Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Yahoo! Entertainment

Hulu Ends Free Streaming Service, Moves Free Stuff To Yahoo View (hollywoodreporter.com) 111

Posted by msmash from the affinity-for-free-content dept.
Hulu has inked a deal with Yahoo to provide free, ad-supported episodes of a range of TV shows. But Hulu also said Monday it will end free streaming service on its own platform as it is moving that to an all-subscription model. As part of its expanded distribution deal with Yahoo, which is launching Yahoo View, a new ad-supported TV streaming site with five most recent episodes of shows from ABC, NBC, and Fox among other networks. From an article on The Hollywood Reporter:Most of Hulu's free content has been fairly limited, restricted to what's known as the "rolling five," or the five most recent episodes of a current show -- content that typically becomes available eight days after it airs and is usually also available for free on broadcast networks' websites. For example, recent episodes of shows like America's Got Talent, South Park and Brooklyn Nine-Nine are currently available for free, while Hulu's slate of originals and high-profile exclusives remain behind the paywall. [...] Yahoo is launching the TV site a half-year after shuttering Yahoo Screen, the video service that offered up ad-supported episodes of original TV shows like Community, live streaming concerts and other clips. With View, however, Yahoo is focusing specifically on providing a destination for television to its audience, many of whom are still driven to Yahoo products via its highly trafficked homepage.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hulu Ends Free Streaming Service, Moves Free Stuff To Yahoo View More

Hulu Ends Free Streaming Service, Moves Free Stuff To Yahoo View

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday August 08, 2016 @12:23PM (#52665419)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:The Yahoo name makes me avoid a service entirel (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Luthair ( 847766 ) on Monday August 08, 2016 @12:45PM (#52665597)
      My question is - did anyone actually know that Yahoo previously offered ad supported network shows? I literally have never heard any reference to it prior to this story.
      • What? You didn't know they were a huge force in online video? They bought broadcast.com from Mark Cuban for $5.7 billion. Surely that wasn't $5.7 billion wasted????

      • My question is - did anyone actually know that Yahoo previously offered ad supported network shows? I literally have never heard any reference to it prior to this story.

        Yeah, I've known about it for two or three minutes now.

      • Other Space was good. It's the only thing I ever watched on Yahoo.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by RyoShin ( 610051 )

        Fans of Community were well aware--after NBC cancelled it a second (third?) time after the fifth season, Yahoo! picked up for the sixth and final season. (A recurring joke/plea was #SixSeasonsAndAMovie) That and Other Space were probably the only somewhat-known content it had.

    • I had no trouble with the Yahoo name. The Verizon name, on the other hand, is a problem...

  • I've been using it to mostly stream anime - Does that go to Yahoo too or fall under Hulu's subscription model?

    Are they going to continue to show ads on their PAID SUBSCRIPTION service? Even the more expensive NO-ADS subscription service that still sells ads?

    Is Yahoo's service still going to use Hulu's software to stream or has Yahoo come up with a whole new system?

    And how many people can use the Hulu subscription simultaneously... :)

    • Re:Anime, older shows? Imthebossneedtheinfo (Score:4, Informative)

      by Binestar ( 28861 ) on Monday August 08, 2016 @12:42PM (#52665571) Homepage

      Are they going to continue to show ads on their PAID SUBSCRIPTION service? Even the more expensive NO-ADS subscription service that still sells ads?

      Yes, they will continue to have ads on their paid subscription service. It's all spelt out when you sign up.

      Also, yes, they'll also have some commercials in programs that are required to have commercials under their no commercials service. This is a limitation from the content providers, not with Hulu deciding they want more ads to run. The shows that this affects are listed during signup for the no-commercial plan.

      From their help: "In response to feedback from our viewers, we started offering a commercial free experience on Hulu. For a small number of shows, however, we have not obtained the rights to stream commercial free and they are not included in our No Commercials plan. You can still easily access these shows with a short commercial before and after each episode with no interruptions during the episode. Specific shows that still have commercials accessible through the No Commercials plan will be noted throughout the signup, switching and playback experience. While the list of shows may change, they are currently: Greyâ(TM)s Anatomy, Once Upon a Time, Marvelâ(TM)s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., Scandal, Grimm, New Girl, and How To Get Away With Murder."

      Bolded by me. The wording is not unclear and they don't pretend everything will have no commercials. What you're buying for $8 is Hulu Plus, the library they have with the ability to stream with commercials. Adding $4 to the plan to remove commercials gives you access to the entirety of the "No commercials" package, which does not included a whopping 7 shows.

      What does watching those 7 shows give you in practice? Under Hulu+ you'll have a couple commercials prior to each show, with some in the middle of shows. Under Hulu+ and No Commercial plan you'll have one Commercial before the shows, none during and one after. Then when starting the next episode you'll have another before that one. If you click "Next episode" it counts as stopping watching that, so you'll skip the after commercial and just need to watch the before commercial.

      TL;DR: I dropped cable and picked up Hulu+ No commercials and Netflix and haven't been happier with my TV Viewing in a long time. The only thing missing is sports, but there are subscriptions available for NFL now too if you're willing to not watch live.

      • Do you have any idea why the rights holders for those few shows insist on commercials?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Binestar ( 28861 )
          Unfortunately I have no inside knowledge, anything I say on that would be pure speculation. But, since this is slashdot, I'll speculate! Pulling things from my ass: they are popular shows and they charge a premium for commercials that the small split from the $4 doesn't cover, or possibly they were sold to the networks with a percentage of gross ad sales clause. I could see where they have "If viewed commercial-free pay X, if viewed with commercials, we get 1% of gross ad sales. They toss ads on and pay

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by gfxguy ( 98788 )
          They might have commercial free contracts with other vendors - typically pay services like Amazon (non-prime) and Apple. Although personally, the 30 second ads that run before/after hardly seem to make it worth paying extra for them, but it's probably just getting around wording in the contracts. I work in broadcast, and there are instances where we cannot give the same exact content we are showing on cable to streaming services, and it has to do with contracts we have with the cable companies. So, it re
        • Easy, they insist on being paid more than their tiny sliver of the $12 subscription is worth. They are high-value series with dedicated fan bases. Hulu is just passing the blame with lawyer approved verbiage.

      • Bizarre that Grimm is included, since the first 4 seasons are commercial free on Amazon Prime Video. (..and presumably the 5th season will be added sometime around the beginning of the new TV season, which has happened for the previous seasons.)

        In other words, it's weird that the different streaming services have such a different experience with the same show.

    • KissAnime has you covered, at least as far as anime is concerned. I don't know of any good places to watch older non-animated series, but torrents are still alive and well.

  • One can hope this will create competition between Comcast and Verizon that will make things more tolerable for the end user, but my hunch is otherwise.

    Broadcast television (recorded personally) is still how I find it easiest to watch shows.

    • Broadcaster here. Please continue to support local TV and big broadcast networks until we figure out how to monetize streaming well enough to survive Comcast's and Dish's downward negotiating pressure on rebroadcast prices. Maybe we can license live stream rebroadcasting to Netflix and Hulu.

      (That's commentary; I don't represent a broadcasting corporation.)

  • Who Lu? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ArhcAngel ( 247594 ) on Monday August 08, 2016 @12:31PM (#52665487)
    The networks have been trying to get something to compete with Netflix for years and fortunately so far they have failed miserably. Amazon is doing well but they had to tie their service to their Prime subscription as an add-on to get the traction they now have. Even so I watch Netflix original shows 10 to 1 over Prime. If the RIAA/MPAA/Networks get a foothold you know they will do everything they can to close it off and jack up the price.
    • The Netflix streaming started as a free bonus, too. We've had Prime for a while and are just starting to actually use the video part here and there... we tried out HBO Now and it was nice, although we cancelled after GoT was over. The catalog is a bit thin to subscribe year-long, especially since you can binge through a show pretty quickly. The binging thing Netflix has encouraged certainly seems like an interesting wrench in the gears of normalcy for the 'old powers' to deal with.
    • Netflix started out as a replacement for blockbuster and gained a lot of popularity by showing people are willing to wait a few months for cheaper prices and convenience. They proved that people were willing to pay a reasonable price for content, and were willing to wait until it was out on DVD/BD to watch it.

      The MAFIAA has already done some strong-arming of Netflix to get their way and push their own products. STARZ keeps going back and forth about having content on Netflix, Showtime has slowly removed

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gfxguy ( 98788 )
      Hulu has been around for several years, and is backed by most of the big content providers (Disney, Fox, Time Warner, to name a few). I don't see it so much as direct competition until Hulu starts offering a vastly larger number of movies to the catalog. Until then, Hulu is basically the Netflix of TV shows, Netflix is the Netflix of movies. The very small catalog of original shows notwithstanding. Yes, Netflix has a large catalog of OLDER TV shows (past seasons for what they do have), but that still do
      • I used HULU the first month it came out so I know how long it's been around. It's funny you mention Disney as a backer of HULU since Some of the best original content on Netflix are Disney properties (DareDevil, Jessica Jones, and soon The Punisher, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, and The Defenders). But the fact remains HULU is niche product (although 12 million subscribers is nothing to sneeze at) looking for that breakaway hit but the networks keep trying to get it using the old style pablum "we'll feed it to you

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by RyoShin ( 610051 )

      I actually really liked Hulu, having used it from its first year until April of this year. It had a lot of "day after" showings of series I liked, and once they finally got a No Commercials plan I started giving them actual money. Even though it cost more than Netflix and the original content was subpar, I was quite happy.

      But, this past April, they forced a new "Watchlist" format on all users. The move was basically an amalgam of every complaint /. has whenever UI is fucked with: control is removed, interac

  • Is Hulu still a thing? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by spoot ( 104183 ) on Monday August 08, 2016 @12:36PM (#52665525) Homepage

    I used to use it when it first started. It was easier and of course, I felt that I was "doing the right thing" as opposed to torrenting for TV shows. Then they went to the paid model. Wait a second, I have to pay... and watch commercials. When was that 2-3 years ago? Stopped watching Hulu. I used to 'make fun' of people at work who were paying for this. They want you to pay and watch commercials?! Hell, I can put an antenna on my TV and watch for "free." So yea, what does their user base (paying that is) really look like these days?

    I was thinking of this in terms of news the other day. I am an admitted news junkie. And I've noticed that I don't even bother with the NYT or the WPost any more. I just jump over those bookmarks. Instead I use free sites where I can use adblocks. Not that I have an aversion to ads, just don't need all that crap running on my browser. I even paid for Sling for a couple of months so I could get CNN. But dropped it, after realizing I was paying 20 bucks a month for CNN, just wasn't worth it. Instead, I watch France24, DW and Sky News. Why, cause they don't charge me. So I don't watch the BIG news casters.

    My real point? Not sure exactly.... But I drop the big casters trying to nickle and dime me, and get the free options. When it comes to TV shows, the point of Hulu (I would think) for the consumer, was to offer TV in a legal and easier to use fashion than torrenting. I'm back to the point where it's easier to pay for a proxy and torrent. What have the streamers learned, from what I can gather, not much.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Binestar ( 28861 )
      I find that when you add the Hulu Plus no commercial plan and Netflix together it is a suitable replacement for cable TV in my home. I went from >$100/month for TV to ~$25 for TV and didn't lose anything but live sports. Since I only watch NFL and I used to TiVo it during the week, the $99/year for NFL replaces from NFL gamepass turns it into ~$35/month.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gfxguy ( 98788 )

        I've only just converted, but I'm glad to see other people like you having success in ditching the > $100 (mine was nearly $140 from DirecTV for service on 3 TVs, and that didn't even include any premium channels). I decided TV is just not worth it. I liked skipping commercials with the DVR, but with Hulu's commercial free option, that hasn't been a problem. There are certainly drawbacks and caveats, and there are holes in the programming that I need to make up for in other ways (like you with the spo

    • CNN isn't news. It is info-tainment. By the way, Sky-News is much bigger than CNN is in terms of viewership and revenue.

    • Yeah, I used to watch Hulu all the time with their free tier as well, but stopped watching regularly a year or two ago after the experience turned sour.

      For instance, one serialized show I watched suddenly stopped receiving new episodes about 3/4 of the way through the season, even though it was (and is) still on the air. New episodes started again with the next season, but those older episodes were never posted for free viewing, and then they did the exact same thing the next season as well. For other shows

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by RyoShin ( 610051 )

      Yeah, pay-to-view-ads was pants-on-head stupid, so I continued with the free, ad-supported plan. Last year they introduced a more expensive No Commercials plan and I was quite happy to give them my money. Then this year they completely fucked up their UI and I dropped them entirely.

  • Nothing of value was lost.

  • It still does no good for those outside the US (Score:5, Informative)

    by fustakrakich ( 1673220 ) on Monday August 08, 2016 @12:44PM (#52665585) Journal

    Sorry, bittorrent is still the best service going.

  • Television? Is that some new type of technology I haven't heard about yet?
  • I have no desire to switch out of one app and into another while watching TV. Either put them together into one universal interface or expect monopolization.

  • Suckers! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by kheldan ( 1460303 )

    They fell for the 'streaming TV' meme, LOL!

    OTA broadcasts + TiVo + 30_second_skip_enabled = Free TV, no ads.

    Oh, and by the way: You're paying for TV three times now: Pay for internet, pay for the streaming service, and be subjected to ads. Suckers!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Hodr ( 219920 )

      Some of us have highspeed internet, but no over the air channels within SEVERAL hundred miles.

      • What the hell, do you live in the middle of Alaska or something? I guess it just sucks to be you then. Read more books or something, you'll get better bang for the buck out of those.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gfxguy ( 98788 )
      Except AMC isn't broadcast OTA. USA is not broadcast OTA. TNT is not broadcast OTA. FX, FXM, FXX are not broadcast OTA. If all the content I wanted was available OTA, then I'd agree with you.
      • Guess what? I used to pay for cable. I gave it up as a cost-cutting measure about 10 years ago and never looked back once. I was paying a premium for a bunch of shitty channels so I could get a few shows I wanted. I decided that made no sense and just walked away. Guess what else? There's plenty on OTA TV to watch, more than I have time for during the Fall/Winter season, good thing I have a DVR. You only think you 'need' those cable-only channels, but you really don't. Why do you think more and more people

        • Have you heard about this thing called Hulu, where you can watch non-OTA shows? It is good it was even on /. earlier today.

          • Are you trying to be funny? Or are you clueless? Or are you just a talentless wanna-be troll?
            I'm not paying to watch TV. Especially when you PAY and still have to watch ADS. That's why there's an antenna on my roof. You're welcome to PAY to watch ADS all you want, buddy, if that's what gets you off.

  • "many of whom are still driven to Yahoo products via its highly trafficked homepage." Crap, did I wake up in an alternate timeline again?

  • I actually loved the original Hulu.

    The idea that I could watch the latest five episodes of a TV show with associated commercials baked in (and unskipable) was quite nice. I certainly stopped pirating those shows.

    The problem with Hulu was that they slowly made more of their stuff behind paywalls. This move to a different website is a good solution. Keep the free stuff on Yahoo and paywalled stuff on Hulu.

  • I wanted premium service, access to their entire catalog, and most importantly - NO ADS. They failed to deliver that experience, and I cancelled the same day. I still use Netflix, but if they ever start showing ads, I'll kick them to the curb just as quickly. I hardly watch anything anymore...saving $10 a month would probably be better for me anyway.

  • When I last tried to use that service, most of the content was not available on the paid variant. What was on it had a bigger back catalog, but was too infested with commercials to be viable. I understand you can pay 50% more to reduce, but not eliminate, the commercials now. But did they ever get all the content moved over to the pay service? Otherwise dropping the free service seems brain dead, even for Hulu.

  • What I get trying to go to https://view.yahoo.com/ [yahoo.com] Tim S. Your connection is not secure The owner of view.yahoo.com has configured their website improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this website.
  • I think this a good move for hulu.
  • Guess I'm telling my ancient age, but I remember when CABLE was advertised as 'no commercials' -lol-

Slashdot Top Deals

Receiving a million dollars tax free will make you feel better than being flat broke and having a stomach ache. -- Dolph Sharp, "I'm O.K., You're Not So Hot"

Close