Back in July, Ted Gioia suggested a select part of the business world was facing a problem.
A few weeks ago, I warned about problems brewing at Netflix (and other streaming platforms). In just the last few days, these problems have gotten worse, much worse—and the situation has reached crisis proportions.
Even more revealing—the crisis is now spreading through the tech world like a wildfire. It’s no exaggeration to say that Netflix dragged down the entire NASDAQ today, after the release of its disappointing quarterly results.
That’s because savvy investors on Wall Street now grasp what’s really going on. They fear that the root cause of Netflix’s woes portends the collapse of the dominant business strategy in tech today.
This is hugely important—and not just for investors or technocrats. All of us will be impacted by how this plays out. And I have a strong hunch that what is bad for Netflix might just be good for you and me.
That’s because Netflix’s failed strategy is audience capture. And you and I are part of the audience it wants to keep in captivity.
I’m not Netflix prey. While I build habits like anyone else, I am self-aware enough that I keep track of what I’m reading / consuming and, if it seems to be getting samey, I try to introduce variety into my steady material: MS NOW’s Steve Benen, for instance, is certainly lefty and not self-critical, so I also have Andrew Sullivan, a center-right conservative, and his Weekly Dish on my reading list as well as the free material Erick Erickson, a right-wing Christian and radio host who still can point at people even further right than himself, puts out. I read the late Kevin Drum, who was data driven, from time to time; other bits of my reading list, less regular, are over on right side of the screen.
When I first started reading the Web, say around 2000, most things were free and open. This has been gradually changing. Sullivan’s free & open Daily Dish went dormant, and then morphed into the paywalled Weekly Dish. Erickson, whose current blog started out as Confessions of a Political Junkie, changed names to the Erick Erickson Show, which is so banal, and tries to lure readers into the pay section of his output.
When Steve Benen was writing for Maddowblog, and he still does, it was open and free. Today? He’s still involved with Rachel Maddow’s podcast, but he’s now writing for a MS NOW that is beginning to demand that you have an account before you contribute, and, for select posts, before you can read them. For alert readers who notice I’m still pulling quotes from those articles, yes, I did find a way to access those articles, but I presume MS NOW will get that loophole fixed.
Other sites, such as a Ballotpedia, ask I disable my ad blocker, which I reject as I find that few web sites display ads gracefully; most actively interfere with my reading and discourage me from using that site. Fox News demands it; I get that news from other sites.
That brings me to CNN. Over the last few weeks it’s been clear that CNN is trying to transition to a subscription model, not permitting access to many, perhaps even most, articles unless you’ve sent them your mail address and some money.
I’m not here to whine about ads or subscriptions. I’ve written about how subscription models should be sought out by readers, as it places the site in an obligation model to improve services, while ad models don’t encourage improvement as much as does the subscription model. I’m sure readers can contribute contradictory examples. Such is life, as I’m not a business manager, nor have ever been, of a news site, a magazine, or allied media.
No, I’m sitting here wondering if Netflix’s slip and potential loss of audience has triggered some of the above changes. Not Sullivan nor Erickson, as they switched to subscription models years ago; but MS NOW and CNN are both new to charging. A lot of sites are subscription-only, and, conceptually, I approve; but as I like to gather news from a variety of sites, this could get expensive. Will I need to yawn the metaphorical wallet open?
The subscription model ties an audience, however briefly, to a site, but the reality is that a better offering can lure that audience away, albeit with a latency. Are we seeing audiences awaken and move away from old haunts? I’ll have to keep an eye out.
Well, yes. I think that’s been obvious for years. But Erickson is not alone, a lot of folks keep trying to interpret President Trump through a prism from decades ago. In order to understand and predict what comes next with President Trump, one first must accept the proposition that the President is mentally ill, pathologically narcissistic to quote a friend, and taking that first step when one’s Party nominated and elected him is tough on the old ego – it was incredibly bad judgment of, admittedly, an actor, by a lot of Republicans. It’s enough to make one question their judgment.
