The topic of price increasing with online streaming is becoming a huge thing in this current generation. Even with music services you have costly wages being paid by plenty of consumers. The most recent increase was with Netflix, it's now going to be 9.99 a month, compared to when it first started it was $7.99; granted, for people who have been with Netflix for a while they will pay $8.99 or $7.99 (depending how long you've been a consumer) for a year before the increase affects you; but, really Netflix? I get it, I mean things are expensive, but $9.99 for an online streaming service? Of course most people will pay it, but think about this as well–Spotify is $9.99 (if you are a student it is only 5$), Tidal (if you use that) is $19.99, Apple music is $9.99, Hulu Plus is only $7.99 (still) but with ads, Amazon streaming is nearly 79$ per month because of Amazon prime or you pay for episodes/seasons separately. What I am getting at here is I get the increase, but wouldn't you think to lower the price so more people would sign up? Or is Netflix simply doing a really good ploy because they know consumers will pay for it no matter what? I'm considering not paying for it, all those prices add up and at the end of the day, and 10$ for 12 months is pretty steep when you really look at it; especially, if you have parents paying for it, or you let your friends use it as well. It's coming to the point where your friends are going to have to pitch in a dollar every month in order to pay for it.
I would like to focus on a match here, I pay for Netflix and Spotify, as well as the increase, really just talking about how much we're paying and why we pay it. That's already 20$ for me, 15$ with the student discount on Spotify; which, doesn't seem like a lot, but for 12 months it adds up significantly. Why do we pay for music services, we used to download music 90MPH and now it's just download a music streaming service. We used to watch TV shows religiously and now it's like "wait till it's on Netflix."
I love this topic as I am an avid Netflix frequenter. The casual and humorous way you approach this rant-style article is amusing and fits in with the type of things I like to read online. My only helpful tip would be to revise it slowly and watch for small grammatical things like commas and tenses. Awesome job! – samvanderwalde9 years ago
A look at series that had not given the audience closure due to a bad ending to the series or being canceled by network heads. Also a look at shows that are being rebooted with a attempt to bring back the old audience from before the series ended to watch the show.
It would be interesting to look at the way Netflix and other online streaming platforms buy cancelled TV shows and reboot them - such as Degrassi or The Mindy Project. – dsubject9 years ago
Cult followings have emerged from such cancellations, so it would be interesting to see how certain fandoms have kept the spirit of canceled shows alive. Firefly, for example, got the movie Serenity due to the massive popularity of the show, even after its cancellation. – scmblack9 years ago
Very interesting topic to explore. I feel like now is the day in age that, many television shows are made, but only a lucky, lucky few are actually successful due to ratings. You can have the most well produced, written, and acted TV show, but if people are not watching, then it gets cancelled, which is very unfortunate. But you can definitely, find TV shows that have gone through that, and maybe find the reason why they were cancelled. – ADenkyirah9 years ago
The Snyder cut gives fans hope that with enough clamouring, beloved unfinished TV series will be relaunched and taken to their logical ends. – Dr. Vishnu Unnithan4 years ago
Recent animated shows airing mainly on The Disney Channel and Cartoon Network have established quite a large following among high school and college students. Why is this? Can it be said that recent cartoons initially targeted at children have taken on deeper meanings beyond young entertainment, while teaching some moral values along the way? With shows like Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Gravity Falls, and Over the Garden Wall attracting a more mature audience than probably anticipated, what does this reveal about the nature of these cartoons.
The power of previous children's cartoons on viewers of the past could also be an interesting topic, though not the era of the 80's or 90's but maybe during WWII? – smarrie9 years ago
With the rise of shows like Adventure Time, Gravity Falls, Steven Universe and Over the Garden Wall, has also come the rise of an interesting following to these shows geared towards a young audience – high school and college students. Does this suggest that these shows go beyond expectations for a standard children's television series with basic humor and entertainment and some moral values thrown in along the way? And what has attracted such a following.
Fan Art and Fan Fiction galore can be found among the ever growing 'fandoms' associated with each respective show, revealing that these series may be having a greater impact than suspected at first glance.
I wrote about this topic from a slightly different angle, suggesting that it was because of the growing acceptance of Geek Culture that these shows even exist now. The people who create them are smarter, more imaginative, and more open to new and fresh ways of looking at the world. And they have a huge backlog of material that they love, which they reference all the time in their own shows. Because the people making these shows are younger, more entwined with social media, and because their humor can range across the gap between kids, teens, and adults: older age groups can respect and enjoy these programs just as much as their initial target audiences. – Jonathan Leiter9 years ago
The Following quickly became a hit during its first season run. With Kevin Bacon playing the loose cannon, hot-headed former FBI agent Ryan Hardy and James Purefoy as the seductive, alluring serial killer Joe Carroll, you get a show that always left you on the edge of your seat and wanting more. However, the show started going downhill during the second and third season which led to its untimely cancellation. If you're a fan of the show and have seen every episode, what do you think led to its cancellation? Was it when Joe Carroll was taken out of the picture or had the show just run its course?
In television, most notably today, Fall premieres of "new" shows find themselves falling into almost predictable patterns: overly dramatic music clues the viewer to get ready, some important memory trigger is interrupted by something "suddenly" happening, etc. Have we come to a point where television has become lazy in delivery, instead relying on tropes it knows will work? Or have we just seen it all? Is there really anything that could be considered "new" television? Or is all television simply a collection of story lines that get revamps via setting, character, etc.?
Live-action dramas fall into these cliched and predictable cues because of how they are produced, and the audiences that typically watch them. So it is indeed a topic which must be explored further to understand why it might happen.
Animated shows, however, do not have these same issues. Plenty of animated series still fail to impress due to bottom of the barrel humor, and often completely unexplainable premises. But quite a few stand as some of the best examples of creative storytelling and character development on television today, and should not be discounted when discussing this particular topic. Perhaps at least a disclaimer somewhere in the opening paragraphs just to make sure they are given their due. – FilmmakerJ9 years ago
Weekly viewing is slowly coming to an end as streaming companies become continuously popular. With Netflix, Crave, Shomi and other platforms, marathoning TV shows has become the new way to watch a season. Are there any downsides to marathoning shows? What are some aspects of watching TV that we've lost since weekly viewing became less popular? Are there any perks with weekly viewing that are not experienced through marathoning? How does marathoning affect a TV series?
Recently, "The Cosby Show," "7th Heaven," and "19 Kids and Counting" have been removed from multiple television channels. Each series was tarnished by the very public legal struggles of the stars of each series. Bill Cosby was accused by countless women of rape, audio tape revealed that Stephen Collins (the start of 7th Heaven) admitted to sexual assault of a minor, and it was revealed that Josh Duggar (one of the Duggar family's many children) had sexually assaulted several of his younger sisters as a teen. What are the implications of removing these shows from the airwaves? What do audiences expect from television stars? Television is a hugely collaborative effort: how do the actions of these stars effect the rest of the people involved in the production of the series? How does our knowledge of these details change the way we view these series?
For Cosby in particular, the reason his reputation was tarnished was because he painted his self as a harmless person. His comedy was safe and family friendly, and he usually frowned upon other comedians using such bad language. But now, no one can watch him be a fun loving dad on The Cosby Show without thinking of him as the vile monster we know him today. His hypocritical statement of being a good person is what hurt the most, as there is nothing worse than realizing than your hero is an awful human being. – Aaron Hatch9 years ago
