Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
CMU School of Drama
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
Netflix has removed nine titles from its service to comply with government requests
The Verge: Since Netflix was founded almost 25 years ago, the company has removed nine titles from its service around the world in compliance with government demands, including Night of the Living Dead in Germany and Full Metal Jacket in Vietnam.
5 comments:
Elizabeth Purnell
said...
From a business perspective Netflix continues to make money if they comply with requests from countries to take down a movie or tv show. It seems that they would much rather take down one specific thing than get the whole service banned. However, this raises a lot of concerns about media censorship. From this list, certain countries have taken down movies criticizing their country or government, movies that have serious themes like suicide, or films with graphic depictions of violence or religion. There are some movies and series like the article mentioned, that are telling very important stories which may be threatened by this ability for governments to demand they be withdrawn. I thought this article was very interesting, and I like that Netflix released the titles that had been taken down, when, and by who. I thought it was especially interesting that they uploaded a taken down episode of Patriot Act onto Youtube so that the ‘affected’ audience could still view the media.
One thing that was clear to me after reading this article that whatever be the case, Netflix will continue to make money whatsoever be the case. By producing great content, they are rewarded and by taking down content that had government consent, Netflix is just building a reputation of being adjustable to peoples sensitivities, which makes me think that it is a win-win situation for the company in whichever sense. What I do not necessarily agree with is the reaction that a few countries have in response to the content created. Until and unless it is something that triggers people in the wrong ways, for whatever reason or because it manages to not paint a country's history the way it was enacted, which is subject to judgement, all this seems to me like an act to establish censorship on things no necessarily found right by a few people in power in coherence with the entertainment spectrum.
I really appreciate that Netflix pushes back on these demands when they can. I think what CEO Reed Hastings said about Netflix does not really line up with their actions, and also caused people to criticize Netflix. It seems to me that Netflix is doing what it can to speak truth to power but is not always able to win and would ultimately rather take down a title than lose the business of an entire country. I honestly do not see an issue with this. I am shocked and glad that they appealed at all. It is a risky thing for any company to do and shows that they do care. It is a shame that there is so much censorship in the world though. I am also glad that Netflix is choosing to list these takedowns. Citizens of the countries where censorship is occurring should be informed of what is happening, and these lists may help identify dangerous trends in the future.
This article is quite interesting… I wonder if the article writer would rather have seen Netflix not comply. Why should this company be responsible for revolting against large countries? What this article brings up in its heart is censorship. Censorship is practiced all around us, from schools blocking Netflix on their computers to countries trying to control information. Censorship is also often practiced when people spread false information on social media. This type of censorship is usually seen as favorable by the public because it prevents the spread of false information. These days we have an issue with telling the truth. People believe if they feel something is true it is true. The question is who is deciding what's true? Some people may say the court of popular opinion, although that's not always true. In the case of these nine censored movies, they all have different reasons for being censored. I’m actually surprised there are only nine programs.
I was surprised to hear that countries that are not known for censorship were censoring what media their people could consume. This reminds me of the saying "Where they burn books, they will, in the end, burn human beings too." It kind of bugs me that the government is willing to censor things like that, especially something as obvious as the Hasaan Minaj episode about Saudia Arabia. Part of what makes societies great is that you can make are and write poetry about things that people may disagree with and it can be consumed by the general public. The other strange thing is that it is straight censorship, because it’s not like the media is in a public place and they don’t want kids to be seeing it, you can’t watch these shows and movies unless you search for it and want to. You are a full consenting adult in that situation.
:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/66272949/1179797608.jpg.0.jpg)
5 comments:
From a business perspective Netflix continues to make money if they comply with requests from countries to take down a movie or tv show. It seems that they would much rather take down one specific thing than get the whole service banned. However, this raises a lot of concerns about media censorship. From this list, certain countries have taken down movies criticizing their country or government, movies that have serious themes like suicide, or films with graphic depictions of violence or religion. There are some movies and series like the article mentioned, that are telling very important stories which may be threatened by this ability for governments to demand they be withdrawn. I thought this article was very interesting, and I like that Netflix released the titles that had been taken down, when, and by who. I thought it was especially interesting that they uploaded a taken down episode of Patriot Act onto Youtube so that the ‘affected’ audience could still view the media.
One thing that was clear to me after reading this article that whatever be the case, Netflix will continue to make money whatsoever be the case. By producing great content, they are rewarded and by taking down content that had government consent, Netflix is just building a reputation of being adjustable to peoples sensitivities, which makes me think that it is a win-win situation for the company in whichever sense.
What I do not necessarily agree with is the reaction that a few countries have in response to the content created. Until and unless it is something that triggers people in the wrong ways, for whatever reason or because it manages to not paint a country's history the way it was enacted, which is subject to judgement, all this seems to me like an act to establish censorship on things no necessarily found right by a few people in power in coherence with the entertainment spectrum.
I really appreciate that Netflix pushes back on these demands when they can. I think what CEO Reed Hastings said about Netflix does not really line up with their actions, and also caused people to criticize Netflix. It seems to me that Netflix is doing what it can to speak truth to power but is not always able to win and would ultimately rather take down a title than lose the business of an entire country. I honestly do not see an issue with this. I am shocked and glad that they appealed at all. It is a risky thing for any company to do and shows that they do care. It is a shame that there is so much censorship in the world though. I am also glad that Netflix is choosing to list these takedowns. Citizens of the countries where censorship is occurring should be informed of what is happening, and these lists may help identify dangerous trends in the future.
This article is quite interesting… I wonder if the article writer would rather have seen Netflix not comply. Why should this company be responsible for revolting against large countries? What this article brings up in its heart is censorship. Censorship is practiced all around us, from schools blocking Netflix on their computers to countries trying to control information. Censorship is also often practiced when people spread false information on social media. This type of censorship is usually seen as favorable by the public because it prevents the spread of false information. These days we have an issue with telling the truth. People believe if they feel something is true it is true. The question is who is deciding what's true? Some people may say the court of popular opinion, although that's not always true. In the case of these nine censored movies, they all have different reasons for being censored. I’m actually surprised there are only nine programs.
I was surprised to hear that countries that are not known for censorship were censoring what media their people could consume. This reminds me of the saying "Where they burn books, they will, in the end, burn human beings too." It kind of bugs me that the government is willing to censor things like that, especially something as obvious as the Hasaan Minaj episode about Saudia Arabia. Part of what makes societies great is that you can make are and write poetry about things that people may disagree with and it can be consumed by the general public. The other strange thing is that it is straight censorship, because it’s not like the media is in a public place and they don’t want kids to be seeing it, you can’t watch these shows and movies unless you search for it and want to. You are a full consenting adult in that situation.
Post a Comment