Re:Netflix is creating a problem by cancelling TV shows too ...
by pwinnski on Wednesday October 14, 2020 @10:54AM
(#24777170)
> but they just don't want to keep them around for long if they think they are not working, because unlimited airtime does not mean unlimited funds.
This makes sense in the abstract, but watching season 1 of the The Office (US) suggests that if NBC had the same view, we wouldn't have one of the most popular long-term binge-watch shows, for which streaming services are paying $500mm now.
As the article mentions, Schitt's Creek apparently had a low-rated first season, but since the execs in charge didn't have the mindset you describe above, it survived long enough to become the award-winning more popular show it is now.
Netflix may not be doing anything wrong here, but if they're not careful, it may bite them hard in a few years as their reputation continues to grow.
I think it's just the other side of the coin. Because they have no airtime limits, they can commission many more series than traditional networks used to; but they just don't want to keep them around for long if they think they are not working, because unlimited airtime does not mean unlimited funds.
In practice, I think some of the series this piece laments would never have been produced by networks. Would you be happier reading only one half of a story, or not even knowing the story existed at all? I think the answer can differ between different people.