IDK couldn't be worse than their take on Apocalypse. If it is... Wow
News FOX selling out to Disney?
- Thread starter Turtletrekker
- Start date
They're even have that Dark Crystal series on Netflix coming out. There's some talk of a new Labyrinth project and I think HBO is in talks for a new Fraggle Rock.
It's not about the government being "involved" in the sense of directly overseeing it, but in the sense of enforcing laws that guarantee a fair, free, and healthy marketplace that benefits the consumers, employees, and society as a whole, and not just the billionaire owners. That's why antitrust laws and market controls exist in the first place. We discovered back in 1929 that without laws to keep capitalist greed in check, it ruins the economy and has devastating consequences. We had a healthy economy for generations because of the New Deal and the sane standards that it put in place. But ever since Reagan, the GOP has been systematically tearing down all those sensible rules and returning the economy to a state as unstable and unbalanced as it was prior to the Great Depression, endangering the entire global economy just so a handful of billionaires can get even more unnecessarily super-wealthy. We already had a global economic crisis a decade ago because of that loss of economic responsibility, and the government has done nothing to penalize the people responsible for it or take steps to prevent it from happening again.
You might as well say you don't want the government involved in services like clean water and safe food and intact roads and bridges. The whole thing that government is for is maintaining basic standards that keep society functional and people's needs and safety provided for.
And yes, our current "government" is the problem, but that's because it's in the hands of people who serve corporate greed and are systematically trying to tear down all sane government safeguards on business. It's the erosion of the laws that used to exist that's allowed entertainment monopolies to gain so much power. Just like it's the erosion of every other aspect of good government that's responsible for the failure to clean up Flint's water or provide aid to disaster-stricken areas. The impact of the current regime that's actively destroying government from within is an argument in favor of the restoration of sane regulations and oversight, not against it.
A generic Western is the best they could do?
Anyways, the first X-Men movie would've worked pretty well with a few minor alterations as a Phase 1 MCU movie. It's the later films that wouldn't have fit.
Most of the content on youtube is not by youtube but from uploaders who have very different takes, opinions, goals than either youtube or other uploaders. To me it's great that youtube provides a platform or distribution for very different kinds of views and opinions.
I don't think youtube is a monopoly or particularly close to it when it faces competition from (for user-uploader content) at least dailymotion and (for professional streaming content) netflix, hulu, amazon instant, CBSAA and iTunes.
Some rules/standards are necessary, particularly as they affect safety and financial savings, but rules about media content should be viewed particularly skeptically since the government could be particularly likely to enforce them in self-serving ways. And rules controlling media, for example as Warren wants to do ban a distributor like youtube from making content for its own platform, do seem to have become more and more inappropriate rather than sensible as since the '80s the amount of channels, distributors, and competition has objectively increased, from three big television networks to scores and then hundreds of channels and the Internet.
Last edited:
Was anyone here talking about content? I sure wasn't. I'm talking about corporate monopolies and how harmful those are in any industry, media no less than anywhere else.
Any government, not just the current one. I wouldn't trust the past 3 administrations with this.
But, I do think anti-trust and monopoly break up is absolutely the pursue of the government to protect against larger consolidation.
This isn't about content at all. Google owns YouTube which means they have access to more information and consolidate it into one place with little to no oversight, aside from Google's self-policing policies. They can also restrict access based upon content that they don't agree with limited competition. And Google eventually absorbs those competitors. That's what they did with YouTube.
For all intents and purposes, YouTube is a monopoly. If you’re job depends on streaming media and you get banned from YouTube for a copyright issue, you’re screwed.
Well, there is Vimeo at least, but it certainly doesn't have the reach of YouTube.
The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance is actually why I was asking, I wasn't sure if there was a possibility of it ending up on Disney+ or one of the other streaming services instead of Netflix, now that more of the companies are setting up their own services.
Of course all this is pretty obvious, but I was talking purely about them taking an active hand in what content the companies are allowed to provide.
Even though the FOX broadcast network survives for now, I can't help but feel as if it will eventually become a 24/7 news and sports channel as was the Murdochs' original plan post-merger, and the loss of such a major network as a place for scripted television would be a major blow.
I don't think any of the rest of us were talking about that, though, so bringing that into a conversation about the danger of monopolies seems like a non sequitur at best. It's a straw man to say that government involvement to resist monopolies and ensure a fair system is equivalent to government censorship and content regulation. They're totally different things. The government making sure that the roads are safe and well-maintained does not mean that the government dictates where and when people are allowed to drive.
I strongly suspect the economics of network television these days is a factor with more and more going to a subscription model.
If FCC rules and regulations hadn't legally prohibited it, the Murdochs would have sold the FOX broadcast network to Disney outright and focused solely on sports and news programming, and so their original plan was to make said programming the central focus on the FOX broadcast network as well (hence why they offered the WWE a home for Smackdown and want the brand to be more sports-like and less entertainment-like) since they were legally prohibited from divesting themselves of it completely.
Is Disney still going to be using the Fox name? I haven't really seen that addressed anywhere, and there's a lot of Fox stuff that I can't see them releasing under the Disney banner.
Or will they be coming up with a new name for the part of the company that releases their more adult stuff?
Or will they be coming up with a new name for the part of the company that releases their more adult stuff?
Disney's no stranger to releasing movies without the Disney name attached. They created Touchstone to do this back in the 80's. IIRC correctly neither the Marvel films or the Star Wars films are released under the Disney banner. They will probably keep the Fox name for some projects.
Last edited:
