Slashdot Mirror


Number of Streaming Shows Overtakes Basic Cable, Broadcast For First Time (variety.com)

schwit1 shares a report from Variety: Streaming services snatched their biggest piece of the TV pie ever in 2018. According to FX's annual report on the number of scripted originals on TV, the number of streaming shows has surpassed the number of basic cable and broadcast shows for the first time ever. Out of 495 scripted originals that aired in 2018, 160 of them did so on a streaming platform. That is compared to 146 on broadcast and 144 on basic cable. Pay cable accounted for the remaining 45 shows. Streaming shows also saw the biggest increase year-to-year, growing from 117 last year. Broadcast dipped slightly, dropping from 153 in 2017. Basic cable saw a more sharp decline, compared to the 175 shows that aired on basic cable the previous year. Pay cable was up slightly from 42.

On a percentage basis, streaming shows now account for approximately one third of all scripted originals, with approximately 32%. Broadcast made up 30% and basic cable 29%, with pay cable making up 9%. The total number of shows across all of TV was up again as well, rising from 487 in 2017. The year-to-year growth was less than that of previous years, however. For example, the number of shows grew from 455 to 487 between 2016 and 2017. The 495 scripted originals this year was also off from FX Networks CEO John Landgraf's prediction that 520 such shows would air this year.

42 comments

  1. only because "reality" shows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would never work on a paid streaming site.. there's more than enough idiots on youtube to watch for free.

    1. Re: only because "reality" shows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also people who like reality show like discussing the week by week events and make predictions for next week.

  2. Re:Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, Trump resigned and volunteered for 8 years of jail time.

  3. Nevertheless ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a single one of them was worth watching...

    1. Re:Nevertheless ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately I agree...=(

  4. Commercials by rtb61 · · Score: 2

    Commercials on cable and no commercials on streaming, guess which will win, like duhh.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    1. Re:Commercials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The advertisers promising $millions of revenue to streaming video sources, that's who'll win.

    2. Re:Commercials by ArchieBunker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The original intent of cable tv was you paid a fee and there were no commercials. You can see what happened there. Commercials will slowly make their way into these services because of simple greed.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re:Commercials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except this time they don't have a monopoly, so they can't force commercials on you unless they ALL do it.

    4. Re:Commercials by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Internet, where consumers have much more power to control the ads up to complete annihilation.

      Vive les ad blockers

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    5. Re:Commercials by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Commercials will slowly make their way into these services because of simple greed.

      Yes, but is it companies who want to double dip or customers who want their "free" TV? Both sides of the same coin, I think. The nice thing about streaming services though is that they can deliver a full selection of choices. There's nothing stopping Netflix from saying "We want to make our original content available to an even broader user base who can't afford our subscription fees, so now we're announcing Netflix Ads at $3.99 and Netflix Zero at $0 with a little and a lot of advertising, respectively." So if you're dirt poor but your kids absolutely want to watch Stranger Things they can do that legally without being left out - assuming you got broadband I guess, but with a heavy side order of commercials.

      I don't really see a future where streaming services would not want to offer an actual top-tier, no ads service. Obviously you have to "outbid" the advertisers for your own eyeball time, but that's really what's happening today as well. Netflix got the business model they got because they think it makes them more money than the other one, YouTube is the other way around where the main service is free but they too offer an ad-free Premium service if you want to pay your way instead. It's a different market dynamic than cable where people had no "super-premium" alternative when premium started doing ads, it was extracting more money from a trapped user base who wouldn't accept higher prices. Today they leave for other services on a whim.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Commercials by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Commercials on cable and no commercials on streaming, guess which will win, like duhh.

      As well, the choices are huge. I have NetFlix, Amazon, and Tubi.

      And I sure don't miss the commercials for catheters, psoriasis medicines and antidepressents, and lawyers on fishing expeditions.

      About the only thing I watch on traditional TV is Rick and Morty on Cartoon Network - although if they don't get new episodes soon that will go away.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    7. Re:Commercials by Artagel · · Score: 1

      Amazon already shows commercials for their own shows at the beginning of Amazon Prime viewing. It is already here.

    8. Re:Commercials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a lie. Commercials existed long before cables Cable took the broadcast channels and offered them to people in areas with poor reception. Shows were already 24-25 minutes to account for advertising, there would be a lot of dead air if they had 0 ads. This is the kind of dumb lie that you could verify if you took 5 minutes to look it up yourself instead of repeating it like it was true.

    9. Re:Commercials by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Cable TV was never free. That was the proposition: Pay for your TV, skip the commercials.

  5. Is this before or after YouTube's banfest? by Chas · · Score: 0

    58 million videos?

    Anyone?

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Is this before or after YouTube's banfest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Always wondered about this. Why are channels on sites like twitch or youtube not counted ? 496 shows is peanuts compared to the the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of shows created _DAILY_ online. Some of them are scripted, even episodes, (youtube), while others are primarillay live (Twitch). Hell even porn sites dwarf broadcast.

      The concept of a TV for entertainment won't go away but the consumption model certainly has. I have no problem with that either.

    2. Re:Is this before or after YouTube's banfest? by Local+ID10T · · Score: 2

      58 million videos?

      Anyone?

      A drop in the ocean...

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    3. Re:Is this before or after YouTube's banfest? by Chas · · Score: 1

      58 million vids.

      Even if you assume an average length of 3 minutes, that's still the equivalent of about 331 YEARS worth of video.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
  6. Viewership? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately the article only talks about how many shows are being produced. I’d be more interested in relative viewership numbers.

    Why it matters: Apple is supposedly starting to produce tons of shows... but is anyone going to watch them? And how many people are actually subscribing to CBS All Access for more than one month?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Viewership? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the article only talks about how many shows are being produced. I’d be more interested in relative viewership numbers.

      Why it matters: Apple is supposedly starting to produce tons of shows... but is anyone going to watch them? And how many people are actually subscribing to CBS All Access for more than one month?

      I read this and the old "Solution to pollution is dilution" chestnut came to mind. So much choice on streaming.

      In our latest C****st sub, we get NetFlix, Amazon, and Tubi, and some streams I haven't checked out yet. You can spend hours just checking out what to watch.

      I don't know what I was doing at the time it was on network TV, but I've been binge watching Star Trek Voyager the past month. That was a pretty good series. Although Jeri Ryan's 7 of 9 character is terribly distracting, as I use closed captions, and find my eyes wandering elsewhere.

      I shall work my way through the difficulties!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  7. Cable TV by hunter44102 · · Score: 1

    The only thing keeping me on Cable TV is live sports, DVR, and my wife has a few shows she watches. I do like how cable is separated from the internet modem/router and I can re-boot it without taking down the TV. With SlingTV, DirecTV, Playstation Vue much cheaper than cable I am getting ready to switch to internet based. They have cloud DVR's so you save some electricity also

    1. Re:Cable TV by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You know, if you only watched sports that stream freely, the advertisers would demand that all sports be distributed this way, and the controlling organizations would make it happen. By paying cable for sports you're guaranteeing that they will continue to charge you. But they would deliver the content even if no one would pay because its first and most important function is as an advertising substrate. Professional sports wouldn't even exist without corporate sponsorship.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Cable TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, as long as you have internet access, you can find/watch any sports you want thru certain sites, same for your wife and her shows !!

      Do internet search for sites, also Reddit has some good threads. Get sports in HD.

    3. Re:Cable TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing keeping me on Cable TV is live sports,

      Sports can be fun, but why watch it?

  8. Not surprising by rundgong · · Score: 1

    Not surprising, since Netflix seems to greenlight anything that even remotely looks like a script.

  9. Haven't used cable or satellite TV for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I am going on 10 years since I last paid for cable or satellite TV subscription. Locals through antenna and the rest streaming.

  10. Re: Hitlercare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darn, and I really trusted libtards Democrats would keep my medical records safe and secure. Oh well, the carbon tax racket still has potential though...

    God bless centrist Republicans for stopping the Democrat's far-left LGBT extremist agenda. Nazis were National Socialist Democrats too, you know.

  11. Thirteen thousand channels of shit on the Internet by mapkinase · · Score: 2

    ... to choose from.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  12. Re: Hitlercare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is the poor customer service. Companies would rather have customers who are looking for the very first chance to ditch their services than loyal customers who want to keep buying. Streaming services seem to have cracked the code, not that it was a very difficult code to crack

  13. Cable Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why Cable?

    I don't want to watch when someone says I should.
    I don't want to pay to record it.
    I don't want to pay to record it, and also pay for the storage for commercials.
    I don't want to pay to watch highly compressed, commercial laden content.
    I don't want to pay for an expensive, slow, crashy, power hungry cable box.

    I don't want to pay for a cable box for every tv, so I can watch stale static commercial laden content.

    Can you hear me now? Cable TV execs?

  14. It's called a glut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it doesn't mean anybody is watching them. That isn't an 'accomplishment' or even a metric, just an indicator of the wealth of whomever is funding the pile of crap. Quantity has no inherent magical powers. Silicon Valley is definitely peopled with shallow trophy babies at this point. 'I have the *biggest* pile of turds! I win! I WIIIIIN!'

  15. What really chaps my a$$ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that over the air networks demand I have a cable subscription to stream shows freely available over the air. AND the streaming shows still have commercials.

  16. Re:Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was not. Troll.

  17. ya by Dj+Bongz · · Score: 1

    very true