Physical media is better than streaming services.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 12,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
definitions:
physical media: DVD, BLU ray, VHS, etc.
streaming service: Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, etc.
rules:
* respond as quick as possible and as good as possible
* avoid these fallacies: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
* follow site's TOS.
"Netflix and Hulu let you pull out every month and do not trap you or goad you into longer-term contracts."
"On the flip side, Netflix in particular not only innovates (which Pro implies is a negative) with many quality original series and movies,"
"but the point is that all of these online streaming platforms make a disproportionately secure way for the producer/provider and consumer to interact with safe risk involved for both."
"oh no you had to be rich enough to mass-produce legitimate DVDs. Legitimate DVDs are not just about paying a cd and writing on it, that's illegal and known as 'ripping' (old school version of what now is torrenting). Even if it's your own media you needed to do things in a very official way or else the CD easily ends up discoloured and overheated during the writing (it's setup that way for security) whereas a proper 'raw DVD' comes from a specific disc written in an official way that leaves it silver and shiny.You had to pay for licensing, consistent copyright and had to convince shopkeepers to gamble hard on your movie/series in case consumers didn't like it. There was no way on Earth for Joe Schmoe random producer to reach ordinary people outside his local area at all. This all changed now. If you can convince Netflix to invest, or Disney or whoever or at the very least after some minimalistic, moderate success talk them into renting your series/movie to put on their platform, you can hit masses just like *poof* and the best part? If it goes wrong, you still got some guaranteed cash out of it, your time and effort weren't wasted."
"On the flip side, Netflix in particular not only innovates (which Pro implies is a negative) with many quality original series and movies, but the point is that all of these online streaming platforms make a disproportionately secure way for the producer/provider and consumer to interact with safe risk involved for both."
"A classic line I see from 'oldies' or 'boomers' these days is that platforms like Netflix are killing off creativity but the exact opposite is true."
"This type of easing of gambling is also seen by consumers. Consumers/viewers needn't spend one cent extra to risk seeing something they'll hate, they click play check it out and if they don't like it can switch over to something else."
"This means both providers and consumers are able to risk safer with more edgy series and movies.""
"Now to just quickly dispel a myth. Quality if the highest Spotify and Netflix, Hulu etc products is equal to anything short of blu-ray in physical media and blu-ray is a lot more expensive.""Blu-ray quality would be very, very slightly better than that. All other DVD variants will be equal.As for music, only sheer vinyl (similar to blu-ray but for music) will slightly push the quality that the highest Spotify quality offers.""The point is that quality-wise only the crème de la crème of physical, where it's a lot more expensive for that 1 movie or series, is the quality truly beyond the peak of online streaming."
Just because of the rise of Spotify and Netflix, the online piracy has fall down to its lowest rate in years, according to a research. According to Intellectual Property Office (IPO), which is tasked with fighting copyright infringement, found that 15pc of internet users illegally accessed films, music and other material between March and May.The rate is 18pc down than last year, and also the lowest recorded rate in the five years the study has been carried out. Recently, 44pc of internet users are using exclusively legal means, up from 39pc at the end of 2015. The Minister for Intellectual Property, Baroness Neville Rolfe explained, “Consumers appear to be turning towards legitimate streaming en masse”.On-demand internet services, which enable subscribers’ unlimited access to a catalogue of music or videos and films for a monthly fee or via an advertising-funded model, have been accused of diluting industry revenues and artists like Taylor Swift have restricted access on some platforms.As per the research, those using peer-to-peer file-sharing services – a popular way to pirate material – fell from 12pc to 10pc of all those who download or stream media.Baroness Rolfe added, “Online copyright infringement has been a running sore for the UK’s creative industries for far too long. I am extremely pleased to see that there has been a decline in infringement and that consumers appear to be turning towards legitimate streaming en masse.”The research showed that while spending on music and films is rising, spending on video games and TV shows is falling.
To put this all into economic perspective for you, a DVD generally costs $5.00 to $20.00, and that means the cheapest DVDs only let you buy 2 for 1 month of the cheapest Netflix, for 3 cheapest, bad DVDs you get 1 month Netflix... For an expensive DVD you get highest quality 1 month Netflix for 4 screens to view at one time.
To convince a seller in a shop to sell your DVD is already hard whereas for a streaming service with thousands of shows, it's a safe enough bet to at least trial-run you for a month. Now, imagine blu-rays (they can range hugely we are talking $40 per blu-ray for nwer movies and $25 as bare minimum for newer movies).
Are you gonna risk somebody's blu-ray as a retailer? Should they risk making it? Should consumers risk buying it, watching it and hating it?
It also helped to curtail the motive for Internet piracy:Just because of the rise of Spotify and Netflix, the online piracy has fall down to its lowest rate in years, according to a research. According to Intellectual Property Office (IPO), which is tasked with fighting copyright infringement, found that 15pc of internet users illegally accessed films, music and other material between March and May.The rate is 18pc down than last year, and also the lowest recorded rate in the five years the study has been carried out. Recently, 44pc of internet users are using exclusively legal means, up from 39pc at the end of 2015. The Minister for Intellectual Property, Baroness Neville Rolfe explained, “Consumers appear to be turning towards legitimate streaming en masse”.On-demand internet services, which enable subscribers’ unlimited access to a catalogue of music or videos and films for a monthly fee or via an advertising-funded model, have been accused of diluting industry revenues and artists like Taylor Swift have restricted access on some platforms.As per the research, those using peer-to-peer file-sharing services – a popular way to pirate material – fell from 12pc to 10pc of all those who download or stream media.Baroness Rolfe added, “Online copyright infringement has been a running sore for the UK’s creative industries for far too long. I am extremely pleased to see that there has been a decline in infringement and that consumers appear to be turning towards legitimate streaming en masse.”The research showed that while spending on music and films is rising, spending on video games and TV shows is falling.
We can sit and pretend things. We can say 'oh la di da blu-ray and vinyl achieve a higher max quality than max of streaming by a small margin' or we can focus on what matters: if for producer flexibility and consumer flexibility this benefits both ends and by goodness does streaming win in a landslide.
As a consumer, you are paying to freely, risk-free venture into edge-of-your-taste picks that you wouldn't otherwise risk. Spotify and Netflix use algorithms to recommend series to you, sure yes but the point is that if something's brand new and sponsored by Netflix or Hulu (or a product of Disney and/or HBO) you can stream it right way, to your pleasure.
This debate is really a comparison between a more scattershot approach to the topic (throw a bunch of arguments out and see what sticks) vs. a focused approach to the topic (narrowing in on a single point or pair of points and explaining them in detail). Both approaches can work, but it's the latter that wins the day here.
Pro, it's not so much that your individual points don't work, it's that they don't really go beyond what you said in R1. Most of those points just sit there, and while some of them might have greater meaning to the debate as a whole, you don't go through the process of explaining why. What makes a list-like approach such as this work is when you narrow down to a few key issues as the debate progresses. You have to make the case that there are benefits to physical media that are the most important facets of the debate. I can think of a few points you could've gone with here, but what I'm seeing instead is more of a rebuttal-based structure where you address your opponent's points instead of building up your own. You also muddle your own points. For example, if Internet access is a concern (you don't really build it up to be one, but you argue that the need for it is a negative for Con's case), then why emphasize that YouTube videos can do so much to help narrow the field of choices? In general, it just doesn't feel like any of these points have heft to them because none of them get all that much emphasis. Bad media exists regardless, it's just a matter of volume and cherry-picking some exemplars isn't enough to tell me that the selection on streaming services is all bad. You could argue that it makes it harder to find the good stuff, but I need to see that spelled out and impacted meaningfully. Emphasizing the quality of Blu-ray tells me there's a loss in going to streaming, but it's not made all that meaningful.
Con, in emphasizing each of his points and focusing his attention, builds a more meaningful case about how the structure of streaming services and their availability to the public both improves the experience for customers and gives more opportunity for creators to introduce something unique and innovative at low risk. Those points establish to some degree what we would lose if we didn't have them. I can recognize that that creativity leads to many flawed products while at the same time recognizing that it leads to amazing work that would otherwise likely never see the light of day, and certainly not a wide audience. I don't think his points are perfect since investments from companies like Netflix can taint a production (they have a lot of say in how these are done), but I don't see that argument. That narrow focus just allows Con to hype up his arguments far more comparatively, and he capitalizes on it.
So I vote Con.
Solid R1 from pro. While it's a list type debate, it's not a gish gallop, as the list is for the purpose of comparison.
"the supposed cons of physical media:"
This section in R1 was a waste. Trying to pre-refute weaker versions of what you suspect someone's argument might be, sets voters to suspect you're going to have more strawman arguements later (even if that is not the intent).
Con highlighted this round with explaining the lower risk to producers and consumers, plus the minimal quality trade-off.
Pro really misunderstood this in his reply, insisting that producers don't have to worry about anyone buying their product and the entry cost; and later that those producers don't really matter (they make the product, so they are self evidentially essential).
Pro lists some bad conduct on netflix, and says people should use YouTube... YouTube... The streaming service... He later repeats this point
Pro ends R2 with an appeal to the video quality of blue-rays being higher than streaming services.
Con counters this with math on the costs... I'm honestly having a hard time moving past pro wanting us to use a streaming service in a debate against streaming services.
thanks for your vote, as always.
If you had gone further, I did point out the YT thing in my Round 3 and was confused at it as well.
3 days remain to vote if you are going to do so.
I'll try to get to this.
Hello to everyone who watched this debate. I hope you enjoyed my expression of my unpopular opinion. I hope you vote for the best. I wish you good luck.
rush to vote!
I do like the choice of topic here.
Please vote if you feel like it. Thanks if you do.
thank you.
Interesting debate
The same comment twice was a mistake and I never intended as such.
I'm a middle class person. I said really cheap to say cheaper than blu ray.
I'm a middle class person. I said really cheap to say cheaper than blu ray.
DVDs are not really cheap btw but you are probably well-off and don't think of pricing in the same way. Regardless I'll handle the economics fully in Round 2.
Yes, I decided to take a small break from my usual debates and I have been planning this for weeks.