What is the semiotic nature of our media consumption in the streaming era?

The final blog post, what a bittersweet prospect. As this semester and course respectively come to an end, I decided to speak generally for this last post, previously having covered specific topics or ideas. For this post, I simply ask: What does this era of streaming and media-based instant gratification symbolize for consumers? The answer could be simple and plain, or endlessly complicated. I’ll choose to tow a speculative line.

At the dawn of the streaming era, Netflix has just stopped slinging DVDs and released its initial streaming offerings, really finding its stride with its original series House of Cards. Around that same time, Spotify has just turned some heads that were previously bound near exclusively to Pandora or Sirius XM Radio with its PC-only, on-demand music platform.

Now almost a decade later, there are almost too many streaming or on-demand services across all media to keep track of. Music, books, movies, television, there are various points of instant accessibility, continuously growing greater than before. But this landscape provoked forced adaptability in various forms. Apple isn’t actively pushing Ipod sales, because no one buys albums or downloads mp3s. Instead, they integrated the Ipod functionality into their Iphones and developed their own Spotify competitor, Apple Music. Companies like Amazon and Disney planted their own flags with Prime Video and Disney+, refusing to let Netflix and Hulu steal the show. And these major players changing the landscape caused a near-endless ripple effect of new services, and roulette for television and movies particularly bouncing service to service when contracts expire.

What does this say about us, semiotically? It doesn’t take academic pedigree or a lifetime of data analysis to see that we, the consumer are the driving force of this endless competition, and streamlined media. Personally, I think it represents a passively acquired need for instant gratification.

In the earlier days of streaming, where streaming complimented our regularly regimented media consumption as a more hybrid model (I.E still frequenting major network television paired with Netflix), it seems like there was a preservation of patience, to some degree. By not yet experiencing all but everything at the palm of our hands at any given time, there was still value and enrichment in those moments where new media was released or chopped up into week-by-week stories, or even where an album leaked and you had to download the leak if you wanted to hear it early.

In the current model, I think it’s safe to say most would be shocked if there wasn’t an opportunity to have access to something instantaneously once it's released. Despite being potentially pay-gated, there is no schedule at hand but yours. At a grander scale, this could speak to the modern world’s anxiety, or antsiness, an every pressing need to modernize and push forward no matter what the cost.

As all things do, media will ebb and flow, and formats will potentially come full circle. Although I personally never expect or even want things to return to the way they once were, it's interesting to see some platforms dabbling in ways that would predictably play against our newfound expectations for instant gratification. Disney+’s The Mandolorian released its episodes weekly, akin to traditional network television. I know many people personally who enjoyed that return to form, citing that it gave them something to look forward to weekly rather than the usual binge-watching session.

I don’t think these aforementioned expectations and qualities we’ve adapted are an inately bad thing. We just exist in a media space where the flood gates were blasted open. It’s hard to keep up with competition when everyone around you is running at breakneck speed. And although interacting with such as a consumer, I feel, deeply affects our expectations of art, it is normal and even okay as well.