With endless content available, why does it still feel like there’s nothing good on TV?
Despite the amount of content spoonfed to us by streaming services, it sometimes seems like there’s nothing worth watching anymore. As streaming service companies harbour more than enough data to cater to viewers’ exact entertainment preferences, TV should be thriving. The primary factor behind this alleged decline of television is the very thing that revolutionised its accessibility: online streaming services. However, we cannot singularly blame the content providers; we must look at our own consumption patterns as well.
In many ways, the easiest kind of show to produce is reality TV. There is no need for thoroughly written scripts, actors’ unions, or complex set design. Rather, producers rely on charismatic personalities. The hardest part of creating these shows is simply finding people who can fabricate compelling drama of their own volition. The fact is, these shows are low stakes, easily digestible watches which have quickly gained immense popularity. Streaming services recognise that following a proven-to-work formula is the most efficient way to maximise profit while exerting minimal creative effort. Cue the endless international spin-offs of Netflix’s most popular shows, such as Love Is Blind and The Circle.
This profit-driven shift has saturated the market with mid-tier forgettable shows, reducing the goal of television from high-quality production to cheaply-made content that aims to keep users subscribed to a streaming platform for as long as possible. This is why finales are often released weeks after the first half of a show’s season: to ensure that audiences will return and ultimately pay a subscription fee for at least another month. As a result, many series now feel as though they were algorithmically programmed to mesh together past successful formats rather than made by creative screenwriters working to produce something new.
I pose a question to the reader: if television continues to churn out redundant stories, why do we as audience members continue to consume them? As we’ve grown increasingly accustomed to short-form content (TikTok, Reels, Shorts, etc.), we’ve started to perceive longer-form media as boring or sluggish. Like many others, I find a 20-minute scroll through TikTok far more engaging than sitting through a 20-minute TV episode. The difference lies in the variety that short-form content can provide for our entertainment-voracious eyes, as opposed to a TV episode that locks viewers into a singular storyline.
Even more telling is the fact that people now watch TV while simultaneously scrolling through their phones, barely paying the big screen mind unless something particularly interesting is heard over the sounds of doomscrolling. Television producers and writers are fully aware of this change in viewing habits and have adapted accordingly, producing content that is quick, hyper-stimulating, and binge-able—or, at the very least, something that can hold its own as background noise during a TikTok scrolling session.
All of this is to say that we have developed an insatiable need for instant gratification. We crave fast-paced, snappy storytelling that gets to the point, simply because that is what we’ve been conditioned to expect from the media we consume. So, the next time you find yourself watching a show that feels rushed and crammed with a dozen plotlines, understand that it is not by accident. Content creators study our consumption habits and are actively trying to keep your digitally burnt-out brain captivated for more than 15 seconds at a time.
Naturally, well-produced television has become increasingly rare and falls victim to poor marketing and limited visibility as it often does not fit the standard of today’s contemporary content models. Take, for example, the show Severance on Apple TV+. This critically acclaimed and audience-beloved show has not received the viewership it deserves due to Apple TV+ lacking the large subscriber bases of industry giants such as Netflix or HBO Max. With fewer subscribers, and consequently, less influence, Apple TV+ doesn’t hold the same leverage to push its shows into mainstream conversation. Moreover, many great shows that suffer from this underexposure get cancelled after one season, leaving the prospect of a long-running series lost to cliffhangers and unresolved storylines, all due to a system that prioritises what is easy to market over what is actually worth watching.
However, realistically speaking, it is not sustainable for the average person to subscribe to multiple streaming services just to watch a handful of shows. For that reason, many great series go unnoticed and unwatched. Ironically, the original appeal of streaming was its affordability over cable. Now, subscribing to multiple services can cost just as much, if not more. Therefore, a solution many people opt for is piracy, and while it does provide unrestricted free access to content, it ultimately weakens the subscriber bases of these smaller streaming services. In turn, lower official viewership is recorded for quality shows, making them more likely to be cancelled, underfunded, or poorly advertised. This is not to say piracy is the root problem; rather, this is the fault of the overwhelming amount of streaming services that have made access to television more complicated and expensive than ever before.
Taking everything into account, TV isn’t necessarily worse, it is just more divided between mainstream, easily digestible content, and high-quality shows that lack visibility. The prioritisation of binge-ability admittedly has led us to more “mid” TV, but great shows still exist—they just aren’t as easy to find as they once were.
