+14 14 0
Published 8 years ago by rawlings with 3 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • NotWearingPants
    +3

    Ridiculous premise.

    Are there too many books? I can't read them all.

    Too many websites? I can't visit them all.

    More content simply means more choice.

    • skolor
      +3

      The article touches on that. In fact, "too many books" is almost a quote from a little over halfway through.

      I'm more concerned about the railing against Netflix being closed with their numbers. As a consumer, I don't really give a shit how many views a particular show got. I rarely, if ever, use viewership as a metric for picking something to watch. More often I'm using ratings from critics or aggregate ratings from other consumers, both of which are fully available for everything Netflix makes.

      Even beyond that, the typical method for collecting viewership counts still works perfectly fine for Netflix shows. It isn't like they have ever been accurately recording what you watched on TV every night. They have always used a survey method and extrapolated that to the entire viewership. The same could easily be done for Netflix programming by a third party, if they so desired.

      • NotWearingPants
        +2

        I don't really give a shit how many views a particular show got. I rarely, if ever, use viewership as a metric for picking something to watch. More often I'm using ratings from critics or aggregate ratings from other consumers, both of which are fully available for everything Netflix makes.

        Exactly. I get my money's worth out of my Netflix subscription, I probably have a solid years worth on my list, and it grows faster than I can watch it. Finding more interesting stuff to watch is easy, from internal suggestions to IMDB lists. And the fact that I'll never live long enough to be able to watch it all. Abundance of riches and all that.

Here are some other snaps you may like...