welmaky niikodem yasmyna

1 view

Skip to first unread message

Rodney Liuzzo

unread,

Aug 2, 2024, 7:54:00 AM8/2/24

to porbtrucamro

It would certainly be a welcome development for people who represent on-air news talent. The traditional TV networks that pay their clients handsomely are losing audience and revenue. Some agents fear significant downsizing and cost-cutting after the 2024 presidential election in November and nothing would lift their spirits more than having a new, deep-pocketed bidder enter the playing field.

The company has internally discussed the opportunities in news, just as it has for many formats on traditional TV that attract audiences. But when asked about any plans along those lines, a Netflix representative cited a recent interview with Netflix Chief Executive Ted Sarandos in which he said the platform has no plans to pursue breaking news.

One reason is that news is not quite like sports. League media rights fees have escalated in recent years, because live game telecasts are the most reliable way to attract large audiences for appointment viewing. The buyers of those rights have some degree of certainty of what they are getting when they sign the deal. Not so with news.

News is not only unpredictable but expensive to produce and perishable after it goes on the air. Breaking coverage is not exclusive to a single outlet. Live feeds of events are now ubiquitous in the streaming and social media era.

Cable news remains highly profitable, but cord-cutting is slowly depriving them of the subscriber fees that have sustained the businesses for decades. Younger consumers are bypassing traditional TV and not developing the habit of news viewing (although many network news programs are repeated on their favorite platform, YouTube).

They also built stature for their parent companies. Affiliate stations still depend on the national broadcast networks for news to supplement their own local coverage. News provides a brand identity for networks, right down to the logo painted on production trucks that show up for live shoots on a neighborhood corner.

Netflix would be better off licensing programs produced by an existing news organization that already has a news-gathering infrastructure in place, several TV executives said. (Netflix carried original shows from CNN before Warner Bros. Discovery moved them over to its streaming service Max, which now offers a streaming feed of the channel.)

Avatar News is in no way affiliated with Paramount, Nickelodeon, Avatar Studios, Dark Horse Comics, Abrams Books, Insight Editions, Netflix, or any other entity whose property may be present on the Avatar News website (avatarnews.co & korranews.com) or Avatar News social media accounts. Avatar News makes no claim of ownership to any content owned by any such entities.

Like the title says, Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko, the co-creators and showrunners of Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra, have left their positions as executive producers and showrunners of the live-action adaptation of ATLA at Netflix, and will have no involvement with it going forward.

Before I get to the crux of this statement, I would like to make it clear that I am very aware and appreciative of the fact that I am in an exceedingly fortunate position, and that the following issues are indeed good problems to have - even more so now that we are in the grips of a global pandemic and a cratering economy which have left millions unemployed. With that crucial context, here is the big news from my little world.

To be clear, this was not a simple matter of us not getting our way. Mike and I are collaborative people; we did not need all of the ideas to come from us. As long as we felt those ideas were in line with the spirit and integrity of Avatar, we would have happily embraced them.

Though I am profoundly disappointed by how things turned out, there are wonderfully talented people who are still working on the series, some of whom Mike and I personally hired and got to know well during our time on the project. We worked very hard together towards a shared dream of how special this adaptation could be. I want to see them employed, and I hope they get the chance to do their best work on the series. Perhaps the team that remains might still be able to make something fans of the original and an entirely new audience can enjoy.

By and large, I have an incredibly charmed career and I am very grateful for it. And I am enormously lucky for the amazing global community of fans that has grown around the shows Mike and I have created and run together. I will continue to be deeply involved in the Avatar universe, telling the stories that my partner and I want to tell in the way we want to tell them. I will put my time, energy, and talent towards the projects that give me the most fulfilment [sic], and where I am afforded trust and respect.

Many of you have been asking me for updates about the Avatar live-action Netflix series. I can finally tell you that I am no longer involved with the project. In June of this year, after two years of development work, Bryan Konietzko and I made the difficult decision to leave the production.

When Bryan and I signed on to the project in 2018, we were hired as executive producers and showrunners. In a joint announcement for the series, Netflix said that it was committed to honoring our vision for this retelling and to supporting us on creating the series. And we expressed how excited we were for the opportunity to be at the helm. Unfortunately, things did not go as we had hoped.

This time, they both talk about how they will be heavily involved in Avatar moving forward. They just spent two years enthusiastically jumping back into the franchise, and at the tail end of that, Avatar became bigger than ever before. (The huge news articles about them leaving is testament to that alone!)

Live TV streaming services may offer different packages and add-ons for viewers, but you want to ensure you can watch your local channels along with cable networks and on-demand videos. Not every service provides access to local programming (like PBS, ABC or NBC), sports or channels you'd typically find on cable and satellite TV. Compare channel lineups before choosing.

You can choose a streaming service subscription that aligns with your budget, and there are multiple services available. Prices range from $25 to over $100 per month, depending on what you want. When considering costs, review the channel selection, cloud DVR abilities, price of premium add-ons, and how many devices you can stream on simultaneously.

Take note of how many screens you can watch at a time. For example, YouTube TV allows you to stream on three devices at once, while Hulu grants you two, with the option to pay extra for more screens. Look for platform offerings that fit your household's needs.

If you want the best mix of live streaming and on-demand, Hulu Plus Live TV is it. Its channel selection may not be as robust as YouTube TV or Fubo, but it's almost there -- especially with the addition of PBS and Magnolia. Yet, it's Hulu's significant catalog of on-demand content that helps set it apart. Not only does the $77 service include Hulu Basic but also Disney Plus and ESPN Plus, plus an unlimited DVR. Hulu's exclusive titles such as The Bear, The Handmaid's Tale and Only Murders in the Building, plus its massive catalog of broadcast programming, grant it a content advantage no other service can match. Given that Hulu Plus Live TV offers you more with its live channels, it's the service to choose for live TV streaming.

YouTube TV has more top channels than any competitor at this price, and it's one of three services with local PBS stations currently -- Hulu is the latest arrival. The basic $73 YouTube TV service has an excellent cloud DVR, including both unlimited storage and a generous nine months to watch recordings (most rivals offer 30 days). The interface is no-nonsense, even if a little drab, and yet it offers most of the features a cable service can give you. YouTube TV is also the only one to offer surround sound on live broadcasts.

YouTube TV is the exclusive home of NFL Sunday Ticket through the 2029-2030 season, with monthly payment plans available. In addition, the video streaming service has a $20 monthly upgrade that lets you watch 4K livestreams, of college football in particular. Given a lack of 4K content otherwise, it's not a great value for a resolution boost alone, but it does add an unlimited number of simultaneous streams (up from three) and offline DVR downloads.

If you're looking for the cheapest live TV streaming service and one that is still able to offer a usable amount of channels, then it's without a doubt Sling TV Blue. Yet, things are a little more complicated than they are for Sling's competitors. You see, Sling tenders two different $40-ish-per-month live TV streaming channel packages, Sling Orange and Sling Blue. While a number of live TV channels are common to both, Orange is essentially the ESPN/Disney package, while Blue is the Fox/Discovery package. Meanwhile, Orange & Blue combines the two offerings for $60.