I've been listening to NPR a bit lately in an attempt to get more "objective" information and news. While I haven't been able to fully vet the objectivity, I am finding that a lot of their reporting is ill-informed and just plain stupid. The most glaring and frustrating example was during their "All Tech Considered" report yesterday. The "reporter" made the claim that on-demand movie services are not as easy to use as one would hope.
Now this position may be a valid one, maybe these services really aren't that easy to use yet, and maybe they are great for early-adopters, but not yet for the casual user. That seems fair and even likely to me, this is a new market, there are no clear standards, and there are a lot of service providers, each trying to differentiate themselves and offer compelling solutions. Apple iTunes is geared towards Apple TV and iPod users. Netflix is geared towards subscribers and PC/laptop users - as well as working with emerging solutions like Xbox and Blu-ray players. Amazon has their solution, and I'm sure there are myriad others in the space - all trying to find their niche. I have used Netflix to view online movies and it works well, assuming you have the appropriate browser and a fast enough broadband connection. I haven't tried Apple or Amazon, but I assume they have similar limitations.
That said, had the reporter focused on any of this kind of information, the report may have been useful. She chose instead to miss the point completely. Her conclusion was that these services are not ready for the masses, but her entire argument was built on the fact that she and her husband, her household's Chief Technology Architect, could not find the movie "City of God" on any of these services. Seriously? You can't find one title - even if it is an Oscar nominee - and you ascert that this solution is not ready for the masses? How about you focus on using the solution to watch a movie. The availability of a title is due to the studio's distribution deals, not the services themselves. When I used to walk to the local video rental shop when I was a kid to rent VHS tapes, I didn't whine that VHS was a poor solution, or that video rental stores were not ready for the casual renter! I was just bummed that it took so long for "Hardbodies 2" to get released (and that the store owner wouldn't rent an R rated flick to a 13 year old!). This NPR reporting is a waste of time! My local Safeway doesn't carry "Marshmallow Fluff", does that mean grocery chains just aren't ready for the masses? Is this the normal depth and focus of NPR reporting?
What really set me off is the "victim" type reaction to the results they found in their search for a lame-ass movie - and this is what I am finding to be pretty indicative of the NPR set: According to the husband, "We've given Hollywood four different ways to give us the movie that we want," he said, "and they've decided that we're not worthy." WTF? Hollywood gave you 1 way to get that particular movie, and you are swimming up stream. This isn't them against you, this is them limiting and protecting, as they see fit, their intellectual property. There are plenty of other options. And honestly, is the story that nobody gives a crap about watching "City of God" online, or that these on-line rental services don't work?
I am trying to keep an open mind about it, and will continue my experiment a little longer, but more stories like this and it is back to pop music for me in the mornings. At least then I'll know to expect idiocy.
