Home / News & Analysis / Report: Amazon Planning Free, Ad-Supported Video Streaming Service

Report: Amazon Planning Free, Ad-Supported Video Streaming Service

Alongside the growing amount of original content, signing up for one or more streaming video subscription services such as Netflix or Prime Video comes with the added bonus of no ads. However, Amazon is apparently working on a completely free version of its Prime Video service, but it will be full of ads.

According to AdAge, Amazon is currently in talks with movie studios, media companies, and TV networks to plan content for a free video streaming service. Where as Prime subscribers pay $99 a year and gain access to Prime Video without adverts, this service wouldn't cost consumers a dime. In return for that free viewing experience, Amazon would surround content with advertising to cover the costs of the service.

Earlier this year, the number of Amazon prime subscribers went past 80 million, but that still leaves tens of million more who don't or even won't pay for access to streamed content. A free service may entice them to try Amazon's platform, at which point Amazon could regularly try and upsell them to a Prime subscription as well as introducing all the other perks paying for Prime offers. And don't forget, free viewers will likely still need to buy a Amazon Fire TV device to watch.

If this free service sounds like a return to regular ad-funded TV, think again. Amazon is apparently planning a much more lucrative deal to content owners. For example, it has been suggested Amazon will share advertising revenue with content creators by allowing them to setup their own channels and provide a set number of hours of content each week. We could effectively have the equivalent of YouTube, only each channel would be from an approved and established movie studio, TV network, or media company.

Related

As to what content we should expect to see on a free Prime Video service, expect a little of everything from children's programming, travel, and cooking, to classic TV shows and the thousands of old movies the studios have to offer.

For now, Amazon is choosing not to comment and the focus remains on Prime subscriptions. If a free service does appear, do you think it will use the Prime Video name or some alternate and new branding?

Read more

Check Also

Undercover report shows the Facebook moderation sausage being made

An undercover reporter with the UK’s Channel 4 visited a content moderation outsourcing firm in Dublin and came away rather discouraged at what they saw: queues of flagged content waiting, videos of kids fighting staying online, orders from above not to take action on underage users. It sounds bad, but the truth is there are pretty good reasons for most of it and in the end the report comes off as rather naive. Not that it’s a bad thing for journalists to keep big companies (and their small contractors) honest, but the situations called out by Channel 4’s reporter seem to reflect a misunderstanding of the moderation process rather than problems with the process itself. I’m not a big Facebook fan, but in the matter of moderation I think they are sincere, if hugely unprepared. The bullet points raised by the report are all addressed in a letter from Facebook to the filmmakers. The company points out that some content needs to be left up because abhorrent as it is, it isn’t in violation of the company’s stated standards and may be informative; underage users and content has some special requirements but in other ways can’t be assumed to be real; popular pages do need to exist on different terms than small ones, whether they’re radical partisans or celebrities (or both); hate speech is a delicate and complex matter that often needs to be reviewed multiple times; and so on. The biggest problem doesn’t at all seem to be negligence by Facebook: there are reasons for everything, and as is often the case with moderation, those reasons are often unsatisfying but effective compromises. The problem is that the company has dragged its feet for years on taking responsibility for content and as such its moderation resources are simply overtaxed. The volume of content flagged by both automated processes and users is immense and Facebook hasn’t staffed up. Why do you think it’s outsourcing the work? By the way, did you know that this is a horrible job? Short film ‘The Moderators’ takes a look at the thankless job of patrolling the web Facebook in a blog post says that it is working on doubling its “safety and security” staff to 20,000, among which 6,500 will be on moderation duty. I’ve asked what the current number is, and whether that includes people at companies like this one (which has about 650 reviewers) and will update if I hear back. Even with a staff of thousands the judgments that need to be made are often so subjective, and the volume of content so great, that there will always be backlogs and mistakes. It doesn’t mean anyone should be let off the hook, but it doesn’t necessarily indicate a systematic failure other than, perhaps, a lack of labor. If people want Facebook to be effectively moderated they may need to accept that the process will be done by thousands of humans who imperfectly execute the task. Automated processes are useful but no replacement for the real thing. The result is a huge international group of moderators, overworked and cynical by profession, doing a messy and at times inadequate job of it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Disclaimer: Trading in bitcoins or other digital currencies carries a high level of risk and can result in the total loss of the invested capital. theonlinetech.org does not provide investment advice, but only reflects its own opinion. Please ensure that if you trade or invest in bitcoins or other digital currencies (for example, investing in cloud mining services) you fully understand the risks involved! Please also note that some external links are affiliate links.