It’s a tough pill to swallow but YOU are the problem.
People spending lots of money to make movies, for example, want a high probability of making money.
So, the movies that the audiences pay to see are what get made.
Crappy news sources? Few people want to pay for news either.
Don't blame the victim. I'm really unhappy that many of these media mergers were allowed to go through by the USG. This was an executive branch failure to enforce existing anti-trust laws. The FCC, FTC, SEC, the DoJ and the President are responsible for this failure. The question remains, in this "American experiment", whether or not "The People" can do anything other than be led by the nose.
Also look at FIFA World Cups right when they were formed versus now, same exact tournament and participants, but the modern has become completely filled with "value" through ads.
Ironically we're seeing many streaming services produce higher quality content and a big part is that they are taking more risks. People are not just being vocal, but voting with their dollars. I'd far rather see something in the theaters than at home but not only is the price of a movie far higher than a month of streaming, but there just are so few good theatrical movies now. A major part of streaming services' success actively demonstrates that YOU are not the problem.
What power does corporate have to force someone to watch a game of football?
> the modern has become completely filled with "value" through ads.
Because sufficient people agree with trade. If they were not OK with the trade, sufficient people would do any of the countless other activities available to them.
It's a different story for industries where doing the alternative has a high amount of friction. Entertainment is not one of them.
Sure, the risky subversive stuff doesn't have multi-million dollar marketing budgets, but why should it, it's risky and subversive.
The current media environment is the product of what people give attention to.
That's entirely beside the point and not an argument for why certain kinds of art thrive.
This seems like an argument that is always true, and thus close to meaningless. What movies are popular? My fault. Rising economic inequality? My fault, I should negotiate harder and not accept poor treatment. Climate destruction? My fault, I didn't choose the most environmentally friendly options every time. Rising obesity? My fault.
It's not wrong, but it's not very satisfying, and we should be looking for more insight and more reliable solutions. "My plan is for 8 billion people to change their habits" isn't as reliable as "let's regulate 100 companies".
100? You could probably apply crushing regulation and taxes to 10 companies on the planet, and the outcome would be a measurably better world! That’s how bad it’s become.
One giant thing that has changed since 2000 is how people consume media. The number of movie tickets sold peaked in 2002. [1] It's a declining market. DVD sales are even worse, down by 90% or more. [2] And perhaps worse yet, shifting video to the internet changed expectations from theater- and DVD-style pricing to free and/or all-you-can-eat pricing. All that plus YouTube and expanding video games created massive competition for entertainment dollars, further diminishing the competitive advantage of long-form film.
Given that it's not shocking that movie funders have generally become risk averse. Or theatergoers, really. The comparative effort between picking something cromulent off Netflix and hauling over to the mall means people are going to be less likely to take a gamble on a film than they were 40 years ago. And that's not going to change much.
So instead, I think we people in tech need to figure out better ways to fund and distribute good movies. That, or accept that the good stuff will be happening mostly in places other than the silver screen.
That said, once I have found a good thing (Star Wars) I want more of that good thing in addition to new experiences. I am enjoying the new take on Game of Thrones, the new take on Lord of the Rings, and really looking forward to the upcoming new take on Harry Potter (hog warts legacy). As more time passes the tried and true franchises should continue to produce while new things are tried on the side in an attempt to build new franchises.
Perhaps it's better to say the demand-side in general is a big part of the problem? But on the other hand, sometimes it's hard to know you want something that isn't being made and marketed.
There's also the fact that people will optimize for certain ends, and the most common end is to be 'sucessful' or at least look like it.