Understanding Netflix’s establishment in Sweden:
A study on how Swedish trade press and cultural journalism build up Netflix as powerful with regards to economic and cultural aspects.
Gustaf Holmqvist Emanuelsson Stockholm University Department for Media Studies Master Thesis Supervisor: Kristina Riegert Submitted on 12 June 2020
Abstract This thesis expands an understanding of how Netflix has been established in Sweden’s media landscape. It seeks to investigate what effect the press has had, and more specifically, the study explores how the press builds up Netflix as powerful and how it imbues Netflix with legitimacy. Methodologically the thesis starts off with a usage of purposive sampling in order to find articles. The material is further handled with a critical discourse analysis, where writers’ language is explored, along with an investigation into how the world is represented with regards to identities, relationships and sociocultural aspects. Analysed articles with an economic focus come from Dagens Industri and those with cultural focus comes from Aftonbladet, Expressen, Dagens Nyheter and Svenska Dagbladet. Moreover, the study is based on theories and earlier studies within political economy, with a pursuit to understand film and television industry; trade press, to interpret the economic articles; cultural journalism, to interpret the cultural articles from; and power, to distinguished different power aspects in Netflix. The analysis comes in two parts: the economic analysis, which is divided in three ways and a two-folded cultural analysis. When it comes to economic legitimacy, two major aspects are prominent: Netflix’s success in competition against other streaming services and a clear establishment on the global market. Some articles have also given reasons to understand Netflix’s situation as ambiguous, meaning its future is uncertain. With regards to cultural legitimacy, the question of quality is significant, along with a connection to other social contexts such as gender, politics and climate. Netflix is perceived as having a societal responsibility. As a result of this thesis, it can be noted that cultural articles tend to be more critical than economic. Cultural journalists appear to cover the subject with a more open approach, using personal opinions, often suggesting what Netflix can improve. Writers of economic articles demonstrate a stricter portrayal of Netflix, mainly focusing on developments and success.
2
Table of content 1. Introduction ...... 5 2. Background ...... 6 2.1 What is Netflix? ...... 8 3. Theoretical framework and literature review ...... 9 3.1 Political economy ...... 10 3.1.1 Structure of the film industry ...... 10 3.1.2 Political economy in the film industry ...... 12 3.1.3 Television ...... 12 3.2 Press ...... 14 3.2.1 Trade press ...... 14 3.2.2 Cultural journalism ...... 16 3.3 Power ...... 17 3.3.1 The forms of capital ...... 18 3.3.2 Journalism power ...... 19 3.4 Summary of theories and connection to Netflix ...... 19 4. Methods and data gathering ...... 20 4.1 Collecting economic influenced articles ...... 21 4.2 Collecting cultural influenced articles ...... 23 4.3 Critical Discourse Analysis ...... 25 5. Analysis - Economic legitimacy ...... 26 5.1 Introducing competition ...... 27 5.1.1 Netflix is here ...... 27 5.1.2 The competition continues ...... 29 5.1.3 World representation, identity and relations ...... 30 5.1.4 Sociocultural aspects ...... 32 5.2 Spreading territory ...... 33 5.2.1 World representation, identity and relations ...... 35 5.2.2 Sociocultural aspects ...... 38 5.3 The uncertain future ...... 38 5.3.1 World representation, identity and relations ...... 40 5.3.2 Sociocultural aspects ...... 42 6. Analysis - Cultural legitimacy ...... 42 6.1 The question of quality ...... 42 6.1.1 World representation, identity and relations ...... 46 6.1.2 Sociocultural aspects ...... 47 6.2 Applicable to everything ...... 48 6.2.1 Gender ...... 48 6.2.2 Socio-political ...... 49 6.2.3 Climate ...... 50 6.2.4 World representation, identity and relations ...... 52 3
6.2.5 Sociocultural aspects ...... 53 7. Concluding discussion ...... 53 References ...... 56 Appendices ...... 60 Appendix A ...... 60 Appendix B ...... 61 Appendix C ...... 62 Appendix D ...... 63 Appendix E ...... 64 Appendix F ...... 64 Appendix G ...... 65 Appendix H ...... 66 Appendix I ...... 67 Appendix J ...... 68 Appendix K ...... 69 Appendix L ...... 70 Appendix M ...... 71 Appendix N ...... 72 Appendix O ...... 73
4
1. Introduction On October 15th in 2012, Netflix was announced on the Swedish market believing it to be a profitable place to expand its trademark on. Initially, Netflix faced stiff competition, entering a Swedish television landscape filled with different kinds of television services, both authorized and unauthorized. But Netflix quickly showed its strength and would become one of the more prominent television companies - leading the way in the new era of streaming, both in Sweden and the world. Continuously, Netflix would also get involved in the film industry. Its first original film was Beasts of no Nation in 2015 culminating in, at the Oscar awards in 2020, the company with most nominations. Netflix has been making its own material since producing Lilyhammer in 2011. By both producing and distributing their own material, Netflix was able to reach out to countries in the whole world. For example: Lilyhammer was made along with a Norwegian company; Beast of no Nation was indeed American but recorded in Ghana; and in 2019 Quicksand was released, Netflix’s first Swedish TV series. Moreover, Netflix’s investment continues, but even with a debt of 12bn dollar, it does not intend to stop producing own material.
Netflix is an increasingly popular subject for academics in media studies. In “Netflix Nations”, Ramon Lobato explains how Netflix has succeeded to affect the world in different ways. Along with Amanda Lotz, Lobato also created a Consortium, a network for research on Netflix and other internet-distributed TV series. On the Consortium’s webpage, Chris Baumann has explored Netflix’s impact in Sweden. The film industry is also a frequently researched area which for example, Perren- and Schatz’s “Media Industries” demonstrates, but also Wasko who studies it through the lens of political economy. When it comes to television, Jean K. Chalaby and his research in “Television and Globalization: The TV Content Global Value Chain” gives an understanding of how globalizing effects have taken place. Despite the academic popularity of Netflix studies, there appears to be a gap in the literature exploring Netflix from the viewpoint of the press, especially in Sweden. It does appear, since Netflix is mentioned quite regularly in press. But studies that look more into how Netflix is represented, that investigates if it may be biased in a
5 supportive or discourage way for example, may still be further explored. Press refers here to trade press and cultural journalism and will be considered as a key pillar. This study will explore how Netflix has become established within the Swedish media landscape. Thus, the aim is to investigate how the press in Sweden builds up Netflix as powerful, in a country with a competitive media landscape, and how it may differ with regards to economic and cultural aspects. Three research questions have been framed in order to explore this more thorough:
Research question 1: In what ways does trade press give Netflix economic legitimacy? Research question 2: Does cultural journalism reinforce the cultural legitimacy of Netflix or does it question it? Research question 3: Is the trade press more or less critical than cultural journalists?
With economic and cultural legitimacy, this study refers to those factors that press uses when writing about Netflix, either in critical or encouraging ways. More specifically, the research seeks to understand what economic and cultural factors exist within the press to perceive Netflix as successful or powerful. To be able to find answer to that, this thesis builds on methods that allows interpretation and earlier research on similar subjects.
The clearest limitation of this research has to do with the lack of involvement from consumers. Even if they are constantly present in some way, being both Netflix’s subscribers and readers of the articles, they will not be the primarily focus here. Further, when the material of the study was chosen, several of newspapers, blogs and webpages were overlooked, in order to remain a qualitative approach with specific focus on trade press and cultural journalism.
2. Background Netflix’s expansion started first in 2011 with establishment in Latin America, Central America and Caribbean. But the global effort came in 2012, when Netflix first became accessible in United Kingdom and Ireland, and later also in Sweden and other Nordic countries (Netflix, 2020). According to Reed Hastings, Netflix’s CEO and founder, the
6 reason why Sweden in particular was seen as a well-fitted adaptor of the streaming service, was because of their great interest in new services and technologies. More specifically, it was convenient that the country had high broadband speed and inhabitants who tended to explore and adopt to these kinds of technological developments. However, Netflix was not alone on the streaming market, with competition tough. On one hand, at the same day as Netflix announced they would launch, Time Warner, the owner of HBO, had also understood there were possibilities in Sweden and informed that HBO Nordic would be introduced as well. Also, the user- generated platform Youtube was already popular. On the other hand, besides these American power houses, Sweden had many domestic streaming videos options as well, both legal and illegal, and could be seen as an oversaturated media landscape (Baumann, 2016, 140-141).
In 2016, Baumann explained there to be a wide media landscape with regards to streaming in Sweden. There were four media companies that controlled the Swedish authorized television market, and they are still present: the public service broadcaster Sveriges Television and commercially structured Modern Times Group, TV4 Group and SBS Discovery Media. Some of these included possibilities to watch streaming videos ‘free-to-air’, such as SVT Play, TV3 Play, TV4 Play and TV5 Play. Furthermore, there were ‘subscription-based’ choices as well: Both TV4 Play and TV5 Play offered ‘premium services’ in which it was possible to catch up with missed programs and watch them ad-free at a later occasion; beyond traditional pay TV services - Viaplay and C More Play offered TV services and it was also possible to stream both films and television series with the standalone product Filmnet. Moreover, ‘transactional services’ such as SF Anytime, Headweb, film2home and Plejmo offered viewers to purchase or rent movies and ‘aggregator streaming services’ such as Magine TV and Telia Play Plus offered package content from several of public service and commercial broadcasters if you subscribed (Baumann, 2016, 141).
Unauthorized streaming offered many possibilities as well. At this time, it was not necessarily illegal to watch streamed video, since it was difficult to identify the site as illegal or not (Baumann, 2016, 142). Beyond that uncertainty, along with the bandwidth and conveniences with streaming - some people were also upset with the verdict that 7 was made against file sharers, those involved with The Pirate Bay for example (Brandel, 2013). With this ambiguity came websites with streaming, such as Swefilmer, Dreamfilm, Swesub.tv, Sweflix and BitTorrent based Popcorn Time, in which the viewer uploaded the material. Furthermore, especially Swefilmer became popular, since it not only had gathered the latest material, both from Hollywood and Swedish productions, but it had Swedish subtitles as well (Baumann, 2016, 142). For the government, it was not easy to catch those responsible for the website: the IP addresses and framework led to London, the servers to Russia, and the name was traced to Australia (Brandel, 2013). However, in 2017, the two men responsible for Swefilmer, 27 and 23 years old, were finally caught (Boman, 2018). In the same year, EU also decided that it was illegal to deliberately stream pirate copied material (Sandberg, 2017).
Today, the general number of illegal streamers has fallen from 21% to 14% and in between ages of 16-29, which has been the most frequent users of illegal streaming, the previous 42% of those who streamed illegally have now become 28% (Hill, 2020). Further, studies show that 58% of Swedish internet users uses Netflix which is double as many as in 2015. Between the ages of 12-35, 80% of the users watch Netflix (Svenskarna och Internet, 2019). This demonstrates that, even if Sweden had an oversaturated media landscape when Netflix launched, Netflix has not only established as one of the most viewed streaming services - it also keeps growing.
2.1 What is Netflix? Ramon Lobato explains that when you explore Netflix in scholarly occasions, it is significant to point out in what way it is being considered. Because there are many ways and can also mean different things, depending on who is asking and who is listening. Lobato says it is based upon the basic ontological problem: what is digital media service and how do we interpret and theorize it? He defines Netflix as follows: a video platform, a distributor, a television network, a global media corporation, a technological company, a software system, a big-data business, a cultural gatekeeper, a lifestyle brand, a mode of spectatorship or a ritual (Lobato, 2019, 20-21). In this study, there are mainly three aspects from Netflix that will be considered: if and how the press conferred economic legitimacy on Netflix; how cultural legitimacy can be
8 perceived in press; and, because of this study’s focus on Sweden - Netflix will also be touched upon as a global corporation. Sweden becomes a particular country to analyse with regards to Netflix, just because it was not really in ‘need’ of a new streaming service with other options already established. But nevertheless, Netflix still managed to become prominent. To other countries, in where streaming services were not developed as rapidly as in Sweden, it was perhaps more natural that Netflix would become successful. Netflix is a subscription video-on-demand service and therefore will be considered as television. But because of Netflix’s interest in making their own material and, both distribute and produce their own films, the film industry becomes significant as well. In order to demonstrate that, at this year of the Oscars awards, Netflix had the most nominations of all with a total of 24, including The Irishman and Marriage Story as nominated to win the prestige award for best picture. And on the 22th January 2019, Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) included Netflix to their global trade association (Ortman, 2019). Furthermore, in one way it can be considered as an archive because of its access to material that other companies have produced and distributed. But because of its investment in original programming, it becomes more than just an archive. Thus, it is a place for customers to enjoy both new and old material. When it comes to Netflix’s global traffic, it should be pointed out that Netflix is completely cloud driven, with Amazon Web Services as its provider for hosted services. That means that things like the logic of the application interface, content discovery, selection experience, recommendation algorithms, transcoding etc. happens in control of Amazon Web Services (Clancy, 2016).
3. Theoretical framework and literature review The theoretical framework for this research is divided into three parts, chosen to conduct earlier theoretical approaches with regards to both economic and cultural studies. First, Netflix’s environment is demonstrated through political economy theories and more specifically, the film- and TV industry are explored. The second part has to do with press and here the concepts of trade press and cultural journalism is demonstrated in order to distinguish differences between the economic and cultural content in press. Finally, in the last part of this section, the main theme is power and here Pierre
9
Bourdieu’s forms of capital have a central role, along with aspects of how journalists may be considered as powerful themselves. Theories and literature will be demonstrated continuously through the chapter and lastly, a summary will present more specifically how this theoretical framework will be used in the analysis.
3.1 Political economy In order to understand the global expansion with regards to media and information industries, Janet Wasko argues that studies on critical political economy is a valid choice. While referring to Vincent Mosco, Wasko explains that political economy can be defined as a perspective on how production, distribution and consumption of resources are intertwined with social and power relations. There are four characteristics that facilitate the understanding of the theory: Social change and history, in which the dynamics of capitalism are being further investigated from classical theorists and touches upon subjects such as cyclical growth, growth of monopoly capital and state apparatus; Social totality, where the relationship between commodities, institutions, social relations and hegemony are being analysed and determined, from an overall point of view; Moral philosophy, in which the focus turns to policy problems and which moral issues that becomes relevant from that. Political economic systems are also investigated here; Praxis, it intends to make actual social change and practice and not merely interpretations (Wasko, 2013, 60-62). It is a theory that has been used frequently with regards to the film industry and in this study, media as a business will be explored even further. Or as Wasko also calls it:” /… / mass communications/media as commodities that are produced and distributed by profit seeking organizations in capitalist industries” (Wasko, 2013, 66).
3.1.1 Structure of the film industry According to Thomas Schatz, the mode of production in film industry can be studied through two levels: the macro-industrial level and the micro-industrial level. In the macro-industrial level, Schatz explains that the industry should be seen as “a commercial enterprise requiring enormous capital investment, in which the major corporate powers strive to optimize efficiency and minimize risk” (Schatz, 2009, 46).
10
Schatz explains there are three tendencies that have been especially notable in the structural development of the industry: oligopoly, integration and distribution control. Oligopoly has to do with the hegemony from the big six media conglomerates, Time Warner (Warner Bros), Viacom (Paramount), News Corp (20th Century Fox), Sony (Columbia), GE (Universal) and Disney, which together control the power on what gets made in the industry (Shatz, 2009, 45). In the integration, Schatz declares that the power pillars aim to maintain one coherent system to control the multiple industry sectors. The traditional way to appreciate this kind of integration is with a vertical point of view, including production, distribution and exhibition all in one company, in where the major producer-distributors were in control. That is when the antitrust laws did not exist, which it did in 1940s. Later on, however, because of technological development and not as strict antitrust laws, integration became not only vertical, but horizontal as well. Individual firms were able to own media content suppliers such as: film studios, TV and cable networks, and certain “pipelines”, such as: theatre chains, TV stations, cable systems, home video and online delivery. It should be mentioned that the individual firms still were the media conglomerates, meaning they were further empowered, instead of creating possibilities for perhaps smaller independent firms. Moreover, the horizontal integration in combination with the rise of television portrays the third tendency - distribution control, which Schatz calls a “flow of product through the marketplace” (Schatz, 2009, 45-46). The rise of television was a factor that made distribution especially significant for studios, thus its connection with film made it possible to consider the development of two major macro-industrial concerns - adjacent industries and new media technologies (Schatz, 2009, 47). This is something that has developed even further during the rise of Netflix and now, one can argue that a TV series is as important as a film.
In the micro-industrial level, focus is more specifically towards the individual production companies and their different approaches when producing films. Schatz explains that companies such as Paramount and 20th Century Fox have a market-driven approach, with big ad campaigns and an interest to the global market. These films are often franchises, with expensive effects and plenty of star actors. Here, the economical aspect can be appreciated as quite flexible, but often expensive. It can cost from 50 11 million to 200 million dollars to produce, with 20 million to 50 million dollars invested in marketing. In contrast to these “Blockbusters”, there are more independent production focused conglomerates. For example, Sony and Fox Searchlight often produces films that cost 25-30 million dollars, with 15 million on marketing (Schatz, 2009, 48-49). To compare somewhat to Netflix, the budget of the film The Irishman was estimated to 200 million dollars (Pulver, 2019).
3.1.2 Political economy in the film industry Several of concepts within political economy studies can be recognized in the film industry. Firstly, what Wasko calls Diversification, which means that media industries today are often big media-entertainment conglomerates that are spreading their activity and with the growth of media companies, new lines of business arrive as well. Hence, two integrations, which are the same integrations that Schatz explained as one of the tendencies in the structural development in the film industry, become notable. Wasko explains that within the growth of media corporation, there is a pursuit to become even more profitable and because of that, companies in the same line of business are often purchased. This is called horizontal integration. Because of new distribution technologies and deregulated markets, media companies are able to add companies in the same supply chain or at different stage of production as well. This is called vertical integration. Moreover, sometimes these big and diversified conglomerates work together in order to maximize the market. Therefore, a synergy is made to make more profit and limit eventual risks. Also, in media business, the lack of competition that appears, often makes conglomerates’ power more concentrated (Wasko, 2013, 67). The film industry is clearly controlled by powerful conglomerates and these political economy concepts demonstrates that it may be difficult for newcomers to compete. This makes it possible to consider Netflix’s involvement as a disrupter to the industry.
3.1.3 Television When it comes to the academic field of television studies, Lobato explains that in recent years, the focus has broadly been on exploring how digital technologies in different ways have transformed, extended and sustained existing television industries. Questions such as: What is television now? and What might television become? have been
12 considered in several studies (Lobato, 2019, 22). Lobato argues that the transformation has made television more of a personalized and interactive medium, instead of a consumer watched mass medium. While referring to James Bennet, he explains that the reason has to do with technological and institutional developments that has turned the previous mass audience of television, into a series of personalized choices. Another way of appreciating the transformation is to divide TV into three eras: TVI - broadcast only; TVII - cable era; and TVIII - digital distribution (Lobato, 2019, 23-24). Netflix can be seen as significant for two reasons: Firstly, it created another alternative to watch television not solely on a television set. Secondly, it introduced new kinds of filtering, aggregation and recommendation systems, which created a new distribution mechanism that made it possible “to deliver personally-selected content from an industrially curated library” (Lobato, 2019, 25). In order to further understand the rise of Netflix and streaming services, this study will also consider service convenience as a possible motivator for product usage. In service convenience there are two factors that are significant with regards to consumer perception - time and effort. Because of these, convenience in goods and service have developed; time-oriented benefits have become more important for advertiser’s promotion; and when consumers make purchase decisions, it is done in an effective and effortless way (Berry, Seiders and Grewal, 2002, 1). When it comes to streaming services, a consciousness of time and effort is highly noticeable. Viewers are able to watch films and TV series whenever and wherever you want with an application such as Netflix, on smartphones, computers and on television. And to watch new films, viewers do not always have to go to cinema anymore since Netflix both makes their own material and distributes films from Hollywood. Indeed, this was possible before Netflix, but one can argue that Netflix added another dimension to this by producing ‘big’ films. For example, before Martin Scorsese made The Irishman, he was critical of streaming services, arguing a film should be seen on cinema. But when Netflix was the only one willing to stand for the economic demand Scorsese had in order to make the film, he was ‘forced’ to work with Netflix (Pulver, 2019). Furthermore, after the film had been released, Scorsese urged people not to watch it on their smartphones, but some still did, and others watched it divided in different parts (Shoard, 2019).
13
In order to understand Netflix’s global movement, the relationship between television and globalization will be further analysed. In his study, Jean K. Chalaby explores on how globalizing effects have taken place in the TV industry and to be able to do that, he uses a global value chain (GVC) framework. He argues this facilitate the understanding of the structure of global economy and more specifically, how it is characterized by two aspects: international fragmentation of production and integration through trade. The fragmentation means big companies take over the industry by selling products they do not manufacture themselves and at the same time the trade integration keeps growing (Chalaby, 2016, 37). Furthermore, the chain is structured in three segments: content production, distribution and aggregation. First, Chalaby explains, TV production “consists of the production of content that is licensed to content aggregators” (Chalaby, 2016, 39). Then, because of companies’ interest in achieving competitive advantage, which international expansion gives, cross-border media flows, transnationalization of production processes, and global coordination of business becomes more significant (Chalaby, 2016, 35). Chalaby’s research is significant to address in this study, much because of Netflix’s clear interest in the global market, but also to get further understanding in the economic aspects of the global movement.
3.2 Press Press will be analysed in two ways. The articles that have to do with economical aspects will be studied with help of theories from trade press and to investigate articles with cultural content, theories within cultural journalism will be used. The reason for that is because the lack of trade press in Sweden, that more specifically focuses on films. It does exist, such as the magazine FLM, however daily newspapers present plenty of cultural content that are more accessible, where it is common that Netflix is written about.
3.2.1 Trade press Thomas F. Corrigan argues that our knowledge on business practice becomes empowered through trade press. The reason for that he continues, is because:
14
They document key choices media executives make on behalf of their firms. They shed light on the interests, practices, and worldviews of owners, executives, and professionals. And they cover the business, regulatory, and cultural environments that shape all of these processes. Of course, no single class of documents can facilitate the sort of multilevel, interdisciplinary, historical, and structural analysis that PEC seeks to produce, but trade press analysis is one important tool in the PEC scholar's toolkit. (Corrigan, 2018, 2753).
He explains trade press is distinguishably characterized after the editorial fare and target of audience. It may be referred in different ways such as trade publications, journals, magazines, specialized business press, business-to-business (B2B) media, or "the trades” (Corrigan, 2018, 2755-2756). More specifically, trade press has three functions: Firstly, it informs business executives and professionals with independent reports of industry news, including mergers and acquisitions, hiring and firing, product launches, new technologies, legal decisions, and regulatory developments. Also, industry and market data, along with opinions and analysis may be published. Thus, a cohesion arises with regards to industry information and conceptual frameworks for how to act. Secondly, it can be perceived as a place where industry professionals negotiate their norms, values and beliefs. This has a more cultural function and is seen when professionals’ best practices and ethical concerns are portrayed. Here, the publications are perceived as “voices” of the industry and both professional gathering is organized as well as professional ideologies, such as different attitudes toward technology and consumers. Thirdly, internal advertising and promotional platforms are provided from trade press to the industries. Here, trade publications become profitable when decision makers attention is aggregated and sold to specific industry advertisers (Corrigan, 2018, 2755-2756). Trade press is explored within political economy studies in order to gather data about media industries, practices, policy making and discourses. According to Corrigan, there are two ways to approach this, ’burrowing down’ and ’listening in’. They can be distinguished by consider burrowing down as appropriate when it comes to business practices and industry conditions, whereas in listening in - the scholar focus on statements or discourses about the practices, along with reviewed conditions (Corrigan, 2018, 2757). This thesis will use the ’listening in’ approach and more specifically, it will be listening in to quotes, op-eds, and ads for decision makers’ statements and discourses 15 about practices and conditions. Then, these statements and discourses will be interpreted as manifestations of interest or underlying worldviews, as Corrigan suggests (Corrigan, 2018, 2758).
3.2.2 Cultural journalism Nete Nørgaard Kristensen explains that cultural journalism comes from the concepts of “cultural intermediary” and “cultural mediators”. While referring to Bourdieu, she explains that cultural intermediary was perceived when cultural journalists and critics of quality newspapers were seen as important occupations. The reason why was because they were able to mediate between cultural producers and consumers and ascribe value to cultural products, which led to a potential influence on cultural publics and consumers perception (Kristensen, 2017, 3). In cultural mediation, there are four roles that are of certain importance: gatekeeping, connecting/networking, selling/marketing and evaluating, classifying and meaning making (Kristensen, 2017, 4). Gatekeeping refers to how cultural journalists are able to control which kinds of cultural products that get attention, and which are not. Some products may gain broader attention in the cultural public sphere and among cultural consumers, whereas others may be ignored or perceived mainly by niche publics. Connecting/networking has to do with the intertwinement of artists, cultural producers and journalists. In these kinds of relations, cultural journalists do not necessarily approach the traditionally adversary role, but instead they share their source’s aims, interests and passions for art and culture. In the role of selling/marketing, Kristensen makes an example of cultural journalists who provide free publicity when they pre-announce, cover or review cultural projects, artists or events. This makes cultural journalism more dependent towards aspects such as publication, release or opening nights. Lastly, in classifying and meaning making, the role has to do with reviews and how cultural mediators and especially critics describe, evaluate and interpret cultural goods. This has created both debates and criticism within cultural journalism and furthermore this has increased the legitimacy of popular culture expressions such as movies, television drama and popular music (Kristensen, 2017, 4).
16
Furthermore, Kristensen along with Heikki Hellman and Kristina Riegert, have studied the usage of the term quality within cultural journalism. In this study, they explore through quantitative analysis and qualitative examples, how Nordic press in different ways legitimize quality in TV series Mad Men. In particular, three aspects were emphasized as key points. First, the cultural journalists used both internal and external ways to express - the internal aspects had to do with aesthetic markers and external were considered as culture industry markers. The series broader social and historical anchoring were also perceived here. Second, the cultural journalists tended to use their professional expertise and personal taste when covering Mad Men, in a positive way. Third, the cultural journalists’ legitimization does not solely concern TV criticism, “(..) but of cultural journalism more broadly in constructing affirmative attitudes toward popular culture phenomena such as TV series”, suggesting the whole journalistic genre is concerned (Kristensen et al., 2017, 1-2). This study will use quality in a broader sense, exploring the relationship between cultural journalists and Netflix in general and not only with regards to one TV series.
3.3 Power There are several ways in which power may be addressed with regards to Netflix and this segment will explore how. In order to do that, Pierre Bourdieu’s forms of capital will be used as a starting point and more specifically a quote from Sue Collins will lead the way:
For Bourdieu, all practice among people is subject to a basic opposition between economic and cultural power, and everything that people do, even when what they do seems disinterested or gratuitous, is motivated by the desire to maximize or accumulate material and/or symbolic profit. (Collins, 2007, 191).
Bourdieu divides social spaces into fields: cultural production, economy, politics, religion and science, which all have their own structure, function, authority and reward system (Collins, 2007, 191). In Netflix’s case, much has to do with economic and cultural factors. On one hand, Netflix belongs to an industry where money plays an important role, referring to the film industry filled with conglomerates that wants to become as
17 powerful as possible and it is crucial to invest if you want to compete, even if it means you may have a debt on $12bn. But on the other hand, the artistic and cultural side of the film industry is perhaps just as substantial, for example with prestigious film awards, famous actors and well-developed cinematographic. Indeed, the economic aspects are always there, but according to Bourdieu it is important to look beyond the economic, and consider cultural and social factors, including aspects such as social skills and networking, education or cultural ability (Collins, 2007, 191).
3.3.1 The forms of capital Bourdieu says there are three ways that capital may be demonstrated: as economic, as cultural, and as social capital. Whereas the economic capital has a clear and direct connection to money and institutionalizes into property rights, cultural capital may be institutionalized in the form of educational qualifications and in social capital, social obligations such as connections becomes important and it may be institutionalized into a title of nobility (Bourdieu, 1986, 16). Within the cultural capital, there are three states it may appear in. Firstly, the embodied state, where qualities that comes from mind and body are in focus. It is a personal state that depends on what social context you are in, which Bourdieu calls “external wealth converted into an integral part of the person”. He explains that, as opposed to money, property rights and titles of nobility, it becomes a part of a person’s habitus and cannot be transmitted directly (Bourdieu, 1986, 18). Secondly in the objectified state, material objects are in focus, such as paintings, monuments or instruments. According to Bourdieu, this state is either materially, in which economic capital is distinguished or symbolically, which highlights the cultural capital. Thirdly, the institutionalized state, which refers broadly to academic qualifications. Bourdieu explains that this kind of cultural competence “confers on its holder a conventional, constant, legally guaranteed value with respect to culture” (Bourdieu, 1986, 20). Social capital has to do with power through a network of relationships, which is seen as a product of investment strategies that are made in order to establish relationship that can secure material or symbolic profit (Bourdieu, 1986, 21-22). Another kind of power is what Collins describes as celebrity capital, which becomes comparable to Netflix because of all the famous actors and filmmakers that often are
18 involved with the company. This kind of capital can be appreciated as symbolic capital, which has to do with recognition from people, with aspects such as prestige and fame. Thus, the recognition of celebrity facilitates the situation for cultural producers to gather an audience. Collins explains that celebrity is a product of large-scale cultural production, that is not necessarily based on art or meaningfulness but a question of profit, which make it an economical matter (Collins, 2007, 191-192).
3.3.2 Journalism power In order to understand the possible reinforced legitimacy that press gives Netflix, this study will take into consideration how journalists may have an own agenda in their articles. According to Alexa Robertson, there are different ways where power is appreciated with regards to press and when it comes to journalists’ role as ‘information- relayer’, three ‘metaphors’ are presented. Just as Kristensen’s important roles of cultural mediation, one way is to look at the press as gatekeepers, deciding what flows of information that comes through the different media channels, such as newspapers, radio bulletin or television news broadcast. Another way is to consider press as ’watchdogs’, which is a term that comes from an approach in where journalists and news organizations investigate powerful institutes and individuals and then reveal them. However, in this thesis, the term ’agenda-setters’ will be of particular significance, which has to do with the ability and responsibility that journalists have in spreading information. It will be explored in which ways press may frame the news or information, that thus may steer readers understanding of it (Robertson, 2015, 22-23). Furthermore, it will be investigated if there are any types of agenda within the analysed texts, that either glorifies or criticizes Netflix. The reason why this will be considered, is to achieve a bigger understanding on how readers may perceive the articles and see if there are possible reasons to become influenced by them.
3.4 Summary of theories and connection to Netflix This chapter has addressed three major parts that will be further explored in the analysis. With regards to economic aspects, Wasko’s view on political economy presents a general understanding, while studies from Schatz will be used more specifically towards Netflix’s involvement in the film industry. Netflix’s connection to the television 19 industry will be further investigated with theories from Lobato and Chalaby. Corrigan’s view on trade press will be used to interpret the economic targeted articles. By exploring cultural journalism, this study will focus on the perception of quality, where research from Kristensen, Hellman and Riegert will be emphasized in particular. Kristensen’s view on cultural journalism will also be crucial in order to interpret the cultural targeted articles. To be able to answer in what ways Netflix may be economic and cultural legitimized, this study takes further trust in Bourdieu’s forms of capital, along with research from Collins. Moreover, the journalists themselves will also be consider as influential actors when writing about Netflix and with help of research from Robertson, they will be considered as possible agenda setters.
4. Methods and data gathering The material in this study are articles where Netflix can be considered as having different kinds of economic and cultural power. In order to find articles with valid content, a purposive sampling approach will firstly be addressed. There are plenty of articles that touch upon Netflix, but this does not necessarily mean that every article is useful. Some are not mentioning Netflix enough, others use it in a way which is not completely suitable for this study. Therefore, this study will not approach research sampling randomly, but with a purposive sampling method. This method, according to Bryman, is an alternative method where sample cases are conducted in a more strategic way and where it is not possible to generalize the results. Bryman explains that the resulting sample should be varied, and it may be useful to have different kinds of key characteristics (Bryman, 2012, 418). With this in mind, the papers from which I intend to find articles will be differentiated in some way.1 After the material have been conducted, it will be further studied through a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA).
1 Articles that solely focus on economic aspects will be explored and conducted from Dagens Industri and when investigating articles with a cultural interest, this study will focus on Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet, Expressen and Aftonbladet. 20
4.1 Collecting economic influenced articles In order to find relevant articles, media archive Retriever was used. Naturally, the range of articles that cover this subject is almost endless and therefore a delimitation was needed. When gathering articles that touched upon economic legitimacy, Dagens Industri (DI) was chosen as source. This is a daily newspaper that, according to themselves, covers the latest news, analyses and deepening that affect the market, stock exchange and business world. They also argue that DI is seen as Sweden’s best newspaper with regards to finance (DI, 2020). Other economic focused paper may disagree, but in this study the question of which economic newspaper is the best in Sweden is secondary. The significant part is that it is an economic focused paper. The collection started with searching solely on “Netflix” and in DI only, which may seem as a quite wide search. But with knowledge that DI always in some way has an economic focus, it was likely it would work as a starting point. The next limitation had to do with what type of articles that would be analysed, more specifically if chosen articles should come from digital or printed press. Here, it was noticed that many of the articles were quite short, especially the digital articles. Many of the articles merely just mentioned a new film shortly coming on Netflix or presented the stocks of Netflix that month e.g. and thus, it was not ideal in order to make thoroughly analyses. Indeed, it is possible that these kinds of articles also may say something about press building up Netflix as powerful, but that would require more articles to analyse in order to give a sincere understanding of its content. Therefore, fewer and more comprehensive articles were chosen. Furthermore, a minimum of 500 words in the articles was established before focusing on DI’s printed press, which had a total of 740 articles left, including articles that had less than 500 words, which would be overlooked manually as it was not possible to ignore these. Thereafter, the years between 2012-2020 were looked at more careful and it was decided to use 2012 as earliest, since that was the year when Netflix was announced in Sweden.
21
Year Number of articles 2012 25 2013 72 2014 73 2015 69 2016 53 2017 96 2018 135 2019 172 2020 33
From here, every two years were further investigated: 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020, in order to achieve continuity. However, this was inadequate of several reasons. For example, with this approach, the year with most articles of all (2019) would be overlooked. Because of the frequent reappearance this year, it was likely that the articles would include relevant content. Also, this tactic would consider the year of 2016, a year that had fewer articles than both 2015 and 2017, which made me doubt on its relevance in relation to other years. Therefore, it was decided that there should be at least one article from the early years and one from recent days, with reasons to see somewhat how the press consideration for Netflix may have changed since the origin. Many articles only used Netflix as a comparison to other companies, with streaming service or television as the main focus, and only mentioned Netflix quickly in the text. These were neither prioritized and instead, articles that had Netflix in the headline or in other ways mainly emphasized on Netflix became highly stressed for further investigation. Eventually, 49 articles were looked into more carefully:
Year Number of articles 2012 4 2013 5 2014 11 2015 1 2016 7 2017 1 2018 15 2019 5 2020 0
22
From these, 16 articles stood out but was still considered as too many and therefore one last limitation was made. Here, the aim was to remain as wide as possible and collect different kinds of point of views. Finally, eight articles were chosen: “Old TV about to get buried with Netflix” from 2012, “MTG challenged of TV-service from US” from 2012, “Netflix takes costumers from Com Hem” from 2013, “Netflix is bubbling” from 2018, “Netflix invests locally” from 2018, “Head of Netflix lets the stream flow” from 2017, “Netflix is having headwind” from 2019, “Netflix shows that content is everything” from 2019. These articles were chosen because it was possible to see patterns in between them and three implicit themes stood out, making the structure of the economic analysis. Some of them touched upon Netflix’s competition, others on Netflix’s global impact, and the rest were about Netflix’s challenges. Furthermore, they were divided into three themes in which they will be further analysed: ‘Introducing competition’, ‘Spreading its territory’ and ‘The uncertain future’.
4.2 Collecting cultural influenced articles The collection of articles that would include cultural legitimacy was conducted with a similar procedure. Retriever was used as the main source, “Netflix” was used as search word and again printed press from years 2012-2020 were considered, with a minimum of 500 words. However, because of the absence of specific papers in Sweden that points direct and solely to film, the four biggest daily newspapers: Dagens Nyheter (DN), Svenska Dagbladet (SVD), Expressen and Aftonbladet were chosen for further analysis. The cultural sections from these papers includes articles from film critics and in general, film- and television industry are regularly written about. The reason for why all four papers were considered, was to remain having a wide approach when perceiving the information and thereafter narrow them down more carefully. No paper was considered more than others, but the main objective was to find articles well-fitted to the study. Again, just as in the collection of economic articles, the headlines became significant. When the headline said something about Netflix, it was possible to assume that the whole article would too. However, after several of articles were looked into, a pattern was noticed – many articles had Netflix in the headline but only mentioned it shortly as a metaphor or in comparison to something else. For example, one article was called “Burnouts will not disappear because of Netflix” and almost solely focused on stress,
23 including surveys and statements from stress-experts. But then it was one sentence that named Netflix: “Burnout will not disappear because of three weeks in bed in front of Netflix, it will influence your whole life”. The fact that the writer has Netflix in the headline, even if it has almost nothing to do with the article as whole, gives reasons to see Netflix as a symbol of streaming services in general, providing a big impact to the industry. It is likely the writer thinks people will look into the article just because it says Netflix in the headline. This article in particular was overlooked since it only mentioned Netflix, but similar articles, that used Netflix in an atypical way, would later become useful in the analysis. A total of 456 articles in printed press touched upon Netflix in different ways between the years of 2012-2020:
Year Number of articles
2012 7 2013 29 2014 37 2015 31 2016 57 2017 49 2018 89 2019 120 2020 37
From these, 40 articles were studied more carefully, in where Netflix was discussed more in general and finally seven articles were chosen for further analysis. Furthermore, the articles came both from early years and more recent, with a varied point of view to Netflix: “Netflix has made me an idiot” from Aftonbladet in 2013, “No algorithms in the world can solve Netflix’s problem” from DN in 2013, “Netflix knows when we get stuck in the TV series” from DN in 2015, “Warning, watch Netflix films in record time”, from Aftonbladet in 2019, “Netflix’s Achilles heel – portrays women as a cliché” from SVD in 2018, “Netflix’s smoking bans almost worse than Sweden’s” from DN in 2019, “Netflix is a climate problem – makes me abject” from Expressen in 2019. These articles were then further investigated in order to find patterns and similarities and thus two main themes were detected, some of them had to do with the meaning of
24
‘quality’ and others about the wide and various extent Netflix is mentioned in. They were divided into two themes to get further analysed: ‘The question of quality’ and ‘Applicable to everything’.
4.3 Critical Discourse Analysis While referring to Norman Fairclough, David Hesmondhalgh explains that in critical discourse analysis (CDA), language is significant when it comes to media texts. This is demonstrated through three particular questions about media output:
1. How is the world (events, relationships, etc.) represented? 2. What identities are set up for those involved in the program or story (reporters, audiences, ’third parties’ referred to or interviewed)? 3. What relationships are set up between those involved (for example, reporter- audience, expert-audience or politician-audience? (Hesmondhalgh, 2006, 122-123).
By using these questions, it will be possible to understand reappearing representations of the world, especially with regards to setting up identities and relations (Hesmondhalgh, 2006, 123). When a critical discourse analysis is performed, language should be largely analysed and touch upon specific aspects, such as linguistic. But it is also important to consider a broader perspective, by studying ways the text may have sociocultural impact. One way to do that is by summarizing specific tensions that affect the media language, studying for example differences between information and entertainment (Hesmondhalgh, 2006, 128). Another way of using language in CDA is to see it as a method that explore contemporary capitalist societies. Thus, by approaching economic systems, it is possible to affect aspects of social life as well. Fairclough argues, because of the strong influences from economic system, while the main areas of social life at the same time can be perceived as both interdependent and impressionable - the economical aspect is substantial (Fairclough, 2010, 1). Moreover, he suggests three main properties of CDA when using it: that it is relational, dialectical and transdisciplinary. With CDA being relational, Fairclough explains, focus is on social relations instead of certain individuals or entities. It is not about analysing one subject or discourse individually, but to study
25 its relation to a context, with regards to both internal and external relations, in order to find a meaning. A discourse can be seen as a communication relation between people; through communicative events, such as conversations, newspapers, articles; by more abstract and discursive matters such as language, discourses and genres; and as objects in the physical world such as persons, power relations and institutions - within a social activity or praxis. Secondly, the relations should be studied in a dialectical way, in a sense that the elements, such as power and discourse, have a cohesion and are clearly influenced by each other and characterized in a social process. The third characteristic, transdisciplinary, has to do with the analysis of CDA. When analysing the social relations between discourse and other objects, several of traditional disciplines may occur, such as linguistic, politics and sociology. Thus, CDA is an interdisciplinary form of analysis, even if Fairclough prefers to call it transdisciplinary. The reason for that is because of the dialogues within the different disciplines, theories and frameworks in an analysis, that becomes a source for the theoretical and methodological developments (Fairclough, 2010, 3-4).
5. Analysis - Economic legitimacy In ‘Introducing competition’, it will be analysed how Netflix stands against their competitors and has been doing that since establishment in Sweden. In ‘Spreading territory’, Netflix’s global interest will be investigated; and in ‘The uncertain future’, Netflix’s situation is considered in a more doubtful and criticising way and demonstrates what difficulties Netflix may have. The articles will first be introduced and analysed in connection to theoretical aspects, along with the writers’ usage of language. Thereafter, in order to further demonstrate the usage of CDA, every section will end with a review on how the three questions demonstrated in the method part (1. How is the world represented; 2. What identities are set up for those involved; 3. What relationships are set up between those involved) have been explored, along with what sociocultural aspects can be perceived.
26
5.1 Introducing competition 5.1.1 Netflix is here The state of television is a frequently reappearing research issue for media scholars and as recalled in the background of this study - Lobato argues that it has transformed from being a consumer watched mass medium, to a personal medium more appropriate for interaction (Lobato, 2019, 23). The reason may have to do with Reed Hastings, the CEO of Netflix, who in 2012 was certain that Swedish linear TV would be replaced. On October 16th, Dagens Industri had an article that headlined: “Old TV about to get buried with Netflix”, in which a confident Hastings explains that linear tv will be taken over by internet. Hastings shows no doubt towards internets upcoming success, even when he is questioned about linear television’s significance when it comes to sport or concerts - Hastings argues, “Internet is fantastic for live events as well!” (Appendix A). The television was indeed in a state of changes at this time, but it was not only because of Hastings and Netflix. The article says HBO, Viaplay and other local actors also are participants on the market, which Hastings calmly welcomes:
“We will not have everything. Netflix is about film and series, not sport and music. We cannot have all the viewers so I am positive that the consumers will have different subscriptions. You can compare it to papers and magazines. People read more than one daily paper and more than one magazine.” (Appendix A).
Hastings says Viaplay “doing a good job” because they are ‘aggressive’ and lowered their subscription price to the same as Netflix. He also thinks local actors “are good at adapting to new technology” and therefore will do just fine with changes (Appendix A). At first, it may seem peculiar that Hastings would praise his opponents, but a political economy approach may explain why. In order to maximize a market, the salient companies aim to make a synergy to limit risks and make more profit. When it is divided like this, new competitors are not as likely to appear and power becomes more concentrated (Wasko, 2013, 67). However, this article still demonstrates Netflix as the advantage company. Hastings praises Viaplay just because of similarities to Netflix but he also emphasizes on their lack of functions such as “availability on Xbox, Dolby 5.1 and possibility to see what friends recommends” – which Netflix has (Appendix A). The
27 local actors are acclaimed, much because they adapt to Netflix and their usage of technology, but it is not clear if local actors had much of a choice. Hastings confidence is reminiscent of what Bourdieu calls embodied capital, which is a personal state that depends on social context, meaning mind and body are in focus and “external wealth is converted into an integral part of the person” (Bourdieu, 1986, 18). The external wealth may here be considered as Netflix’s success and by being the CEO, Hastings undoubtedly have an important part in it and may therefore feel confident to speak about competitors in such a causal way. Two months before, on August 16th, 2012, Dagens Industri had another article on this subject, but with some differences. For example, the headline was called “MTG is challenged by TV service from USA” (Appendix B). It may be seen unusual not to have Netflix in the headline, since ‘Netflix’ and ‘TV service’, perhaps not always is the same thing, but often are close to each other. The decision to use TV service instead, might suggest that Netflix was not seen as a threat at the time. Especially since the article also demonstrates a calm CEO at MTG, who is satisfied with Viaplay’s supply of movies and series and who is not impressed with Netflix’s establishment in UK as a comparison (Appendix B). After it has been shown that MTG will not change anything because of Netflix, the article ends by saying Netflix may be cheaper than Viaplay. The only time Netflix is mentioned from their own perspective is when their Nordic media contact says:
“It is exciting because this is Netflix’s first launching in Europe after UK and Ireland. I cannot say much more now, but we can tell you more about the launch later this fall.” (Appendix B).
In combination with MTG not being worried, this statement makes it possible to interpret that it is still early to see how Netflix will succeed. Most likely it will not compete with Viaplay, but at least it may be cheaper. Two months later, Dagens Industri has ‘Netflix’ in the headline saying it will ‘kill old television’ and the article implies Netflix controls the market and that Viaplay has adapted to Netflix’s subscription price (Appendix A).
28
5.1.2 The competition continues In an article from 2013, November the 15th, it is clear that Netflix has become the biggest streaming service in Sweden. If the headline was not clear enough, saying “Netflix takes customers from Com Hem”, the lead paragraph makes it even more obvious: “The video streaming service Netflix sweeps other competitors away and steals customer from cable giant Com Hem” (Appendix C). Words like ‘sweep’ and ‘steal’ makes it possible to interpret Netflix as in a front position - competitors are easy to handle and by taking customers, not only from a regular cable company but from a cable ‘giant’, Netflix is demonstrated as quite powerful. In order to achieve a deeper understanding of the article, Corrigan’s three functions of trade press will be investigated. The first function has to do with information, which is significant in the article since it shows the statistic on Netflix’s accomplishment. In the second function, norms, values and beliefs may be perceived and the publication is seen as voices of the industry. Again, choices of words in the article is important. By saying Netflix steals customers, it gives reasons to reflect on whether the attitude against Netflix is positive or not. This becomes further questionable when the third function is looked into, in which ‘internal advertising’ and ‘promotional platforms’ may appear (Corrigan, 2018, 2755-2756). The article suggests that Com Hem is “in need of improvement” and aims to recover this hit from Netflix through advertisement. It demonstrates how Com Hem has a new TV service with American Tivo, that will make it possible to connect the TV box with computer, iPad or mobile. It is also emphasized how big of an effort this is, saying it will be the Com Hem’s biggest ad campaign ever (Appendix C). Here it can be argued that this article has a critical approach to Netflix. For example, there is no information on what Netflix has done well in order for their success or why it is popular, only that Com Hem has been weakened and can be improved. Indeed, Netflix is never portrayed explicitly as something negative, but focus is primarily on sympathizing with Com Hem and present how they can take back what Netflix took from them. On June 20th in 2018, DI presented another article in which Netflix is compared to a Swedish company. But whereas previous articles focus on how Netflix affected Sweden and Swedish companies; this article presents Netflix as a tech company in an uncertain stock position. Netflix’s success is mentioned rather quickly, for example, the lead paragraph begins with “Nothing seems to stop Netflix’s share that just keep going up,
29 up, up”. But it is also explained that even if own original content such as the TV series House of Cards strengthens the gross margin, the net profit still does not increase enough (Appendix D). By talking in terms of gross margin and net profit, the article shows more of an economic approach than previous articles. Naturally, it is possible the reason for that is because it is just another kind of article, focusing on something different. But two prominent aspects emerge from comparing the articles. Firstly, in 2018, Netflix is no longer just a streaming service from US that has enter Sweden as it was in 2012, but one of the biggest companies in the world, like Facebook or Disney. Secondly, making a direct connection to Sweden in some way is still occurring and this time Spotify frequently appears in comparison to Netflix. There are almost no reflections on which company are doing best, but a similarity between the companies is emphasized instead. Spotify’s involvement in an article mainly about Netflix can be interpreted in two ways. On one hand, it empowers Netflix much because of sentences like: “It is no secret that Spotify aim to do the same journey as Netflix did” or “But Netflix has better scalability than Spotify (…)” (Appendix D). Thus, the sentences build up Netflix as a company that is ‘even bigger than the big and powerful Spotify’. But on the other hand, it is also possible to consider the amount of Spotify in the article as an inadequacy in Netflix. Perhaps people first need to understand what situation other companies have, such as Spotify, in order to realize Netflix’s wealth. Further, the article also shows a table in where the writer argues that Netflix’s stocks are overvalued and warns for an IT bubble. Netflix is compared to Facebook, saying it lacks the scalability of Facebook (Appendix D). By making this comparison, Lobato’s ways of broadly defining Netflix may be addressed as well, with Netflix being understood not merely as TV, but as an IT-company, just as Spotify and Facebook (Lobato, 2019, 20-21). By being compared with these kinds of different companies, Netflix may be understood as powerful - being considered as ‘more than just TV’. But it is also possible to understand Netflix as overvalued.
5.1.3 World representation, identity and relations 1. The articles demonstrate a modern world, filled with actors that tries to be successful on an irregular market that may change, for example, when companies like Netflix wants to interfere on the same market as national actors. The world is represented as
30 competitive, in where Netflix is compared to other companies and it is explored how Netflix affects both the companies and the market itself. The articles were written in 2012(x2), 2013 and 2018 – which mean they represent somewhat of a different time span and it is therefore possible to get an insight on Netflix’s evolution on the Swedish market. This is clear in the articles from 2012, in where Netflix first is named as just a “TV service from US” and then, only two months later, it has gained enough power to “kill the old television”.
2. There are mainly three involved parts in the articles, from which different identities can be perceived: the corporations, the persons making statements for their companies and the writers of the articles. • Corporations Netflix is the most frequently appearing company and it is represented as powerful, successful and as a tough competitor. But other companies are presented in similar ways. For example, Viaplay is demonstrated as strong enough not be too intimidated for Netflix’s establishment and Com Hem is appointed as a ‘cabel giant’. Nevertheless, this may strengthen Netflix since both Viaplay and Com Hem have difficulties with Netflix’s ability to overtake the market. • Persons making statements With regards to persons who makes statements, Reed Hastings is the clearest example. He is often perceived as calm and sure on Netflix’s affect and establishment, and he also welcomes competition. He has a similar identity as the company itself and becomes sort of a personalization of Netflix. • The writers The writers’ attitude against Netflix is not necessarily as clear as it may suggests. Indeed, Netflix is presented as successful and powerful, but it is not definite if the writers are all positive to Netflix. In last article for example, Netflix is seen as overvalued and the writer seems to warn the market actors against Netflix. He uses economic language, with words such as “scalability” and “IT-bubble”, not necessarily accessible for the average reader. This makes it somewhat difficult to fully understand the intention.
31
3. The relationships within the involved parts in the articles are as follows: • Corporation – Corporation (Netflix – Viaplay/Com Hem/Spotify) Competition is explicitly demonstrated and seen as a necessity in order for the market to work. Therefore, they are not solely opponents but in a togetherness that develops the market. • Stating person – Corporation (Reed Hastings – Netflix) Partly, this concerns Hastings and Netflix, but also Hastings and other companies. When Hastings stated that he thought Viaplay was doing a ‘good job’, he also confirmed an interest in competing companies. • Writer – Netflix Netflix is the main subject in the chosen articles and naturally it is mentioned frequently. However, the relationship can be considered as unclear, because Netflix’s growth may come on the behalf of Swedish corporations, which the writer appears to sympathize with. • Writer – Swedish corporations The constant comparison to Swedish companies, even if they are not necessarily the focus of the article, gives reasons to perceive Netflix as successful, but also as an outsider. • Writer – Persons making statements When describing the situation, the writers often uses a person from a current corporation in the article. Reed Hastings is reappearing, and it is not merely his statements that becomes of matter, but how he is portrayed. When he is presented as ‘confident’, that makes reasons to believe he is satisfied with the situation, which makes both him and Netflix sound powerful in an environment of heavy competition.
5.1.4 Sociocultural aspects With regards to sociocultural aspects, the articles primarily demonstrate an economic interest, much because DI is an economic focused paper. However, as Fairclough argues, when approaching studies with concerns of economic systems, it is possible that the social life is affected as well (Fairclough, 2010, 1). In this case, the most salient aspect has to do with nationality because of the involvement of Swedish companies in articles 32 about Netflix. The environment may be perceived as erratic, with many changes in between the companies and the articles often presents point of views on what could occur in the future, and not necessarily how. For example, by saying Spotify could be more as Netflix or saying Viaplay will not be affected of Netflix. Since those matters are not definite, it is difficult to fully know how it would appear.
5.2 Spreading territory Ever since Netflix’s establishment in Europe, first in UK and Ireland and thus also in Sweden and Scandinavia in 2012, its global interest has only kept spreading. On one hand, that can be understood with regards to availability since you are able to watch Netflix in almost every country in the world. But on the other hand, there has also been a distinct global effort when it comes to the content as well, where it is not only American films and series that are shown but also domestic originals. It should be pointed out that the reason for that has to do with the law EU parliament declared, meaning a third of the range Netflix offers, and other providers of streaming-video, shall be produced in Europe (Rankin, 2018). The EU parliament argued that would facilitate the protection of different kinds of language and culture. However, this would accordingly show itself as quite profitable to Netflix. On February 5th, 2018, DI treats this matter in an article named “Netflix invests locally”. Once again there are enhancing words when Netflix is described, such as calling it a “streaming giant”; by saying it has “turned the concept of TV industry upside down” and again, by not perceive any problem with competition. According to Brian Pearson, the Netflix’s head of original production in Europe and Middle East, it is needed:
“In the end, competition is something good, both for the consumer and for the industry. It creates sort of a tide in where we are constantly challenged to create better TV series. That is what matters in the end.” (Appendix E).
This statement comes after Pearson has been questioned about competition from HBO Nordic, Viaplay and C More in Sweden, and from Disney and the ‘giant’ Amazon in general. Because of aspects such as naming all of those streaming services, calling Amazon a ‘giant’ and saying that Pearson has a very relaxed attitude towards an
33 increasingly tougher competition, this study will argue that the article implies there actually could be reasons for Netflix to worry. But because of their success they do not have to. The success in this case has to do with local original content and especially a TV series from Germany called ‘Dark’ is highlighted. Pearson claims, “America does not have monopoly on story telling” and he explains that “Dark gives us a data point that we can build on. People are very interested in content in other languages or from other places than they are used to” (Appendix E). Both of these statements reflect the general tone in the article, meaning Netflix is for the whole world to consume, not only US. With Pearson, Netflix has a representator that confirms this, and he does so in different ways. Firstly, because of his title, being head of original production in Europe and Middle East, which clearly represent a global interest. Secondly, how he is presented in the article. In addition to being ‘very relaxed’, he is also “keen to raise the fact that only five percent of world’s population lives in US” and he has moved to Amsterdam from US since Netflix wants to invest further in Europe. Thirdly, because of his actual statements, such as:
“Honestly, we see a lot more similarities than differences in between the countries. What is popular in some part in the world is just as popular in other parts” (Appendix E).
By being globally attached, Netflix becomes flexible and able to more specifically reach out to different parts of the world. For instance, Pearson claims Scandinavia distinguishes from others because of their common usage of storytelling, focusing on the characters and not just the noir (Appendix E). This suggests that Netflix becomes even more recognizable and gives people another, more local and national reason, to use Netflix as their chosen streaming service. This is applicable to Chalaby’s research on globalizing effects in TV industry. He explains that international expansion may bring competitive advantage which, more specifically, has to do with cross-border media flows, transnationalization of production processes and global coordination of business (Chalaby, 2016, 35). In this case, Pearson emphasizes on the significance in different types of storytelling which accordingly help Netflix to expand globally.
34
This global business approach did appear before 2018 as well for Netflix, which can be perceived in another article from DI, in March 11th, 2017. In this article, TV series Lilyhammer and House of Cards are highlighted. Lilyhammer is Netflix’s first original from 2011, that takes place in Norway and is made in collaboration with Norwegian public service company NRK. House of Cards from 2013, is an adaption from an old British show that became a global phenomenon, according to Hastings (Appendix F). These TV series are seen as the starting point for Netflix’s continuous investment in original content. Once again, there are several statements from important persons in Netflix in the article. Reed Hastings, presented here as ‘reticent’, says: “The only thing we do know, is that it is going to be exciting” after he has been questioned on where Netflix will be in a decade, “even though Netflix celebrates ten and twenty anniversary this year” the article continues (Appendix F). Again, a calm and positive approach is presented, towards a perhaps unsure future, and they seem certain on their strategy. Sweden is related to the company here as well. At this time, no Swedish production or director have been involved in Netflix, compared to Denmark, Finland and Norway. Hastings responds to this by saying that Sweden partly is a producer in TV series The Rain whereas Ted Sarandos, Netflix’s chief of commercial officer (CCO), “comfortingly” says they are “putting Skarsgård in everything we do”, referring to Swedish actor Alexander Skarsgård who is reappearing in Netflix’s material (Appendix F). The tone is easy-going and there are no reasons to believe any real worries with regards to Swedish involvement from the writer, only curiosity. Another aspect that has been implicitly addressed in previous articles, that is here directly pronounced, is the fact that Netflix is a success both on Wall Street as well as among watching customers. By mention both of these achievements, it is possible to consider Netflix as multifaceted powerful, since it accomplishes to affect both the industry and the people.
5.2.1 World representation, identity and relations 1. The representation of the world in this part, is almost entirely a presentation on Netflix investments, both globally and locally, and the profits from it. Netflix is no longer presented as an American company that takes subscribers from other companies,
35 but as someone who aim to satisfy subscribers all over the world. However, it is clear Netflix has this global interest much because it benefits their business. But by saying “America does not have monopoly on story telling” and emphasising that content in different languages is important, it is possible to perceive a welcoming global approach.
2. There are mainly four parts in the articles, from which different identities can be perceived: Netflix, persons from Netflix making statements, the writers of the articles and Netflix’s audience. • Netflix, as a global company Netflix is presented here as a big and powerful company, but with an awareness of the environment that offers affiliation from all over the world. This is partly showed through naming smaller TV series such as Dark from Germany, and The Rain from Denmark, but also by acknowledging their perhaps biggest TV series House of Cards, a series that is heavily attached to America, as a remake from an old British series. • Person that makes statement Again, Reed Hastings makes statements, along with Ted Sarandos, Netflix’s CCO. But they are both mentioned rather rapidly, with short and easy-going answers on Sweden’s involvement in Netflix. Instead, Brian Pearson has a bigger part and he explains in what ways global and local investments are significant for Netflix. Furthermore, beyond their global interest, they are all presented as calm towards competition and it is possible to consider the company as successful. • Writers The writers’ identity has a lot to with nationality in this case. They write for a Swedish paper, about an American company that invest globally. Since they focus on Netflix’s side on the situation, explaining what Netflix says about their investment, instead of criticising it or consider Netflix’s local competitors for example, it is possible to argue that they are positive towards Netflix’s spreading. • Audience Since it appears that Netflix is globally successful and because it is stated that Netflix intend to invest further on global activity, it is possible to distinguish a satisfied audience. They do not have their own identity in this case, because there
36
are no statements directly from the audience. But they appear to be supportive towards different kinds of storytelling and it does not have to be on English.
3. The relationships within the involved parts in the articles are as follows: • Netflix – the world The clearest relationship in these articles, Netflix wants to be everywhere. • Netflix – Audience Netflix depends heavily on satisfying their audience in order to make profit. However, the relation is one-sided - the audience is only mentioned through members from Netflix, saying they see more similarities than differences between different countries, for example. • Netflix – Persons making statement / Writers – Persons making statement These relations are intertwined because it is the writers who present the persons that makes statements. There is not much more information on Reed Hastings, Ted Sarandos and Brian Pearson’s relation to Netflix, besides their titles. But according to the writers, they can be perceived as calm, confident and globally positive. • Writers – Netflix It is possible to perceive a impressed approach from the writers when mentioning Netflix. That is especially clear when they call the company a “streaming giant” and by saying it has “turned the concept of TV industry up and down”. There is hardly any criticism against the company, except perhaps the questioning about Netflix’s involvement in Sweden. • Consumer – industry This relation is current much because of the first quote from Pearson, saying “competition is something good, both for the consumer and for the industry”. Netflix may be seen as a commonality here, between consumers and the industry. But because of the consideration of competition, streaming services as a whole becomes current as well which makes it a broader issue that involves consumers, industry, Netflix and other streaming services. Perhaps by merely consider Netflix’s perspective, this can be seen as inadequate in order to fully understand
37
the connection. Nevertheless, it is certain that Netflix affect both consumers and the industry.
5.2.2 Sociocultural aspects The theme here is heavily influenced by global matters. More specifically, it is about how global investments can make Netflix more profitable and how the viewers at the same time are able to consume different kinds of content from all over the world and thereby, it may be possible to get an insight in different cultures.
5.3 The uncertain future Lastly with regards to economic legitimacy, this study will look more into the challenges that lay ahead of Netflix. The next articles are both from 2019, which gives a more current outlook. So far, previous parts have presented aspects that will somewhat reappear here. In particular, Netflix’s competing situation against similar companies will be further analysed and thus demonstrate a possible future.
On April 10th, DI had an article in where the importance of content was explained. Again, the article names Netflix in the headline, saying: “Netflix shows that content is everything” which refers, partly to a Swedish well rated TV series on Netflix (Quicksand in English), but also to the usage of content as a business strategy (Appendix G). The article then continues to address Netflix’s success with regards to their investment on global and local material. This is significant since it refers to a comment from SVT’s CEO who in 2018, said Sweden was “too peripheral for Netflix”, while SVT managed to keep producing plenty of drama material every year. However, with Quicksand, Netflix was able to compete. This was not only a competition between two companies, but also between the market (Netflix) and the state (SVT) and because of Netflix’s global success, the article suggests that the market is winning, in making drama. Accordingly, there are many actors’ that chases content, Telia bid on TV4; Disney bought 21st Century Fox; and Apple and Disney’s have own streaming services e.g. (Appendix G). Because of this, the concept of vertical integration becomes current again, previously explained by both Schatz and Wasko in the theoretical part. The article explains that with vertical integration, the companies are able to control expenses, retain 38 the profit and lock in the customer. However, it is a risk and investors are often doubtful, and for the users the situation is not optimal as well since they, according to the writer, do not want to get stuck with a particular amount of content - they want the best possible content to the best possible price (Appendix G). It should be mentioned this is the writer’s point of view and no explicit audience perspective is presented. Netflix has encountered resistance as well. On July 19th, DI demonstrates this with an article that headlines: “Headwind for Netflix”. In general, the article explains that Netflix had wrong in their forecast on subscribers. Instead of five million, they only increased with 2,7 million, which was the first time in a decade where Netflix lost subscribers in US. Netflix argued they knew about it, saying the second quarter is the least profitable quarter and the reason was because they had raised the price on the subscription. Nevertheless, the article presents potential problems for Netflix. For instance, once again it is argued that the competition is tough, exemplifying with Apple, AT&T/Warner and Comcast who are all developing their own services. But the article also problematizes the fact that Netflix not merely produces their own material, but figures as an archive as well, which means the owners of that material can take it back if they want to use it themselves. Again, Chalaby’s research is applicable here and what he calls international fragmentation of production, meaning big companies take over the industry by selling products they do not manufacture themselves (Chalaby, 2016, 37). It may be essential in order to be successful on the global market, meaning it could, in combination with raising prices, damage Netflix in the long run. But the article says Netflix believes in their original material and while referring to Hastings, customers will supposedly turn to Netflix’s own material if they cannot archive others content at the same extent. Also, with regards to international progress, Netflix is still growing, and the competition mostly has to do with US (Appendix H). But Netflix is not the only one that intend to invest globally. Both Disney- and Apple’s services are still new and will spread even further and HBO has already been mentioned as well, establishing in Sweden at the same time as Netflix.
This thesis will argue that Netflix’s situation may be perceived as uncertain. On one hand it keeps growing, at least internationally, and continues to produce plenty of various content. But on the other hand, so does its competitors and because of factors such as the frequent usage of vertical integration in Netflix’s environment, or a debt on 39
$12bn dollar – is it possible that Netflix may be bought of another company? If so, one can argue Amazon and Apple might be most likely to make an acquisition, since they have the most economical strength, being both valued at $1trn (The Economist, 2019). In fact, in Amazon’s case, it is also already involved in Netflix, being the provider for Netflix’s hosted services. Supposedly, “everything before a user hits ‘play’ on Netflix, happens in Amazon Web Services”, referring to selection experience or content discovery for example (Clancy, 2016). Indeed, this is only speculations, and nothing says it will become reality in near future. But because of the uncertainty around Netflix, it may be relevant to consider, especially if Netflix’s business would impair even further.
5.3.1 World representation, identity and relations 1. In these articles, Netflix is not seen as superior as it has been in previous articles. It is still considered as profoundly powerful, much because it supposedly made ‘the market’ beat ‘the state’ in Sweden (Appendix G). But it is also demonstrated how Netflix has failed in collecting as many subscribers as intended which creates a possibility to look into Netflix’s challenges. Again, economical aspects are notable along with Netflix’s wealthy competitors on the global market.
2. There are mainly three parts in the articles, from which different identities can be perceived: Netflix, the market and the writers of the articles. • The market The main theme of these articles is about the market. It is clear that content is of significance here, which is demonstrated with the explanation on how companies tends to integrate vertically and thus become more powerful. Partly, it is focused on the global market with Sweden in particular, but it also demonstrates the situation in US. • Netflix as a corporation It is not sure at what extent Netflix’s competitors will be effective or how many there are that will subscribe to Netflix every quarter. In one way, this may present a negative portrait of Netflix, but because of its successful usage of content - it is
40
possible to still consider Netflix as powerful whereas it is the market that is unclear. • The writers In general, the writers are not critical towards Netflix, but demonstrates instead an informative attitude, where focus is on explaining the market. They do not have any distinct conclusions nor opinions but uses Netflix in order to explain aspects of the market. This may be interpreted in different ways. On one hand, by saying Netflix’s situation is uncertain, it is also implied that Netflix’s future does not necessarily equals with success. Even if the writers are not explicitly criticising Netflix, they are not supporting the company neither. On the other hand, by mentioning Netflix when describing the market may suggest that Netflix is in a strong position, once again being the symbol of streaming services in general.
3. The relationships within the involved parts in the articles are as follows: • Writers – Market / Netflix The writers use Netflix in order to demonstrate the market. There are other companies named as well, but not in the same extent as Netflix. For example, the first article begins with an explanation on how Netflix’s global usage of content in particular has affected the Swedish production market. Thereafter content is explained more generally. By using Netflix as a starting point, and especially by doing so with praises, it is possible to appreciate a positive approach. Also, in the second article where Netflix is being questioned, the writer still ends the article saying Netflix’s numbers would have looked different if the TV series Stranger Things would have been included, implying Netflix makes successful material. • Market – Netflix It is a competitive market in which Netflix, through usage of global content, intend to keep collecting subscribers. Even if Netflix miscalculated the number of new subscribers in the second quarter, it is still seen as salient on the market. But the competition is not far away.
41
5.3.2 Sociocultural aspects In the third and last part of the analysis of economical legitimacy, it is possible to conclude all parts into one. Because there are two major themes that are constantly reappearing in this uncertain environment and that has to do with competition and global spreading. The articles have shown several of political economy aspects, such as corporations that tend to support a synergy on the market, and it has also been shown an interest in vertical integration. Furthermore, the global market is highly current, especially with regards to collecting subscribers, which Netflix so far has succeeded with best.
6. Analysis - Cultural legitimacy The analysed articles here have been divided into two themes: ‘the question of quality’, that focus on the term ‘quality’ and on Netflix’s usage of technological factors; and ‘applicable to everything’, that investigates how Netflix manage to get involved in subject that at first may not seem relevant. The articles will first be introduced and analysed in connection to theoretical aspects, along with writers’ usage of language. Thereafter, in order to further demonstrate the usage of CDA, every section will end with a review on how the three questions demonstrated in the method part (How is the world represented?; What identities are set up for those involved; What relationships are set up between those involved) have been explored, along with what sociocultural aspects can be perceived.
6.1 The question of quality With regards to Netflix and cultural legitimacy, the question of quality is clearly current. This is demonstrated by Aftonbladet who, on the 14th December in 2013, had an article that headlined “Netflix has made me an idiot”. In this article, there is one main focus – to mediate that Netflix’s content makes you stupid. The writer says that by watching Netflix, you will not be able to discuss the latest happenings with regards to, what appears to be appreciated as more important subjects, such as: war, politics, economy, geography, society and sport. Furthermore, Netflix is called “stupid TV” and it is explained how the writer, because of a frequent usage of Netflix, avoids talking to
42
“normal bright people” just because of the risk of not being smart enough anymore (Appendix, I). This article also emphasises on a technological function in Netflix. After the writer had watched one film, Netflix recommended similar content which made it difficult for the writer to stop watching this kind of non-educational content. This has also been discussed in an article from Dagens Nyheter, written on the 14th October in 2013, headlined: “No algorithms in the world can solve Netflix’s problem”. Again, Netflix’s material is heavily criticized, and one reason is because Netflix do not have what the writer wants: it does not have enough box office hits, narrowed cult film, old classical film, nor films that has been shown on film festivals. The writer explains:
Netflix’s problem, and not even “an ecosystem of algorithms” can solve it, is that they do not have enough movies like that (referring to box office hits, movies from film festivals etc.). There is too much junk. And by junk, I do not mean “superficial” or “commercial” movies, but movies that have never been considered as anything but junk, that are just some cheap complement on the supply list. (Appendix J).
The regarded issue here, is to understand what preferences these writers have when watching movies. For the writer from Aftonbladet, it is important it involves content that can be used in social occasions in order to appear intelligent and updated to current societal subjects. However, by watching Netflix, an opposed experience is perceived, making the writer feel incompetent instead. Nevertheless, it does not prevent the writer from keep watching Netflix. The writer from DN wants ‘good’ content, which means big office hits, narrowed cult films, old classic films that have made impression to previous generations, or films that have been shown at film festivals which, apparently, is not part of Netflix’s supply (Appendix, I). According to Kristensen et al., cultural journalists tend to use their professional expertise and personal taste when covering these kinds of cultural occasions. They may emphasise on both internal aspects, such as aesthetics markers and external, referring to the culture industry as whole (Kristensen et al., 2017, 1-2). In this case, there are mainly external aspects to consider, where the writers strive after a wider cultural experience when watching Netflix, making them more socially competent or getting affirmation
43 from people involved in film industry e.g. But there are internal aspects as well, referring to the algorithms Netflix uses and other technological factors. In order to explore the writers’ approach even further and find answers on why there is criticism on something so popular as Netflix, this study will look at Pierre Bourdieu’s forms of capital and more specifically at the institutionalized state within the cultural capital. Bourdieu says the “institutionalized state” is a cultural competence that has to do with academic qualification and “confers on its holder a conventional, constant, legally guaranteed value with respect to culture” (Bourdieu, 1986, 20). This makes reason to consider the profession of the writers, being journalists on two of the biggest newspapers in Sweden. This study will argue, because of their critical approach, the writers may distinguish from other subscribers of Netflix. The writers’ cultural interest, and perhaps way of “respecting the culture”, refers to content that make you smart and that have been confirmed from others that it is of high quality. It is not suggested that other subscribers do not appreciate this, but perhaps they do not perceive the same cultural responsibility as the writers’ do and may focus more on what they think is entertaining instead. The writer from Aftonbladet admits to frequently watch Netflix, probably because it is entertaining (it is not stated what makes the writer to keep watching), but perhaps because of the writer’s possession of institutionalized capital, entertainment is not enough - it has to be educational as well. It should be emphasised that one can watch for whatever reason they want, whether it is for entertainment or educational reasons, but because of the writers’ profession, their approach may be seen as another power dimension. As Robertson explain, journalists may be seen as ‘agenda-setters’ because of their ability and responsibility to spread information and thus steer readers understanding of it (Robertson, 2015, 23). In this case, there are two articles made heavily on opinions, that criticise something that is frequently used. From Netflix’s perspective, this can be appreciated in two ways: on one hand, the fact that it is written about at this extension may suggest on influential forces. But on the other hand, if the journalists have the power to influence readers what to think and then present Netflix in a negative way, this could make people look at alternatives to Netflix and thus Netflix would lose subscribers. Two years thereafter, further technological aspects are demonstrated. On the 24th September in 2015, DN had an article with the headline: “Netflix knows when we get stuck with a TV series”. In general, the writer has a neutral approach and mainly states 44 facts and statements about Netflix. However, at occasions Netflix is still presented as powerful. For example, by saying it knows when their subscribers like a TV series, as the headline implies, Netflix is demonstrated as being in control. Furthermore, it is also presented as a “streaming giant” (Appendix K). The reason why Netflix knows when a subscriber becomes more intensely interested in a TV series, has to do with the concept of ‘binge-watching’, which according to the writer means you watch all episodes at once (Appendix K). The writer refers to Ted Sarandos, saying the consumption of TV series has changed. In earlier days, during the prime time on traditional TV, the pilot episode was significant. But now Sarandos explains that Netflix has made research that shows that few people are convinced they will like the series after one episode. Sarandos says, by releasing all episodes at the same time instead, will make more fans interested. But again, Netflix stands out from its competitors and in this case, it is HBO that has another approach. HBO does not believe in the ‘binge-watching’ model, Richard Plepler the CEO of HBO, explains. The reason why, is because he thinks viewers enjoy waiting for the next episode of a series and by having this kind of “cultural conversation with the viewers for 10-13 weeks”, as he calls it, that involves a frequent usage of social media, this creates a greater interest towards the trademark of HBO (Appendix K). The article does not convey any particular opinions on the matter, but instead questions which of Netflix’s and HBO’s approach will be most successful. In more recent years, it is possible to understand that Netflix intend to keep its technological progress. On the 6th November in 2019, Aftonbladet demonstrates this through another article. With the headline “Warning for Netflix films in record time”, the article emphasises on Netflix’s test-launching: to watch a film or TV series with a 1,5 times faster speed than usually. This makes it possible to consume even more content - a 45 minutes long episode takes 30 minutes to watch. Furthermore, the function is implied being a response to Apple and Disney’s new services and the article also mentions that it has received positive feedback from internet, saying it is common on YouTube and that it is convenient when you sit on the bus while watching (Appendix L). The main focus here has to do with quality. The article suggests; indeed, Netflix may have an interest in quality, but because of its wide supply of content and user-friendly functions, the question of quantity becomes current as well. The writer says:
45
The fraction of films from festivals that succeed to stand out on Netflix, definitely gets a broader spreading all over the world. But what happens when these quantitative forces set the standard for the culture and thus also on how quality is perceived? (Appendix L).
Netflix may be perceived as powerful here, being called a “superior power from which other must adapt to in order to get a piece”. But more implicitly, it is clear that there is criticism as well. Netflix is called “the people’s opium” and is explained both as an everyday drug and a dirty word, that all cultural activity seems to be forced to adapt to (Appendix L). This article differs from the analysed articles from 2013 (Appendix I and J), in a way that it does not criticise Netflix just as explicit. Nevertheless, the article is not completely positive towards Netflix, because it definitely questions if Netflix affects culture in a positive way. But instead of just calling it “stupid TV” and presenting personal opinions, the subject here is explored in a more nuanced way, where Netflix is placed in a social and cultural context – wondering for example, what quantitative forces will do to the cultural standard.
6.1.1 World representation, identity and relations 1. The articles present a world representation in where different perceptions of quality are explored with regards to Netflix and how it affects culture. Netflix is clearly considered as influential, which is understood partly because of reappearing usage of empowered words when describing it, such as ‘streaming giant’. But also because of explicitly statements, saying Netflix is in control and others have to adapt to it. Nevertheless, the articles also clearly criticise Netflix: the two first articles through personal opinions on the matter, saying its content is inadequate with regards to intelligence and quality. The latter ones are not as explicitly critical but explain through technological functions what impression Netflix gives to its environment.
2. There are mainly two parts in the articles, from which different identities can be perceived: Netflix and the writers of the articles. • Netflix Even if quality has been sort of a key term in this part, it is significant to point out that quantity is perhaps just as notable. Netflix’s business model is presented as
46
producing plenty of material, in order to both retain current subscribers and tempt new ones. Quality is almost seen as secondary and focus is instead on a wide supply list and technological functions that facilitate the understanding of subscriber’s behaviour. • Writers The writers differ somewhat from each other in these articles, where the first two stands out because of their personal attitudes. The two latter writers remind more to the writers from DI that was explored in the first part of the analysis. They have a more general approach where the subject is explored in a broader way and potential criticism may be perceived more implicitly instead.
3. The relationships within the involved parts in the articles are as follows: • Netflix – Writers The deeper meaning of the relation between Netflix and the writers may be understood as a way to study quality’s existence in culture. For these writers, quality has to do with consumption that not merely is about entertainment, but it gives something more. Both on a personal level, making you smarter e.g., or on a market level, being a company that affects the industry in a positive way from a cultural perspective. It is not clear that Netflix succeeds with this, because primarily Netflix is portrayed as a powerful company that focuses on mass- producing content and collecting subscribers, which according to the writer is not enough. • Netflix – Competitors This relation is not touched upon in the same extent as it was in the economic focused articles, but there are some comparisons. For example, Netflix and HBO’s different opinions on binge-watching along with several of Netflix’s newer functions, is explained as something that has been made in order to compete with other similar companies.
6.1.2 Sociocultural aspects The clearest sociocultural aspects from this part has to do with the responsibility that Netflix has when deciding what content to use. There are various expectations from the
47 subscribers when watching Netflix, these articles have especially demonstrated an interest towards intelligence and quality. However, one can argue that quality may be perceived differently and, by referring to Bourdieu’s view on cultural capital, one can reflect on the possibility that perhaps people without the same educational background as these writers have a different attitude. Of that reason, this matter may be considered as a question of class as well. Nevertheless, Netflix’s growth may suggest that Netflix succeeds to reach out to a wide crowd, even if the writers shows dissatisfaction.
6.2 Applicable to everything As recalled in the method part, one article had Netflix in the headline even though it had almost nothing to do with the rest of the subject. This kind of usage of Netflix will be further investigated in this part, and the following articles will demonstrate points of views that somewhat stand out from previous subject areas.
6.2.1 Gender On the 20th April in 2018, Svenska Dagbladet explored Netflix through a gender perspective, with an article headlined: “Netflix’s Achilles heel – portrays women as a cliché”. Instantly, the writer demonstrates Netflix as powerful, saying it has ‘conquered the world’ and competes with both ‘global giants’ and ‘local dragons’, implying the competition is heavy. But the absence of women is a problem and the writer argue that Netflix has answers to most questions, especially with regards to its business, except just the inadequate frequency of women. In general, its content is dominated by men and when there finally is a TV series with women in focus – it is a show about switchboards operators, which is why the writer names Netflix as a cliché in the headline, referring to a stereotypical point of view. The writer then exemplifies with actor Kevin Spacey who, because of being an accused sex offender, made Netflix lost 310 million SEK since they had to scrap material to House of Cards (Appendix M). By mentioning Kevin Spacey and how that situation affected Netflix, what Sue Collins describes as celebrity power becomes current. Collins explains this is a type of symbolic capital and emphasizes on aspects such as prestige and fame from which people get engaged. Furthermore, it may be seen as an economical matter, appreciating celebrities
48 as a product of large-scale cultural production based on profit and not merely on art or meaningfulness (Collins, 2007, 191-192). It is possible to understand that the impact of celebrity is significant in this case, especially with regards to economic impressions - one famous actor made a company of Netflix’s calibre lost millions of dollars. According to the writer, this was seen as a cold business-estimate more than a consequence of the company’s values and the writer seems clearly upset:
It’s astounding that a company can be so commercially progressive and structurally outdated at the same time. It makes me wonder if Netflix knows their viewers as good as they think. (Appendix M).
Even if Netflix may not be able to control actors’ behaviour, it can control the representation of its basic values, equality in particular. But according to the writer, Netflix has a primarily focus on its business instead.
6.2.2 Socio-political On 6th July in 2019, Dagens Nyheter had an article with the headline: “Netflix’s smoking bans almost worse than Sweden’s”. Accordingly, the writer expresses a disapproval attitude towards the Swedish smoking law, that means you cannot smoke at outdoor seating on restaurants or bars, bus stops, playgrounds etc. Thereafter, the writer says Netflix has decided to limit its usage of smoking in films and TV series. There will be no cigarettes or e-cigarettes in content with 14 years old age limit and it will also be less used in older age limits as well (Appendix N). In general, when it comes to how articles tend to present Netflix in this study, Netflix is often portraited with strengthening words, such as calling it a ‘streaming giant’. But in this article, the writer uses a different way. Indeed, Netflix is called a ‘very influential streaming service’ at one occasion, but apart from that the writer mostly demonstrates a belonging to Netflix instead, for example:
Netflix! Our sanctuary and safe place! The place where we thought we would always be able to smoke, regardless what obstacles the wellbeing lobbyists put upon the reality, since streaming services have open up a more uncensored, amoral TV-world (Appendix N).
49
By calling it a sanctuary and safe place, Netflix is presented as a place of trust, but one can also argue for it to be powerful as well. By getting this kind of affirmation from viewers, Netflix has succeeded to present itself as a place where viewers know what to expect and since they keep using it, they probably like it as well. However, by changing approach, there is a chance that viewers will get confused or upset. More implicitly in this case, the writer’s dissatisfaction towards less smoking has to do with the increased level of restriction this also entails. Furthermore, the question of quality becomes considerable again, where the writer emphasizes on the significance of uncensored content, without “obstacles that wellbeing lobbyists put upon reality”. With previous statement, the writer presents a difference between streaming services and other producers of content, meaning streaming services usually do not have the same political involvement (referring to affecting lobbyists). This can be analysed further in two ways. On one hand, Netflix is portraited here as a company that has turned to a more ‘normal’ approach, since apparently most companies are affected by lobbyists. This is noteworthy since Netflix often is portraited as the opposite, being a company that ‘changes the TV-industry’ for example. On the other hand, the article as whole is a comparison between Netflix and political regulation, which makes the company bigger than just a streaming service – it is part of a political discussion. The writer demonstrates both internal and external ways of expressing in this article (Kristensen et al., 2017, 1-2). The internal aesthetic marker has to do with smoking’s involvement in Netflix and Sweden’s legal system. In the external aspects, the usage of censorship may be considered a culture industry marker, which has been perceived in a larger extent within streaming services, according to the writer (Appendix N).
6.2.3 Climate On February 2th in 2019, Expressen had an article about Netflix’s affinity to climate. With headline: “Netflix is a climate problem – it makes me abject”, the article refers to another article that says streaming video on internet is a growing climate problem. The writer expresses clear disagreement to this, saying Netflix instead can be seen as an “immaterial product with endless recycling, that eases the climate anxiety” (Appendix O). Because accordingly, there is much the writer personally avoids doing when
50 streaming, that would affect the climate even worse. For example, it prevents the writer from driving a car, it makes the writer stay inside instead of getting tempted to shop because of all shop windows, and it stops from cooking too much food and drinking imported wine with friends. Moreover, it also helped the writer to avoid bulimia. Without further explanation, the writer continues to argue that streaming services’ “rich access to interesting documentaries” educates people to understand the global situation with regards to climate changes (Appendix O). In contrast to previous articles in this study, that has demonstrated criticism towards Netflix, this article shows an explicit support and questions those who criticize the streaming company. Partly, the writer says Netflix shows positive influence on a global level, by educating people about the climate. But Netflix is also presented as influential on a personal level, since the writer says it has prevented her from bulimia. By recalling to articles: “Netflix has made me an idiot” and “No algorithms in the world can solve Netflix’s problem” (Appendix I and J) from 2013, one can argue it to be a clear difference with regards to perception of content. In fact, one of the reasons why Netflix supposedly had poor content in 2013, was because it was not educational enough (Appendix I). In this article from 2019, educational content is instead used as an argument to why Netflix is significant and concerns people all over the world. This suggest on a clear development when it comes to Netflix’s content, being first considered as a company that ‘makes people idiots’, to then become a place that, according to the writer, literary can help save the world. Once again, the consideration of seeing the journalist as an agenda setter becomes current here, much because the article is used as an argument. The writer opens up a possibility to pick a side - appreciating Netflix as a part of the climate problem or see it as positive matter that makes you avoid further affecting the climate. However, the writer does not say anything about the other article, except its name and that it is ‘bad news’ that makes the writer feel miserable. Instead the writer presents several of argument why one should watch streaming videos, leaving a biased perspective of the situation where the reader is left without knowing why streaming video would be bad for climate. The information also demonstrates inadequacy in its argument. For instance, it is not clear how Netflix helped the writer from bulimia (Appendix O).
51
It is possible that the writer has this approach in order to steer readers understanding and perhaps it is enough for people to settle with the writer’s point of view, even if they are not fully informed. Lastly, there is one further power dimension that may be considered here, with regards to Netflix and other streaming services. In general, the article emphasizes on streaming services as a whole, but nevertheless Netflix is still named both in the headline and in the text as example. In contrast, other companies such as HBO, Amazon or Disney are not named at all.
6.2.4 World representation, identity and relations 1. With these articles, it is possible to appreciate a world representation with a multifaceted demand on Netflix. The writers demonstrate a world that is inequal, restricted and excessive with regards to climate effects and Netflix has a responsibility in all areas. According to the writers, it should both present itself as a company that stands up for equal values and produces material that is educational to a level it will help fight global climate. Moreover, it should also be a place where viewers do not feel limited because of political restrictions. It is no longer enough to make entertaining content and compete with other streaming services about who is the biggest, which previously has been prominent factors in the portrayal of Netflix. The company has a societal responsibility as well.
2. There are mainly two parts in the articles, from which different identities can be perceived: the writers of the articles and Netflix. • Writers Personal opinions are clearly demonstrated here, meaning the writers expresses typical behaviour as cultural journalists (Kristensen et al., 2017, 1-2). Moreover, the writers seem societal interested, since Netflix is considered secondary while gender, politic and climate are the main focus areas. • Netflix Because Netflix is presented as having this broad and societal responsibility, one can argue this to be another power aspect in Netflix. It makes it possible to
52
consider the company as more than just a streaming service, making impressions in various societal ways.
3. The relationships within the involved parts in the articles are as follows2: • Writers and Netflix Netflix is clearly the common matter between the writers, but they are all presenting it in different ways. The writer in the first article is explicitly criticising Netflix, the writer in the second article mainly uses Netflix as an example and the writer in the third article is arguing in favour of Netflix.
6.2.5 Sociocultural aspects There are three clear types of sociocultural aspects that have already been introduced: gender, politics and climate. It has been demonstrated to be an inadequacy when it comes to women’s involvement, partly in Netflix, but also in the TV industry as a whole. The society is perceived as restricted, which is why even Netflix, that supposedly has expressed a more open approach before, has limit its usage of smoking in films and TV series. Netflix is also argued to enhances people’s knowledge with regards to climate, which further may make people react. For example, EU supposedly decided to limit usage of plastic because of a film that demonstrated “impenetrable atolls of plastic” (Appendix O). Even if these aspects are merely just presented by the writers, without delving it more specifically, this study will argue that it stills says a lot of Netflix’s role in today’s society. Just as Google often is known as the main source in gathering information, and Facebook tends to equal with plenty of people’s social life – Netflix may be applicable to almost everything and people will understand how and identify with it.
7. Concluding discussion The aim of this thesis has been to demonstrate how journalists builds up Netflix as powerful, with regards to economic and cultural legitimacy. By using a critical discourse
2 A relationship between Netflix and society has also been considered, but because of similarity to the ‘sociocultural aspects’, it is further explored under that headline instead of having its own under ‘relations’. 53 analysis, it has been possible to consider, both details in the usage of language, and further sociocultural aspects. With this approach, it has been shown that cultural articles tend to be more critical than economic. Cultural journalist appears to be given a more open area when covering the subject, where much of the content comes from writers’ personal opinions, often suggesting what Netflix could improve. Here, the question of quality has been frequently appearing in different shapes, but educational content has been emphasised in particular, or perhaps the lack of it. Even if there is critical questioning to Netflix, it is possible to see a reinforcement from cultural journalists as well. Netflix has been connected with contexts such as gender, politics and climate and is perceived as having a societal responsibility, standing up for a representation of equal rights in television series for example. However, the usage of Netflix in cultural articles have also been seen as lacking substance at some occasions, and it has been considered that Netflix may be used mainly to get people’s recognition, without having any major belonging with the subject. Netflix is used almost in a metaphorical purpose, being a gateway into something else. For example, one writer uses Netflix’s smoking restriction in film and TV-series in order to criticise a too restricted Swedish society (Appendix N). Perhaps this may be the clearest indication of power, being a company possible to be compared to everything, without having any major contradictions.
When it comes to economic legitimacy, two major aspects have been distinguished from the explored articles: Netflix’s prominent success in competition with other streaming services and a significant interest towards the global market. However, some articles have also given reasons to understand Netflix’s situation as ambiguous. The industry has proven to be inconsistent, with different companies constantly trying to challenge Netflix and become the most successful streaming service. In order to understand the industry, theories within political economy have proven helpful, with particular focus on film- and TV industry. In this way, terms like synergy and vertical integration has been perceived and further explored to understand a possible future for Netflix and streaming services. In contrast to cultural journalists, writers of economic articles and thus writers within trade press have demonstrated a stricter portrayal of Netflix, mainly focusing on developments and success. However, looking more specifically at the articles it is 54 possible to see patterns of either positive or negative attitudes as well. At one occasion for example, the writer alienates Netflix through a primarily interest in other Swedish streaming services, implying that Netflix has worsen the situation for Swedish companies (Appendix B).
In general, there is a clear connection between economic and cultural aspects, with several similarities. Perhaps the clearest cohesion is Netflix’s interest in investing heavily in international content, such as TV series Dark and The Rain, which have been a reason for why Netflix has established so well on the global market. Further, it is possible to see how the study is pervaded of Bourdieu’s point of view, saying the practice among people “is subject to a basic opposition between economic and cultural power”, which is motivated by the “desire to maximize or accumulate material and/or symbolic profit.” (Collins, 2007, 191). Netflix is able to gather both material profit (economic income) and symbolic profit in form of a belonging, no matter what country you come from. More specifically in the articles, there are several similarities between them, regardless if they are economic or cultural focused. There is a reappearing connection to Sweden in every article, even if Sweden not necessarily has anything to do with the content. In those cases, there is either a comparison to Swedish companies or questions on how Sweden will or could be involved. Moreover, almost all articles use Netflix in their headlines and the company is also frequently touched upon through strengthening words, often saying Netflix is a ‘streaming giant’. Because the articles are written in different time spans, it has been possible to perceive a development in the usage of Netflix as well. With regards to economic legitimacy, Netflix went rapidly from a questioned streaming service that would destroy Swedish companies, to a successful powerhouse which Swedish companies could learn from. Cultural articles remained critical over the years, but there was development as well. Earlier articles demonstrated heavy critic to Netflix for not being educational enough, but a later article argued that Netflix had content that could help people understand how critical the global climate situation is – suggesting there to be an expectation that Netflix has power on a socio-political level.
55
Even if Netflix’s consumers have been frequently touched upon in this study, much because of subscribers’ crucial role in streaming services, I would argue it still has not been considered enough and there are still unanswered questions. Indeed, the writers of the articles may be seen as viewers themselves, but because of their position as journalists and possible agenda setters, it is not comprehensive enough. Furthermore, both Netflix and other streaming services have presented their views on consumers’ behaviour, meaning there are several of approaches to consider. None of which has to be misleading, because the viewers probably have different kinds of behaviour when watching. But since other factors plays a part here, such as journalists’ interest in making an influence and streaming services inevitable interest in profit, focus is never solely on the consumer. Future research would therefore benefit from a more consumer targeted approach, both to perceive a bigger understanding in the influences of journalists and to see what differences there are in subscribers’ perception of various streaming services, not only Netflix.
Netflix is the main focus in this study much because it is seen as the biggest streaming service and is a frequent subject in both economic and cultural articles. However, other streaming services are also reoccurring in press and future research could therefore also investigate how journalists legitimizes companies such as Disney, HBO or Amazon and see what differences and similarities there are to Netflix (and between each other). Perhaps Disney and HBO in particular, who still have not fully established in Sweden. Disney’s streaming services is supposedly coming to Sweden later in 2020 and even if HBO already exist in Sweden (HBO Nordic), their new service HBO Max may eventually also come to Sweden and effect even further. Also, because of Netflix’s global integration, it would be interesting to see how journalists in countries all over the world addresses Netflix and how they distinguish from Swedish journalists.
References Baumann, Chris. (2016). “Sweden: Circumvention and the Quest for Privacy” in Geoblocking and Global Video Culture, edited by Lobato, Ramon and Meese, James. Institute of Network Cultures. Issue no. 18.
56
Berry, Leonard L; Seiders, Kathleen and Grewal, Dhrew (2002). “Understanding Service Convenience”. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66, July.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1986). “The Forms of Capital.” in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J. G. Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press,
Boman, Mattias. (2018). “Hovrättens dom mot männen bakom Swefilmer”, SVT, 28 March. https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/halland/hovrattens-dom-mot-mannen- bakom-swefilmer
Brandel, Tobias. (2013). “Svensk illegal streaming växer snabbt”, Svenska Dagbladet, 29 April. https://www.svd.se/svensk-illegal-streaming-vaxer-snabbt
Bryman, Alan (2016). Social Research Methods, 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Chalaby, K. Jean (2016). Television and Globalization: The TV Content Global Value Chain, Department of Sociology, City University London. Journal of communication 66. Collins, Sue (2007). “Celebrity Capital”. In Politicotainment: television's take on the real. Edited by Riegert, Kristina. New York: Peter Lang
Clancy, Michelle (2016). ‘Netflix moves all global traffic to Open Connect CDN’. Rapid TV News, March 19. https://www.rapidtvnews.com/2016031942170/netflix-moves-all- global-traffic-to-open-connect- cdn.html?fbclid=IwAR3rhcjjZXeTy73VDFJvxRLm6IhsdDlc6wFZKXsd_h6qC_ACqjI0mT 27H5E#axzz4eSbiNPpn
Corrigan, F. Thomas (2018). ’Making Implicit Methods Explicit: Trade Press Analysis in the Political Economy of Communication’. International journal of communication
Fairclough, Norman (2010). Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. 2. ed. Harlow: Longman
57
Hesmondhalgh, David (2006). ’Discourse analysis and content analysis’ in Gillespie, Marie & Toynbee, Jason (red.) Analysing media texts. Maidenhead: Open University Press
Hill, Siri (2020). “Ny rapport: Allt färre svenskar använder piratsajter”, SVT, 7 February. https://www.svt.se/kultur/ny-rapport-farre-streamar-film-och-tv-serier-illegalt
Kristensen, Nete Nørgaard (2017). “Churnalism, Cultural (Inter)Mediation and Sourcing in Cultural Journalism”, Journalism Studies, DOI:10.1080/1461670X.2017.1330666
Kristensen Nørgaard Nete, Hellman Heikki & Riegert, Kristina (2017). Cultural Mediators Seduced by Mad Men: How Cultural Journalists Legitimized a Quality TV Series in the Nordic Region. Television & New Media. SAGE
Lobato, Ramon (2019). “Netflix nations: the geography of digital distribution." New York: New York University Press
Ortman, Chris (2019). “MPAA Welcomes Netflix as New Member”, Motion Picture Association. January 22. https://www.motionpictures.org/press/mpaa-welcomes- netflix-as-new-member/
Pulver, Andrew (2019). ’Martin Scorsese defends decision to make deal with Netflix for The Irishman’. The Guardian, October 13, https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/oct/13/the-irishman-martin-scorsese- defends-decision-to-go-with-netflix#maincontent
Rankin, Jennifer (2018). ‘Online streaming services face '30% made in Europe' law’. The Guardian, April 26, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/26/eu- third-party-trader-amazon-google-ebay
Robertson, Alexa. (2015) Media and Politics in a Globalizing World. Cambridge: Polity.
58
Sandberg, Katarina (2017). “Ny EU-dom kan göra det olagligt att använda illegala streamingsajter”. SVT, 15 May. https://www.svt.se/kultur/medier/ny-eu-dom-kan- gora-det-olagligt-att-anvanda-illegala-streamingsajter
Schaltz, Thomas (2009). ‘Film industry studies and Hollywood history’ in Holt, Jennifer & Perren, Alisa (red.). Media industries: history, theory, and method. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell
Shoard, Catherine (2019) ‘Martin Scorsese on The Irishman: 'Please, please don’t look at it on a phone'. The Guardian, December 2, https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/dec/02/martin-scorsese-the-irishman-dont- watch-on-phone-netflix
The Economist (2019). The future of entertainment. Briefing, November 14, 2019 edition. https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/11/14/the-future-of-entertainment
Wasko, Janet (2014). “Understanding the critical political economy of the media” in Christians, C. & Nordenstreng, K. (eds.) Communication theories in a multicultural world. New York: Peter Lang. www.netflix.com (2020). “Netflix Timeline” https://media.netflix.com/en/about- netflix
59
Appendices Appendix A
60
Appendix B
61
Appendix C
62
Appendix D
63
Appendix E
Appendix F
64
Appendix G
65
Appendix H
66
Appendix I
67
Appendix J
68
Appendix K
69
Appendix L
70
Appendix M
71
Appendix N
72
Appendix O
73