They don't even list all their old content. For example the old Donald duck cartoons, there seem to only be about 15 or so streaming. The rest are not available. Why?
I don't know about Donald Duck cartoons in particular, but I think a lot of those old cartoons are difficult to find because they contain content that the corporation fears might offend somebody. Racist (or arguably so) ethnic caricatures, extreme cartoon violence, that sort of thing.
For instance, the original version of Disney's The Three Little Pigs has the wolf disguising himself as a stereotypical Jewish merchant.
Old cartoons have been whittled down like this for decades. In 1999, Cartoon Network stopped airing anything with Speedy Gonzales because they decided he was an offensive ethnic stereotype. They ended up reversing course when they discovered that Hispanic audiences by and large liked the character.
So, pay someone with good sensitivities to watch the cartoons and decide based on notes. How expensive can that be ?
Or, integrate a feedback system and take down complained-about cartoons quickly. That's probably better since sensitivities change and some perfectly fine items today might be off-limits tomorrow.
Doing nothing is not a great option, even if it's the easiest to implement.
> So, pay someone with good sensitivities to watch the cartoons and decide based on notes.
Maybe they did, and that's why the cartoons aren't available? If you have to cut X% of a show for content, maybe they make the call to cut the show entirely and pretend it doesn't exist, just so they don't have to answer awkward questions about why so much of the show is missing.
In sales there’s a concept where you don’t just sell against competitors, you sell against doing nothing.
What’s the convincing reason for Disney to not simply do nothing? Sell me on Disney digitizing and releasing old cartoons with the salary of at least one person versus doing absolutely nothing.
You also have to sell me on that employee working on the Donald Duck smoking cigars and speaking in a Mid-Atlantic accent archive project versus working on something else. Why is that employee not instead working on The Avengers Versus Guardians of the Galaxy 2: Hulk We Groot Again!”
The sell (though they seem to be avoiding this particular avenue) is that they have become the owners of a LOT of cultural cornerstones and can leverage that content to create something Netflix cannot:
A complete multi-generational back-catalog that is always available to stream.
Netflix’s irrevocable back-catalog can only go as far back as their first Netflix original. Everything else is licensed.
In a romantic sense the idea that a multi-generational back catalog being a profitable pursuit might feel right, but that doesn’t necessarily translate to a marketable product.
Netflix hasn’t needed much of a back catalog to out-earn the competition.
The truth is that back catalogs have the potential to be basically worthless except for a select few “best of the best” classics.
The majority of Disney back catalog content is most certainly not at the level of Snow White or Cinderella. I think about many of their package (anthology) films as a great example of near-unwatchable garbage that only has non-profit historical value.
Media companies quite literally let their back catalogs rot (like the neglect and disinvestment that led to the Universal masters fire of 20008).
While I think your points are valid, I also think that simply making “trusted archive” part of their brand is enough to justify the cost of employees watching through everything and tagging offensive content.
