Entertainment should be accessible to everyone, not a costly luxury with a growing price tag.
Streaming was supposed to simplify entertainment consumption, an industry built on accessibility that now prioritizes content exclusivity and profits over consumer interests.
What was once the hopeful future of the entertainment world has turned into another arena for corporate greed. Initially marketed as liberating alternatives to cable, streaming services are slowly transforming into the very thing they promised to replace.
When Netflix introduced online streaming in 2007, it revolutionized how we consume media. By offering affordable, convenient access to various content, the platform paved the way for a new era of entertainment.
Fast forward to 2024, 99% of all U.S. households pay for at least one or more streaming services, with the average American paying for 2.9 streaming subscriptions every month, according to Forbes.
However, as other legacy companies like the Walt Disney Company and Warner Bros. entered the field, they found trouble making a profit. To remedy this, many of these platforms created multi-tiered subscription levels with varying levels of access.
Mirroring the tactics of traditional cable companies, these industry giants insert ads into various moments of programs, just like the commercials of the cable era.
Furthermore, the streaming industry is heavily unregulated, with various licensing agreements enabling content exclusivity. As a result, your favorite show could vanish at a moment’s notice, leaving viewers with little control over what’s available to them.
As large streaming companies monopolize content, their vertical market integration imitates the practices of the cable industry.
In the past, when cable television emerged with a monopoly between NBC, ABC, and CBS, also known as the “Big Three,” the government stepped in.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) initiated regulations known as the Financial Interest and Syndication Rules (Fin-Syn), which put restrictions on larger cable networks like NBC, ABC, and CBS so they could not acquire ownership and distribution rights for television programs.
Although later abolished in 1993, Fin-Syn demonstrates the level of regulation that once existed to protect consumers from corporate monopolies.
Another negative aspect of the streaming industry is the paradox between consumers’ well-being and corporations’ profits.
One habit developed by many consumers is binge-watching. Instead of sitting down for regularly scheduled programming as many would with cable, streaming services allow viewers to burn through hours of content in one sitting.
Stuck in a cycle of viewing paralysis, this consumption setup can negatively affect viewers. According to a study conducted by Raza et al., binge-watching often results in negative consequences such as depression, anxiety, stress, and loneliness. In using entertainment for an escapist reality, the streaming model allows many viewers to indulge in potentially harmful habits, with corporations profiting from it.
As streaming giants continue to raise subscription costs and profit off unhealthy viewing habits, the question remains: how long will consumers bear the cost of convenience?
With prices climbing and content fragmented across multiple platforms, it’s clear that the current model is unsustainable. As the industry develops, it must shift towards a more consumer-friendly approach that prioritizes accessibility and affordability.
*This editorial reflects the views of the Editorial Board and was written by Emi Pajarillo. The Editorial Board voted 10 in agreement, 4 somewhat in agreement, and 1 refrained from voting.
