It's a conflated term. There is the one you're working with, which is specifically about the technological method of distribution, and then there is the other meaning, which is used for content creation and licensing (and awards).

It is the second meaning which the author seems to imply and that I'm using here.

For example, the Emmy's (and the Hollywood Reporter, for example) consider NBC, ABC, HBO, Netflix, and Amazon to all be networks on equal footing.

It's not just about the technological method of distribution, it's about the structure of the entity, how it's regulated, etc. It's a pretty standard term and while it can have other meanings and the meaning can shift (as the strict original meaning becomes more, uh, meaningless), it seems weird to complain about that usage being somehow 'all over the place'. It means something most newspaper readers understand.

Who reads newspapers these days?

> For example, the Emmy’s (and the Hollywood Reporter, for example) consider NBC, ABC, HBO, Netflix, and Amazon to all be networks on equal footing.

The trade papers may use ‘network’ interchangeably in Ye Grand Tradition of old school Deadline slang for TV, but nobody in the industry would ever confuse networks (read: ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX) with cable/premium/streaming channels.

As a mere set of eyeballs... why are they (E.g. Netflix vs CBS) different? And why should I care?

To me they are all channels. Just some don't allow binge watching or time-shifting well and others do.

Plus the argument kinda petered out at the HBO also broadcasts on the internet part...

What do you mean? I have had in the past an internet only HBO subscription via Sling TV.

Paraphrasing: The main difference is that Netflix broadcasts via the internet while HBO broadcasts on cable and the internet.

So not a vast difference.

As the cable TV bundle starts to peter out, all of these entities are just effectively studios, i.e. entities with money that fund TV shows/movies with various exclusive distribution rights for some periods.

One of the questions becomes what does the new bundle look like? (or the a la carte package.) Because there are pretty clearly a limited number of monthly subscriptions that most consumers are willing to pay for especially if they're in the >$10 range.

For anyone outside the US it is. Or at least in the UK, I can't get watch HBO without jumping through VPN hoops.

Don't they license pretty much everything to Sky? NowTV costs about the same as Netflix, UX/UI is rubbish but you should get all their current HBO content.

Hmm you are right. I thought they had at least a few of the big markets. But no, seems like US only.