Amazon Prime asks the question: “Are you sure you wouldn’t rather be shopping?”
Not to be dramatic but remember Buy N Large? If not, here’s one of their commercials. It’s unfair to sit here comparing Amazon to Buy N Large, the fictional Pixar mega corporation which was featured prominently in Wall-E, but there are undeniable parallels between the two entities. Buy n Large’s motto reads “Everything, all the time” and Amazon isn’t far beyond. Amazon, for all its many, many faults, is nonetheless a convenient service that satisfies a massive need: the need for quick and easy shopping. While this is not a discussion of Amazon’s practices, it is impossible to separate Amazon Prime Video from Amazon the retail giant: the two are inextricably intertwined. Take a look:
I have googled other streaming services (I regularly access different services throughout my week) and with the glaring exception of Amazon prime, every single streaming service interface only allows the consumer to interact with streamable content. Amazon is different because the interface provides me with the option to start shopping with a simple click on any of the various drop down menus prominently displaced across the top of the screen. In many ways, making Prime Video just one option on the existing drop down menu within the Amazon interface makes sense. The company doesn’t have to design an entirely new interface and me as the consumer can order cat toys and watch the new James Bond movie without ever switching to a new tab.
Convenience aside, however, it is worth recognizing that Amazon never allows me to forget that I could be shopping right now instead of looking at movies. Imagine if Disney+ perpetually had a search bar across the top offering me deals on toys, theme parks, and the status of my cart? Amazon’s insistence on intertwining streaming and shopping almost seems to imply that the two may be interchangeable. The lack of separation between entertainment and retail makes me almost wonder if Amazon is cleverly attempting to take advantage of the bored and listless. Anyone who makes their way to Amazon’s interface without a title already in mind is liable to be redirected towards retail therapy.
Perhaps because Disney is an entertainment company first and a retail company second with a vested interest in never allowing guests behind the curtain, we the consumer would declare our hatred for the Disney+ shopping experience vocally and immediately. But there is hardly a peep when Amazon offers free delivery while I watch Nacho Libre. Amazon is benefiting from a double standard by running their streaming service as a retail space rather than as a comfort/escapist space.
Scrolling down, Amazon’s first recommendations are “Movies we think you’ll like” followed by “Amazon originals”. Two quick notes: first, the wording behind “Movies we think you’ll like” and second, how many movies are offered.
The wording is clever as it absolves Amazon of blame if you don’t like its recommendations. Rather than giving a hard and fast recommendation such as “You’ll love this movie” or “Find your next favorite”, Amazon is linguistically hedging its bets. They think you’ll like it but they want you to remember that Amazon is not infallible and can’t be held accountable if you decide you hate Eddie Izzard’s “Dress to Kill”.
Secondly, by making the “Movies we think you’ll like” double decked, Amazon is able to effectively double the odds that a consumer will click on a title by cramming more options into the search area. Amazon’s algorithm is based upon machine learning and collaborative recommendation. What this means is that like any large streaming service, Amazon has an algorithm designed to learn one’s habits and direct the consumer towards potential new media. But amazon’s collaborative recommendation model, “consumers who like X also liked Y” helps create a more human curation and solves issues that arise when movies like Napoleon Dynamite encounter machine learning.
Additionally, Amazon is a relative newcomer in the world of streaming services. Perhaps the double decked suggestion bar is nothing more than a corporate strategy to double their chances of enticing a viewer before said viewer clicks away to a more tried and true (but rival) service. Amazon is fighting to increase the stickiness of its platform and one way to do so is to draw in users with choice, and more of it. Amazon’s lack of original IP means that as a streaming service, it is competing with the likes of Disney Plus and HBO max, both of which are able to throw literal decades worth of intertextual synergy and nostalgic intellectual property at any competitor. For Amazon, maybe the double decker suggestion bar is the first step of an uphill climb.
I scrolled to the end of the section and it’s worth noting that every single movie showcased was a Prime movie. It’s possible that for new users this would not be the case but for me, Amazon seemed intent on reminding me (enforcing?) a content quid pro quo: you keep being a Prime member and we’ll keep curating content for you.
To wrap up, I want to take a quick look at Amazon Prime Video’s handling of content diversity. Look at the screenshots below, take note of the method by which a user is able to access the content.
Researching the methodology behind how Amazon prime decides what is Pay-per-view and what is included for free yielded no clear explanation. The best explanation seems to be that paid content is available to anyone while Prime content is only available to, well, Prime members. This make’s sense but it is worth discussing the fact that scrolling to the end of both sections revealed that 100% of Hispanic Heritage Month content was available for free with Prime compared to 33% of Celebrate Black Voices content.
Amazon has reams of user data and no doubt this availability differential is based on some clever internal analysis of user habits cross referenced with cost of maintaining products for free on Prime. But considering that the reported budget for Amazon’s Lord of the Rings TV show is a whopping $465 million for the first season alone, it’s difficult to believe that Amazon can only economically justify having 33% of Black Voices content be free on Prime. The pay-per-view model only serves to raise the barrier to entry to this genre of content when, in light of the recent American paradigm shift, Amazon should instead be doing everything in its power to increase accessibility to traditionally marginalized content creators.
