Netflix's Big Data Dump Shows Just OK TV Is Here To Stay (wired.com) 50
After years of withholding viewership data, Netflix earlier this week released statistics showing its top viewed titles from January-June 2023. The winner with over 800 million hours watched was The Night Agent. Though the steamy, soapy Sex/Life scored over 120 million hours, the warm coming-of-age series Sex Education had under 30 million.
Netflix claimed "success comes in all shapes and sizes," but co-CEO Ted Sarandos admitted the data guides business decisions. So while Netflix says stats aren't everything, pouring resources into sure bets like The Night Agent seems likely as competition grows post-Hot Strike Summer. The show is what some call "just OK TV" -- not offensive, not groundbreaking, but reliably watched. Wired adds: This era of Just OK also comes as Netflix captures the King of Reality TV throne. Shows like Love Is Blind and Selling Sunset are becoming cultural juggernauts, and the streamer shows no sign of slowing down, especially now that the Squid Game spinoff, Squid Game: The Challenge, is getting major traction.
True, Netflix is still putting out artful content. A show like Wednesday, for example, had more than 507 million hours viewed and is also currently up for 12 Emmys. Netflix, on the whole, is nominated for a whopping 103 Emmys. That's impressive, but also, it's down from the 160 nods it got at its peak in 2020 and fewer than the 127 nabbed by (HBO) Max, which crushed thanks to shows like The White Lotus, The Last of Us, and Succession. You see where this is going. Netflix likes to tout its prestige shows, but also has to keep its paying customers, who left in droves in 2022 before partly coming back as Netflix cracked down on password sharing. To that end, it behooves Netflix to make more Ginny & Georgia, more Night Agent, more You. One analysis of the data found that the most-watched film, according to Netflix's data dump, was the Jennifer Lopez vehicle The Mother, which accumulated about 250 million hours watched in six months. Variety puts that level of engagement up there with Barbie and The Super Mario Bros. Movie. Not a bad showing.
Netflix claimed "success comes in all shapes and sizes," but co-CEO Ted Sarandos admitted the data guides business decisions. So while Netflix says stats aren't everything, pouring resources into sure bets like The Night Agent seems likely as competition grows post-Hot Strike Summer. The show is what some call "just OK TV" -- not offensive, not groundbreaking, but reliably watched. Wired adds: This era of Just OK also comes as Netflix captures the King of Reality TV throne. Shows like Love Is Blind and Selling Sunset are becoming cultural juggernauts, and the streamer shows no sign of slowing down, especially now that the Squid Game spinoff, Squid Game: The Challenge, is getting major traction.
True, Netflix is still putting out artful content. A show like Wednesday, for example, had more than 507 million hours viewed and is also currently up for 12 Emmys. Netflix, on the whole, is nominated for a whopping 103 Emmys. That's impressive, but also, it's down from the 160 nods it got at its peak in 2020 and fewer than the 127 nabbed by (HBO) Max, which crushed thanks to shows like The White Lotus, The Last of Us, and Succession. You see where this is going. Netflix likes to tout its prestige shows, but also has to keep its paying customers, who left in droves in 2022 before partly coming back as Netflix cracked down on password sharing. To that end, it behooves Netflix to make more Ginny & Georgia, more Night Agent, more You. One analysis of the data found that the most-watched film, according to Netflix's data dump, was the Jennifer Lopez vehicle The Mother, which accumulated about 250 million hours watched in six months. Variety puts that level of engagement up there with Barbie and The Super Mario Bros. Movie. Not a bad showing.
Define "watched", Netflix. (Score:3)
The show is what some call "just OK TV" -- not offensive, not groundbreaking, but reliably watched.
Oh, it was reliably "watched"? That's cute, coming from the company who inadvertently earned the social moniker of Netflix n' Chill.
"Watched" represents anything and everything from those actually watching and paying attention, to those being paid to do that, to those having a Netflix noise machine on in the background while they scroll through other forms of "Just OK" distractions classified as mind-numbing entertainment these days. Or fall asleep. Or fuck.
A "watched" statistic at Netflix is about as warped as you can get within the realm of warping statistics for profit.
Re:Define "watched", Netflix. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should Netflix care if you are actually watching it or not? You pay for a subscription and for whatever reason that was the content you played. Netflix will therefore keep playing that content. When it comes to revenue, it just doesn't matter what you do with the content.
At any rate, whatever flaws there are in the stats, they are far more accurate than TV viewership numbers.
Re: (Score:1)
Why should Netflix care if you are actually watching it or not? You pay for a subscription and for whatever reason that was the content you played. Netflix will therefore keep playing that content. When it comes to revenue, it just doesn't matter what you do with the content.
At any rate, whatever flaws there are in the stats, they are far more accurate than TV viewership numbers.
'Accurate' for who exactly? The ones profiting off warping the shit out of that statistic for greed and profit?
Accurate my ass. My point stands. There's a reason we're settling for "Just OK" content. Because the manufactured audience is basically irrelevant. "Watched" statistics are whatever Greed says it is.
This is exactly how Rotten Tomatoes destroyed their own reputation. Putting sponsored greed over truth.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really clear what you're point is?
Are you literally suggesting that, to make money, they are making up the hours that their customers are watching, and catering to those pretend made up customers, rather than to the ones actually paying them?
Because greed and profit? How exactly does that make them profit?
Re: (Score:2)
Because just OK, is a precarious position to be in, If good comes along people will switch.
I wouldn't actually say its just OK, most shows are just boring if I can fall asleep during these shows and not even care enough to rewind, its not just OK, its boring.
I would say people are watching these because they are the best of a bad bunch, doesn't make them good. As evidence of this look a the popularity of shows like friends (a show that finished 20 years ago), is it that people really want to see it for the
Re: (Score:2)
Because just OK, is a precarious position to be in, If good comes along people will switch.
You may be right and I hope you are, but I'm not convinced. I think there's a big market for reliable, predictable, unchallenging shows that provide some entertainment in a time-filling / time-killing way. Some people just want what an old friend used to call "chewing gum for the eyeballs".
I think of that kind of TV as the entertainment equivalent of McDonald's. It isn't good, but it has an engineered addictive quality and it fills a void without a lot of effort. If more people wanted to be challenged by th
Re: (Score:2)
I thought Friend's was very entertaining. Better then OKAY. Rewatching it a couple years ago was well worth the Netflix sub at that time.
So clearly, people have different taste and content producers are probably better off going for mass appeal then niche market.
I liked Star Trekk while my ex liked Grey's Anatomy (it was okay). Both shows were actually insanely popular.
I personally think reality tv is terrible but my parents love Survivor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they want the subscriptions to continue, they'll need to do better. Pluto, Tubi, and others have nearly 70 years worth of "just OK TV" for free.
Re:Define "watched", Netflix. (Score:5, Insightful)
Still better than the Neilson ratings were for my whole life...
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah no question you are on the spectrum.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The show is what some call "just OK TV" -- not offensive, not groundbreaking, but reliably watched.
What does "just OK" mean? That the show is watched by a lot of people suggests that those viewers think the show is more than "just ok". Is the implication that some enlightened or privileged set of critics know the inside secret of the quintessential quality of shows and that the masses are ignorant? Or is the truth that critics are a minority that is out of step with most people, a minority that seeks media that appeals to their minority personal interests.
Re: (Score:2)
What does "just OK" mean?
I think it's meant in a similar vein as cafeteria food, hear me out.
While they can sometimes make a stellar meal most of the time the food is "just ok", not too spicy, not too bland, but also not anything special. You'll eat it and not feel ripped off, while certain portions of it pique your taste buds just right to become a personal favourite - but you typically wouldn't pick the cafeteria food over a proper restaurant if you had the choice.
I've talked to the kitchen staff at the cafeteria where I work an
Yeah, no kidding (Score:1)
You know why there are so many direct to streaming chick flicks, and used to be so many direct to video ones before that? Because they cost nothing to make, so they print money.
Same thing here.
Re: (Score:2)
You know why there are so many direct to streaming chick flicks, and used to be so many direct to video ones before that? Because they cost nothing to make, so they print money.
Same thing here.
Straight to streaming, implies one statistic to measure for "success".
If "watched" statistics are what prints money for them, don't assume for a second that statistic favors truth over greed. It'll be bent, warped, distorted, and destroyed to "prove" garbage-OK content is somehow profitable.
All the people all the time. (Score:2)
The bigger the audience is, the harder it is to please them all. And the easier it is to offend some of them. So, it is logically predictable that the shows that have the most mass-appeal are going to stick to reliable crowd-pleasing elements and avoid kicking hornets' nests.
Bland is profitable. These things are expensive to make, so one needs a profit motive to justify their existence.
When we have AI fully generating entire movies (including all elements, actors, visuals, sound, dialogue, plot, music, a
Breaking news: most TV is just OK TV (Score:2)
Or, in Douglas Adams' terminology: mostly harmless to harmless.
Just like most art falls into that category.
Which is a shame - but there's probably no alternative if good stuff is going to occasionally get produced out of nowhere; it gives new people a chance to shine.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, in Douglas Adams' terminology: mostly harmless to harmless.
You said harmless. Reality more says pointless and worthless.
If there was zero societal FOMO/YOLO pressure to subscribe to substandard "OK" content, they would have 80% less customers, and filed for bankruptcy a decade ago.
Gotta keep the 'fashionable' delusion going. Kind of like Apple justifying a 'premium' price tag for "OK" hardware, because fashion statement.
Re: (Score:3)
Do you like being angry for the sake of being angry?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You said harmless. Reality more says pointless and worthless.
Reality says nothing of the sort. Reality says that a large number of people found value in the show and watched it.
What you're doing is imposing your own values on the show (i.e. pointless and worthless) and making the profoundly uneducated assumption that all of reality holds the same values.
Re: (Score:2)
You said harmless. Reality more says pointless and worthless.
Reality says nothing of the sort. Reality says that a large number of people found value in the show and watched it.
Reality says there's a reason we're here talking about "Just OK" programming that's here to stay. Consumer demand, hardly gives a shit about quality. Why do you think clickbait bullshit is a multi-billion dollar industry.
Pointless because while it may be entertaining, it's hardly memorable. Winning awards? Pfft. No need to even rise to that level of effort. "Just OK" is plenty good enough when you own the patent on your definition of "watched".
Most Slashdot posts are just ok posts. (Score:2)
As soon as content strays into controversial territory like politics or tabs vs spaces, people jump up with the troll mods just to punish the poster for saying something disagreeable. So, we are all training each other to gravitate towards tried-and-true "stock" posts that aim for a chuckle or maybe provide a wikipedia link for that insightful mod.
Which is ironic since Wikipedia is not a reliable source [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Good is very subjective. My ex hated Star Trekk. I hate reality TV. Some people hate soap operas. They all have their markets. How can you really say one is better then another?
What you think is good may be a waste of time to me.
OK - so let's consider Star Trek (Score:2)
In TOS there is one stand out episode; 'The City on the Edge of Forever'. Most of the rest were watchable to anodyne.
In TNG there are a few great episodes; Darmok and the world where androgyny are the norm spring to mind. The rest are mostly just OK...
etc. etc.
Few writers or artists achieve genius level output every time. The issue is what to do about it - and to reflect on the fact that it is only in modern times of relatively easy travel do many of us get to see anything but our localities effort at art.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll take it over... (Score:3)
I'll take an era of "just okay TV" over the nonstop reality shows of the early 2000's. I got rid of cable before "cord cutting" was even a term in popular usage because of all that garbage TV.
Re: (Score:2)
I think its beyond doubt television had a major uptick in quality over the previous 10-15 years (not uniformly, but there have been some truly spectacular shows amongst the dross).
But its a little befuddling that some truly good shows (like Sandman) get poor numbers compared to weird RomCons. I guess not everyone has fond attachments to 1990s gothy graphic novels.
And outside of Netflix, it was frusturating to see probably the best Sci-Fi show ever made, The Expanse, struggle to get viewers while Amazon seem
Re: (Score:2)
Oh c'mon, surely that blurry mass only in shot for a moment is PROOF. It's not at all weird that in this era of everyone having a reasonably high resolution camera in their pocket that no one can get a proper photo or video in any of these shows!
Your comment makes think of this last Thanksgiving where I was out visiting an aunt and uncle with other family. They are absolutely wonderful people whom I love very much but boy do we have differing opinions on entertainment. My uncle at least was taking very seri
Re: (Score:2)
And outside of Netflix, it was frusturating to see probably the best Sci-Fi show ever made, The Expanse, struggle to get viewers while Amazon seemed more interested in trying to sell me f***ing UFO documentaries like I'd *ever* watch such gibberish.
The biggest problem with Amazon in general is that, at least as a company, they're so focused on delivering maximum profit for shareholders that they have mostly stopped caring about doing what is best for their customers, treating customer satisfaction as a problem for their customer service teams, rather than as a responsibility for every employee. Amazon tends to sort results based on what makes the biggest profit for Amazon, which means the products that are cheapest to manufacture and have the highest
The Night Agent (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The plot of The Night Agent was absolutely formula, but the writing was reasonable, the characters were interesting and it was paced well. It didn't pretend to be more than it was, but it achieved its goal well.
Implicit criticisms like this from TFS:
Though the steamy, soapy Sex/Life scored over 120 million hours, the warm coming-of-age series Sex Education had under 30 million.
... reek of stop liking what I don't like [knowyourmeme.com]. This is Slashdot, we should be familiar with having different preferences than the general populace.
Artful Content (Score:1)
Streaming Is Bad For Consumers (Score:2)
Streaming is just another way to play consumers for chumps. Everybody is getting in on the game and charging their own stupidly high fees. The system is more fractured than ever. Pretty soon all that will be on Netflix is Netflix content...all the other studio will be putting their movies on their service where they get 100% of the content.
Just OK TV is all most people will get. Linear cable is already zombified. Networks are putting their good shows on streaming and cheap shit on the air. ATSC 3.0 will all
Pretty much everything... (Score:3)
I watch on Netflix is foreign
Other countries just seem to do it better
Re: (Score:2)
I watch on Netflix is foreign
Other countries just seem to do it better
More like Netflix tends to make content in countries where production costs less money. A lot of their shows are made in some other language and then dubbed into English, and the rare non-dubbed show is usually made in Australia or Canada.
Invest in the Hallmark Channel! (Score:2)
The more I study these statistical trends, especially as we are in the holiday season, the Hallmark Channel's business logic is dead-on given this data.
Fun-fact: the Hallmark channel films in a lot of foreign locations, because it helps the folks at home virtually travel.
The Hallmark Channel has 40 new movies streaming this holiday season [tomsguide.com].
p.s. Don't shoot the messenger.
Re: (Score:2)
The Hallmark Christmas movies are bland but pleasent to watch. We go through a ton of them every year,
What Netflix data dump shows (Score:2)
The Night Agent had little competition (Score:3)
Just OK (Score:3)
What amuses me about people bemoaning "Just OK" TV is that used to be the norm - And people ate it up.
In the good ol' days TV was a wasteland. Sure there was All in the Family, M*A*S*H and Hill Street Blues, but for every one of those you had The Love Boat, Fantasy Island, CHiPs Battle of the Network Stars, and dozens more unwatchable piles of tripe.
Even programs that are fondly remembered like The Hardy Boys and The Six Million Dollar Man are largely unwatchable when you look back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Where and when I was a kid, there were a half dozen broadcast TV stations and (I think) around 30 cable channels.
It wasn't just a matter of eating it up, it was that there literally wasn't much choice once you'd sat down on the couch to watch television. It was generally either on or it wasn't. Sure, by the late 1970s you probably had a VCR and could record a show on tape to play back later... or rent something from the video store... but there was NOTHING like the on-demand variety that streaming gives u
Define "offensive" (Score:2)
Netflix used to have a very large catalog of inoffensive "classic" television shows.
These days, just about all the big titles on Netflix would be rated R in movie theaters. Certainly not something you'd want to watch with your kids.
take it easy (Score:2)
I sometimes don't want to have something that challenges me, and a simple, mind off, blockbuster will do just fine and can be very entertaining, while it doesn't really push the media of cinema in any way. Same with TV shows.