Hacker News Reader

Comment by sytelus | Hacker News Reader

This is great insider reporting! Most people have no clue how shows gets selected and blame “wokness” for troubles at Netflix. In reality, the cost-cutting high-volume risk-averse leadership took over initial leadership of opposite nature. Transition from “ gut-driven, risktaking, maverick culture” to “prudent and frequently indecisive” is exactly the story of many other areas. Well put.

View on HN

This isn't "insider reporting". If you don't how the media works, when the article says "Sources close to Holland" or a "Holland loyalist"...it is Holland (usually journalists will make an effort to disguise that, but the precise events being "quoted anonymously" here make obvious that the main source for the story was one person i.e. when the "anonymous" source quotes a conversation that occurred with two people in the room...it is obvious). There is no real analysis, it is just execs sniping at each other and trying to make sure future employers think it was someone else's fault.

On the subject, the problem with Netflix was that they tried to have it both ways. They seemed to think they could significantly increase output without decreasing quality. So saying that the failure of the new strategy is prudence ignores the fact that reckless spending got them into this position...bankruptcy tends to force prudence, but that is ex-post...prudence is not the cause of bankruptcy.

I think this should indicate that problems with NFLX are slightly more fundamental. I am sure they have the capacity to produce great shows. Look at their debt, look at how much capital they have committed to production...you can produce multiple "best ever" shows, and it won't get you out that hole.

> They seemed to think they could significantly increase output without decreasing quality.

An executive is quoted, on their strategy, as saying “We succeed if 1 in 10 shows is a hit.” I think it’s pretty clear they didn’t think they were pumping out pure winners.

Agree with this assessment, Cindy Holland is bitter she was pushed out and reached out through "channels" to deliver her own take on events. Its not really reporting just highlighting a power struggle from an individuals viewpoint(Cindy).

If the events mentioned in the story are in fact a cause of NFLX's decline is another story. People were forced inside(globally) during the pandemic and consumed alot more media than ever before in history. The quality of shows at NFLX has gone down considerably the past 2 years. NFLX pushed a show that alienated alot of people with Cuties. Friends and other hit shows left NFLX. Inflation has hit a 40 year high and gas and food are expensive, people are cutting costs and NFLX seems like an easy cut.

Would Cindy have stopped all of the above events? Maybe the quality issue but costs(under her) seemed steep, who can say? I think no matter who is at the top NFLX would have suffered in some way. If Ted had chose Cindy instead of Bela Bajaria we would have a similar article talking about Bela's sources and how Cindy's excessive spending and smaller show lineups are killing NFLX.

My favorite variation of that is “a source familiar with X’s thinking”. Of course that is X.

I think the "woke" people watch TV too. The problem is that there are not nearly as many of them as social media makes it appear that there are.

> (It was also Holland who warned Sarandos, to no avail, that continuing to order specials from one of his comedy heroes, Dave Chappelle, would lead to internal strife and bad press.)

Given that the journalist goes out of her way to include this, it's not a mystery why "wokeness" is not mentioned in the article :)

If you like this stuff here's another one

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/he-makes-you-fe...

Absolutely love behind the scenes stuff. I'm only a little way into Binge Times[0] by Dade Hayes and Dawn Chmielewski and I'm pretty sure I can recommend it here.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B099WY4H6G/ref=docs-os-doi_0

> Most people have no clue how shows gets selected and blame “wokness” for troubles at Netflix.

Well, the people blaming "wokeness" aren't connected to reality anyway, so I doubt that any evidence will change their mind.

But it's ironic if the reign of an "anti-woke" Chapelle loyalist is what tanks them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com