuing to read paper (instead of digital or nothing at all), for desiring open solutions to technology and information gathering (instead of choosing design or a fear of technology witchery), I'll just wish it would all slow down again. Just a little.

What do I want/believe in?
  • Not being available 24 hours a day
  • Apple is just another big tech company and is sometimes not the best option
  • Physical books and newspapers
  • Big companies should be regulated but individuals should be left alone to make (sometimes poor) decisions for themselves
  • Children should be kept out of bars but smoking should not
  • Baseball doesn't need replay but football does
  • The 1980s were the worst decade known to man and should never be celebrated
  • There is nothing wrong with a healthy does of cynicism
  • Everyone is too worried about being productive all the time