Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Content discovery challenges are forcing the average consumer to spend 10.5 minutes finding something to watch each time they access their streaming services according to Nielsen
Don’t really agree. The video rental store forced you to make a decision because you spent time to go there and the social pressure of actually chosing something instead of awkwardly shuffling away huffing something about forgetting to buy milk. For streaming there is no such pressure or urgency. You’d have something to watch every time if the app forced you to make a decision via say a time limit before it refuses to open and/or some rewards for consistently making fast decisions on what to watch.
I do think the descriptions are very poor, but movie box art and synopsis have always been pretty shit, it’s just more shit now.
Regarding your algorithm rant it obviously doesn’t fit you but on the whole it helps guide people towards choices they’d enjoy. People tend to lock up when overwhelmed with choices so they try to narrow it down. You on the other hand would prefer to slowly peruse a giant genre based category, but that isn’t the norm. However I do agree that they should provide the option, because we’re all different and it’s good to cater to all types.
I think it depends on how much of the content you have already watched. I’ve personally watched a lot of Netflix in the past year and it keeps suggesting stuff to me that I’ve already watched. And I don’t mean the “watch again” category. Literally every category on the main page contains stuff I’ve already watched recently and rated.
I also rate every title I watch, in hope of feeding the algorithm. It does offer me new releases which fit, but anything older is completely hidden behind recommendations that never really change (no way to hide away content i don’t want to watch).
I get your point about it being good to guide people towards things they might like, but evidently from the article we are commenting on it’s not really helping on the whole.
I’m just saying the study is a bit flawed in that before we zapped channels but it didn’t take that long to go through the list and then you either picked something or didn’t watch. Going through all streaming services and the content they have takes far longer. It’s a bit like saying people spend far more time in their car after moving to the suburbs. Sure they can work remotely or in the suburbs but they can also work in the city, which is far likely than the reverse of city people working in the suburbs. Not a very good analogy, could probably come up with a better one, but I’m simply saying it’s a lot easier to waste time browsing now.
To continue on the zapping comparison the algorithm in that situation would put the channels you normally watch first. It wouldn’t stop you from zapping through all of them but in many cases it would reduce the number of channels you zap through. Same thing here, if you’re looking for something matching your regular pattern the algorithm reduces the time to pick, but if you want something different it doesn’t help and we’re back to a problem of how to make a catalog of 1000 movies “perusable” with a remote.
I can appreciate how algorithms might be helpful with seeing what you like and helping you find other stuff similar for you to enjoy. I think the issue comes when you end up getting pigeon holed and only see certain things, despite maybe wanting to see something completely different. I noticed this when I saw what my Dad’s Netflix looks like compared to mine. He had all sorts of movie suggestions I’ve never seen before due to his different watching patterns.
We’re both in agreeance that they could do a better job with movie descriptions though.
Don’t really agree. The video rental store forced you to make a decision because you spent time to go there and the social pressure of actually chosing something instead of awkwardly shuffling away huffing something about forgetting to buy milk. For streaming there is no such pressure or urgency. You’d have something to watch every time if the app forced you to make a decision via say a time limit before it refuses to open and/or some rewards for consistently making fast decisions on what to watch.
I do think the descriptions are very poor, but movie box art and synopsis have always been pretty shit, it’s just more shit now.
Regarding your algorithm rant it obviously doesn’t fit you but on the whole it helps guide people towards choices they’d enjoy. People tend to lock up when overwhelmed with choices so they try to narrow it down. You on the other hand would prefer to slowly peruse a giant genre based category, but that isn’t the norm. However I do agree that they should provide the option, because we’re all different and it’s good to cater to all types.
I think it depends on how much of the content you have already watched. I’ve personally watched a lot of Netflix in the past year and it keeps suggesting stuff to me that I’ve already watched. And I don’t mean the “watch again” category. Literally every category on the main page contains stuff I’ve already watched recently and rated.
I also rate every title I watch, in hope of feeding the algorithm. It does offer me new releases which fit, but anything older is completely hidden behind recommendations that never really change (no way to hide away content i don’t want to watch).
I get your point about it being good to guide people towards things they might like, but evidently from the article we are commenting on it’s not really helping on the whole.
I’m just saying the study is a bit flawed in that before we zapped channels but it didn’t take that long to go through the list and then you either picked something or didn’t watch. Going through all streaming services and the content they have takes far longer. It’s a bit like saying people spend far more time in their car after moving to the suburbs. Sure they can work remotely or in the suburbs but they can also work in the city, which is far likely than the reverse of city people working in the suburbs. Not a very good analogy, could probably come up with a better one, but I’m simply saying it’s a lot easier to waste time browsing now.
To continue on the zapping comparison the algorithm in that situation would put the channels you normally watch first. It wouldn’t stop you from zapping through all of them but in many cases it would reduce the number of channels you zap through. Same thing here, if you’re looking for something matching your regular pattern the algorithm reduces the time to pick, but if you want something different it doesn’t help and we’re back to a problem of how to make a catalog of 1000 movies “perusable” with a remote.
I can appreciate how algorithms might be helpful with seeing what you like and helping you find other stuff similar for you to enjoy. I think the issue comes when you end up getting pigeon holed and only see certain things, despite maybe wanting to see something completely different. I noticed this when I saw what my Dad’s Netflix looks like compared to mine. He had all sorts of movie suggestions I’ve never seen before due to his different watching patterns.
We’re both in agreeance that they could do a better job with movie descriptions though.