When I see stories like this I often feel both confused and a bit irked. It seems like much of the frustration here is misguided. (pic via Wiki)
First, no one is is forced to be a Netflix customer for any reason that I am aware of. Which right out of the gate makes the criticisms ridiculous, imho.
So here we have Netflix, a private business, offering a fantastic service at a fair price. But some still aren't happy that it doesn't cater to their narrow niche desires. So these groups malign Netflix as a bad or evil business.
I find this viewpoint to be quite warped and here's why. Netflix offers many thousands of movies, some of them with subtitles (and the list is constantly expanding), and they are made out to be the bad guy. Many other businesses offer not only no subtitles, but also not a single movie of any kind! Using the above logic, shouldn't they be considered even more evil than Netflix?
It would be one thing if Netflix came out ahead of time and claimed that they would serve the deaf community and offer every title with subtitles, then reneged on the promise. They would then be legitimate targets of this criticism. But I don't believe that's what happened here.
Why doesn't say Costco get even more criticism for this? Costco doesn't offer any streaming movies with subtitles. And none is markedly fewer than some. You would think following this logic they would be disliked even more than Netflix.
There may be too many people who believe that the world owes them something.
Netflix Adds Subtitles to More Streaming Content, Stirs Up Controversy - Fast Company: "The company has just announced plans to increase subtitles on streaming content. But it's not enough, say deaf advocates. For some, in fact, Netflix's recent shift to streaming and its price hike, looks like something of a 'deaf tax.' Is Netflix listening?"
Monday, February 28, 2011
Is Netflix A Bad Guy Here?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Support The Amateur Econ. Blog
3 comments:
Of course you are spot on. But if Netflix were a "Nonprofit" maybe they'd get a little more slack.
"There may be too many people who believe that the world owes them something."
I'll have to call you on this one - your "may" leaves too much room for doubt. There ARE too many people who believe the world owes them something. With liberals and unions controlling most of what goes on in the government indoctrination camps -sorry, I mean public schools- and half the population getting more from the government than they pay into it, I can't figure out where folks get ideas like that ;-)
Part of the problem is once groups get organizations to cave to their demands, they move on to the next indignation they have suffered, and extort another company. And, one more brick gets added to the canonical and practically untouchable temple of "stuff the gub'mint or 'big corporate' owes us."
This is absurd. OF COURSE Netflix should be pressured to provide greater subtitled content. There are two ways that companies wind up providing greater accessibility: consumer pressure and the law. This is consumer pressure. This is capitalism in action. Netflix is doing a good thing by providing subtitles on some of their content and vowing to add more. Mike Chapman is doing a good thing by holding them -- publicly -- to their promise.
The internet hold so much promise for people with accessibility problems, but tech companies that make their products or services inaccessible hold back that promise to millions of customers. Making sure that companies like Netflix respond to the needs of the disabled is an invaluable part of proving that the free market can benefit everyone.
You don't have to like him, but this guy is fighting to make Netflix a better company and he's using one of capitalism's most potent weapons -- publicity -- to do so.
Post a Comment