Hubbry Logo
Streaming mediaStreaming mediaMain
Open search
Streaming media
Community hub
Streaming media
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Streaming media
Streaming media
from Wikipedia

On websites such as YouTube, videos such as this short NASA film about spacesuit design are played instantly depending on the user's internet connection, and the video is partially downloaded in the background.

Streaming media is multimedia delivered through a network for playback using a media player. Media is transferred in a stream of packets from a server to a client and is rendered in real-time;[1] this contrasts with file downloading, a process in which the end-user obtains an entire media file before consuming the content. Streaming is more commonly used for video on demand, streaming television, and music streaming services over the Internet.

While streaming is most commonly associated with multimedia from a remote server over the Internet, it also includes offline multimedia between devices on a local area network. For example, using DLNA[2] and a home server, or in a personal area network between two devices using Bluetooth (which uses radio waves rather than IP).[3] Online streaming was initially popularized by RealNetworks and Microsoft in the 1990s[4] and has since grown to become the globally most popular method for consuming music and videos,[5] with numerous competing subscription services being offered since the 2010s.[6] Audio streaming to wireless speakers, often using Bluetooth, is another use that has become prevalent during that decade.[7] Live streaming is the real-time delivery of content during production, much as live television broadcasts content via television channels.[8]

Distinguishing delivery methods from the media applies specifically to, as most of the traditional media delivery systems are either inherently streaming (e.g., radio, television) or inherently non-streaming (e.g., books, videotapes, audio CDs). The term "streaming media" can apply to media other than video and audio, such as live closed captioning, ticker tape, and real-time text, which are all considered "streaming text".

Etymology

[edit]

The term "streaming" was first used for tape drives manufactured by Data Electronics Inc. that were meant to slowly ramp up and run for the entire track; slower ramp times lowered drive costs. "Streaming" was applied in the early 1990s as a better description for video on demand and later live video on IP networks. It was first done by Starlight Networks for video streaming and Real Networks for audio streaming. Such video had previously been referred to by the misnomer "store and forward video."[9]

Precursors

[edit]

Beginning in 1881, Théâtrophone enabled subscribers to listen to opera and theatre performances over telephone lines. This operated until 1932. The concept of media streaming eventually came to America.[10]

In the early 1920s, George Owen Squier was granted patents for a system for the transmission and distribution of signals over electrical lines,[11] which was the technical basis for what later became Muzak, a technology for streaming continuous music to commercial customers without the use of radio.

The Telephone Music Service, a live jukebox service, began in 1929 and continued until 1997.[12][13] The clientele eventually included 120 bars and restaurants in the Pittsburgh area. A tavern customer would deposit money in the jukebox, use a telephone on top of the jukebox, and ask the operator to play a song. The operator would find the record in the studio library of more than 100,000 records, put it on a turntable, and the music would be piped over the telephone line to play in the tavern. The music media began as 78s, 33s and 45s, played on the six turntables they monitored. CDs and tapes were incorporated in later years.

The business had a succession of owners, notably Bill Purse, his daughter Helen Reutzel, and finally Dotti White. The revenue stream for each quarter was split between 60% for the music service and 40% for the tavern owner.[14] This business model eventually became unsustainable due to city permits and the cost of setting up these telephone lines.[13]

History

[edit]

Early development

[edit]

Attempts to display media on computers date back to the earliest days of computing in the mid-20th century. However, little progress was made for several decades, primarily due to the high cost and limited capabilities of computer hardware. From the late 1980s through the 1990s, consumer-grade personal computers became powerful enough to display various media. The primary technical issues related to streaming were having enough CPU and bus bandwidth to support the required data rates and achieving the real-time computing performance required to prevent buffer underruns and enable smooth streaming of the content. However, computer networks were still limited in the mid-1990s, and audio and video media were usually delivered over non-streaming channels, such as playback from a local hard disk drive or CD-ROMs on the end user's computer.

Terminology in the 1970s was at best confusing for applications such as telemetered aircraft or missile test data. By then PCM [Pulse Code Modulation] was the dominant transmission type. This PCM transmission was bit-serial and not packetized so the 'streaming' terminology was often a confusion factor. In 1969 Grumman acquired one of the first telemetry ground stations [Automated Telemetry Station, 'ATS'] which had the capability for reconstructing serial telemetered data which had been recorded on digital computer peripheral tapes. Computer peripheral tapes were inherently recorded in blocks. Reconstruction was required for continuous display purposes without time-base distortion. The Navy implemented similar capability in DoD for the first time in 1973. These implementations are the only known examples of true 'streaming' in the sense of reconstructing distortion-free serial data from packetized or blocked recordings.[15] 'Real-time' terminology has also been confusing in streaming context. The most accepted definition of 'real-time' requires that all associated processing or formatting of the data must take place prior to availability of the next sample of each measurement. In the 1970s the most powerful mainframe computers were not fast enough for this task at significant overall data rates in the range of 50,000 samples per second. For that reason both the Grumman ATS and the Navy Real-time Telemetry Processing System [RTPS] employed unique special purpose digital computers dedicated to real-time processing of raw data samples.

In 1990, the first commercial Ethernet switch was introduced by Kalpana, which enabled the more powerful computer networks that led to the first streaming video solutions used by schools and corporations.

Practical streaming media was only made possible with advances in data compression due to the impractically high bandwidth requirements of uncompressed media. Raw digital audio encoded with pulse-code modulation (PCM) requires a bandwidth of 1.4 Mbit/s for uncompressed CD audio, while raw digital video requires a bandwidth of 168 Mbit/s for SD video and over 1000 Mbit/s for FHD video.[16]

Late 1990s to early 2000s

[edit]

During the late 1990s and early 2000s, users had increased access to computer networks, especially the Internet. During the early 2000s, users had access to increased network bandwidth, especially in the last mile. These technological improvements facilitated the streaming of audio and video content to computer users in their homes and workplaces. There was also an increasing use of standard protocols and formats, such as TCP/IP, HTTP, and HTML, as the Internet became increasingly commercialized, which led to an infusion of investment into the sector.

The band Severe Tire Damage was the first group to perform live on the Internet. On 24 June 1993, the band was playing a gig at Xerox PARC, while elsewhere in the building, scientists were discussing new technology (the Mbone) for broadcasting on the Internet using multicasting. As proof of PARC's technology, the band's performance was broadcast and could be seen live in Australia and elsewhere. In a March 2017 interview, band member Russ Haines stated that the band had used approximately "half of the total bandwidth of the internet" to stream the performance, which was a 152 × 76 pixel video, updated eight to twelve times per second, with audio quality that was, "at best, a bad telephone connection."[17] In October 1994, a school music festival was webcast from the Michael Fowler Centre in Wellington, New Zealand. The technician who arranged the webcast, local council employee Richard Naylor, later commented: "We had 16 viewers in 12 countries."[18]

RealNetworks pioneered the broadcast of a baseball game between the New York Yankees and the Seattle Mariners over the Internet in 1995.[19] The first symphonic concert on the Internet—a collaboration between the Seattle Symphony and guest musicians Slash, Matt Cameron, and Barrett Martin—took place at the Paramount Theater in Seattle, Washington, on 10 November 1995.[20]

In 1996, Marc Scarpa produced the first large-scale, online, live broadcast, the Adam Yauch–led Tibetan Freedom Concert, an event that would define the format of social change broadcasts. Scarpa continued to pioneer in the streaming media world with projects such as Woodstock '99, Townhall with President Clinton, and more recently Covered CA's campaign "Tell a Friend Get Covered", which was livestreamed on YouTube.

Business developments

[edit]

Xing Technology was founded in 1989 and developed a JPEG streaming product called "StreamWorks". Another streaming product appeared in late 1992 and was named StarWorks.[21] StarWorks enabled on-demand MPEG-1 full-motion videos to be randomly accessed on corporate Ethernet networks. Starworks was from Starlight Networks, which also pioneered live video streaming on Ethernet and via Internet Protocol over satellites with Hughes Network Systems.[22] Other early companies that created streaming media technology include Progressive Networks and Protocomm prior to widespread World Wide Web usage. After the Netscape IPO in 1995 (and the release of Windows 95 with built-in TCP/IP support), usage of the Internet expanded, and many companies "went public", including Progressive Networks (which was renamed "RealNetworks", and listed on Nasdaq as "RNWK"). As the web became even more popular in the late 90s, streaming video on the internet blossomed from startups such as Vivo Software (later acquired by RealNetworks), VDOnet (acquired by RealNetworks), Precept (acquired by Cisco), and Xing (acquired by RealNetworks).[23]

Microsoft developed a media player known as ActiveMovie in 1995 that supported streaming media and included a proprietary streaming format, which was the precursor to the streaming feature later in Windows Media Player 6.4 in 1999. In June 1999, Apple also introduced a streaming media format in its QuickTime 4 application. It was later also widely adopted on websites, along with RealPlayer and Windows Media streaming formats. The competing formats on websites required each user to download the respective applications for streaming, which resulted in many users having to have all three applications on their computer for general compatibility.

In 2000, Industryview.com launched its "world's largest streaming video archive" website to help businesses promote themselves.[24] Webcasting became an emerging tool for business marketing and advertising that combined the immersive nature of television with the interactivity of the Web. The ability to collect data and feedback from potential customers caused this technology to gain momentum quickly.[25]

Around 2002, the interest in a single, unified, streaming format and the widespread adoption of Adobe Flash prompted the development of a video streaming format through Flash, which was the format used in Flash-based players on video hosting sites. The first popular video streaming site, YouTube, was founded by Steve Chen, Chad Hurley, and Jawed Karim in 2005. It initially used a Flash-based player, which played MPEG-4 AVC video and AAC audio, but now defaults to HTML video.[26] Increasing consumer demand for live streaming prompted YouTube to implement a new live streaming service for users.[27] The company currently also offers a (secure) link that returns the available connection speed of the user.[28]

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) revealed through its 2015, earnings report that streaming services were responsible for 34.3 percent of the year's total music industry's revenue, growing 29 percent from the previous year and becoming the largest source of income, pulling in around $2.4 billion.[29][30] US streaming revenue grew 57 percent to $1.6 billion in the first half of 2016 and accounted for almost half of industry sales.[31]

Streaming wars

[edit]

The term streaming wars was coined to describe the new era (starting in the late 2010s) of competition between video streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Hulu, HBO Max, Disney+, Paramount+, Apple TV+, Peacock, and many more.[6][32]

The competition between increasingly popular online platforms, such as Netflix and Amazon, and legacy broadcasters and studios moving online, like Disney and NBC, has driven each service to find ways to differentiate from one another. A key differentiator has been offering exclusive content, often self-produced and created for a specific market segment.

When Netflix first launched in 2007, it became one of the more dominant streaming platforms even though it initially offered no original content. It would be nearly a half-dozen years before Netflix began offering its own shows, such as House of Cards, Orange Is the New Black, and Hemlock Grove. The legacy services also began producing original digital-only content, but they also began restricting their back catalog of shows and movies to their platforms, one of the most notable examples being Disney+. Disney took advantage of owning popular movies and shows like Frozen, Snow White, and the Star Wars and Marvel franchises, which could draw in more subscribers and make it a more serious competitor to Netflix and Amazon.[33] Research suggests that this approach to streaming competition can be disadvantageous for consumers by increasing spending across platforms, and for the industry as a whole by dilution of subscriber base. Once specific content is made available on a streaming service, piracy searches for the same content decrease; competition or legal availability across multiple platforms appears to deter online piracy. Exclusive content produced for subscription services such as Netflix tends to have a higher production budget than content produced exclusively for pay-per-view services, such as Amazon Prime Video.[34]

This competition increased during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic as more people stayed home and watched TV. "The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a seismic shift in the film & TV industry in terms of how films are made, distributed, and screened. Many industries have been hit by the economic effects of the pandemic" (Totaro Donato).[9] In August 2022, a CNN headline declared that "The streaming wars are over" as pandemic-era restrictions had largely ended and audience growth had stalled. This led services to focus on profit over market share by cutting production budgets, cracking down on password sharing, and introducing ad-supported tiers.[35] A December 2022 article in The Verge echoed this, declaring an end to the "golden age of the streaming wars".[36]

In September 2023, several streaming services formed a trade association named the Streaming Innovation Alliance (SIA), spearheaded by Charles Rivkin of the Motion Picture Association (MPA). Former U.S. representative Fred Upton and former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) acting chair Mignon Clyburn serve as senior advisors. Founding members include AfroLandTV, America Nu Network, BET+, The Africa Channel, Discovery+, FedNet, For Us By Us Network, In the Black Network, Max, Motion Picture Association, MotorTrend+, Netflix, Paramount+, Peacock, Pluto TV, Radiant, SkinsPlex, Telemundo, TelevisaUnivision, TVEI, Vault TV, Vix, and The Walt Disney Company. Notably absent were Apple, Amazon, Roku, and Tubi.[37][38]

Use by the general public

[edit]
A camera live streaming at a zoo by Niconico

Advances in computer networking, combined with powerful home computers and operating systems, have made streaming media affordable and easy for the public. Stand-alone Internet radio devices emerged to offer listeners a non-technical option for listening to audio streams. These audio-streaming services became increasingly popular; music streaming reached 4 trillion streams globally in 2023—a significant increase from 2022—jumping 34% over the year.[39]

A car audio receiver playing music being streamed via Bluetooth from a smartphone

In general, multimedia content is data-intensive, so media storage and transmission costs are still significant. Media is generally compressed for transport and storage. Increasing consumer demand for streaming high-definition (HD) content has led the industry to develop technologies such as WirelessHD and G.hn, which are optimized for streaming HD content. Many developers have introduced HD streaming apps that work on smaller devices, such as tablets and smartphones, for everyday purposes.

"Streaming creates the illusion—greatly magnified by headphone use, which is another matter—that music is a utility you can turn on and off; the water metaphor is intrinsic to how it works. It dematerializes music, denies it a crucial measure of autonomy, reality, and power. It makes music seem disposable, impermanent. Hence it intensifies the ebb and flow of pop fashion, the way musical 'memes' rise up for a week or a month and are then forgotten. And it renders our experience of individual artists/groups shallower."

A media stream can be streamed either live or on demand. Live streams are generally provided by a method called true streaming. True streaming sends the information straight to the computer or device without saving it to a local file. On-demand streaming is provided by a method called progressive download. Progressive download saves the received information to a local file and then plays it from that location. On-demand streams are often saved to files for extended period of time, while live streams are only available at one time only (e.g., during a football game).[41]

Streaming media is increasingly being coupled with the use of social media. For example, sites such as YouTube encourage social interaction in webcasts through features such as live chat, online surveys, user posting of comments online, and more. Furthermore, streaming media is increasingly being used for social business and e-learning.[42]

The Horowitz Research State of Pay TV, OTT, and SVOD 2017 report said that 70 percent of those viewing content did so through a streaming service and that 40 percent of TV viewing was done this way, twice the number from five years earlier. Millennials, the report said, streamed 60 percent of the content.[43]

Transition from DVD

[edit]

One of the movie streaming industry's largest impacts was on the DVD industry, which drastically dropped in popularity and profitability with the mass popularization of online content.[44] The rise of media streaming caused the downfall of many DVD rental companies, such as Blockbuster. In July 2015, The New York Times published an article about Netflix's DVD services. It stated that Netflix was continuing their DVD services with 5.3 million subscribers, which was a significant drop from the previous year. On the other hand, their streaming service had 65 million members.[45] The shift to streaming platforms also led to the decline of DVD rental services. In July 2024, NBC News reported that RedBox, a DVD rental service that had operated for 22 years, would shut down due to the rapid incline of streaming platforms. As the rental services has been rapidly declining since 2010, the business had to file for bankruptcy, with 99% of households now subscribing to streaming services. Further reflecting the shift away from physical media, BestBuy has ceased selling DVDs.[46]

Napster

[edit]

Music streaming is one of the most popular ways in which consumers interact with streaming media. In the age of digitization, the private consumption of music has transformed into a public good, largely due to one player in the market: Napster.

Napster, a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network where users could upload and download MP3 files freely, broke all music industry conventions when it launched in early 1999 in Hull, Massachusetts. The platform was developed by Shawn and John Fanning as well as Sean Parker.[47] In an interview from 2009, Shawn Fanning explained that Napster "was something that came to me as a result of seeing a sort of unmet need and the passion people had for being able to find all this music, particularly a lot of the obscure stuff, which wouldn't be something you go to a record store and purchase, so it felt like a problem worth solving."[48]

Not only did this development disrupt the music industry by making songs that previously required payment to be freely accessible to any Napster user, but it also demonstrated the power of P2P networks in turning any digital file into a public, shareable good. For the brief period of time that Napster existed, mp3 files fundamentally changed as a type of good. Songs were no longer financially excludable, barring access to a computer with internet access, and they were not rivals, meaning if one person downloaded a song, it did not diminish another user from doing the same. Napster, like most other providers of public goods, faced the free-rider problem. Every user benefits when an individual uploads an mp3 file, but there is no requirement or mechanism that forces all users to share their music. Generally, the platform encouraged sharing; users who downloaded files from others often had their own files available for upload as well. However, not everyone chose to share their files. There was no a built-in incentive specifically discouraging users from sharing their own files.[49]

This structure revolutionized the consumer's perception of ownership over digital goods; it made music freely replicable. Napster quickly garnered millions of users, growing faster than any other business in history. At the peak of its existence, Napster boasted about 80 million users globally. The site gained so much traffic that many college campuses had to block access to Napster because it created network congestion from so many students sharing music files.[50]

The advent of Napster sparked the creation of numerous other P2P sites, including LimeWire (2000), BitTorrent (2001), and the Pirate Bay (2003). The reign of P2P networks was short-lived. The first to fall was Napster in 2001. Numerous lawsuits were filed against Napster by various record labels, all of which were subsidiaries of Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group, or EMI. In addition to this, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) also filed a lawsuit against Napster on the grounds of unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, which ultimately led Napster to shut down in 2001.[50] In an interview with the New York Times, Gary Stiffelman, who represents Eminem, Aerosmith, and TLC, explained, "I'm not an opponent of artists' music being included in these services, I'm just an opponent of their revenue not being shared."[51]

The fight for intellectual property rights: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.

[edit]

The lawsuit A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. fundamentally changed the way consumers interact with music streaming. It was argued on 2 October 2000, and was decided on 12 February 2001. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a P2P file-sharing service could be held liable for contributory and vicarious infringement of copyright, serving as a landmark decision for Intellectual property law.[52]

The first issue that the Court addressed was fair use, which says that otherwise infringing activities are permissible so long as they are for purposes "such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching [...] scholarship, or research."[53] Judge Beezer, the judge for this case, noted that Napster claimed that its services fit "three specific alleged fair uses: sampling, where users make temporary copies of a work before purchasing; space-shifting, where users access a sound recording through the Napster system that they already own in audio CD format; and permissive distribution of recordings by both new and established artists."[53] Judge Beezer found that Napster did not fit these criteria, instead enabling their users to repeatedly copy music, which would affect the market value of the copyrighted good.

The second claim by the plaintiffs was that Napster was actively contributing to copyright infringement since it had knowledge of widespread file sharing on its platform. Since Napster took no action to reduce infringement and financially benefited from repeated use, the court ruled against the P2P site. The court found that "as much as eighty-seven percent of the files available on Napster may be copyrighted and more than seventy percent may be owned or administered by plaintiffs."[53]

The injunction ordered against Napster ended the brief period in which music streaming was a public good – non-rival and non-excludable in nature. Other P2P networks had some success at sharing MP3s, though they all met a similar fate in court. The ruling set the precedent that copyrighted digital content cannot be freely replicated and shared unless given consent by the owner, thereby strengthening the property rights of artists and record labels alike.[52]

Music streaming platforms

[edit]
As music streaming platforms have become more prevalent in the US, music piracy rates have fallen. Piracy rates are calculated as a function of US total population.[54]

Although music streaming is no longer a freely replicable public good, streaming platforms such as Spotify, Deezer, Apple Music, SoundCloud, YouTube Music, and Amazon Music have shifted music streaming to a club-type good. While some platforms, most notably Spotify, give customers access to a freemium service that enables the use of limited features for exposure to advertisements, most companies operate under a premium subscription model.[55] Under such circumstances, music streaming is financially excludable, requiring that customers pay a monthly fee for access to a music library, but non-rival, since one customer's use does not impair another's.

An article written by the New York Times in 2021 states that "streaming saved music." This is because it provided monthly revenue. Especially Spotify offers its free platform, but you can pay for their premium to get music ad-free.[56] This allows access for people to stream music anywhere from their devices not having to rely on CDs anymore.

There is competition between services similar but lesser to the streaming wars for video media. As of 2019, Spotify has over 207 million users in 78 countries,[57] As of 2018, Apple Music has about 60 million, and SoundCloud has 175 million.[58] All platforms provide varying degrees of accessibility. Apple Music and Prime Music only offer their services for paid subscribers, whereas Spotify and SoundCloud offer freemium and premium services. Napster, owned by Rhapsody since 2011, has resurfaced as a music streaming platform offering subscription-based services to over 4.5 million users as of January 2017.[59]

In the evolving music streaming landscape, competition among platforms is shaped by various factors, including royalty rates, exclusive content, and market expansion strategies. A notable development occurred in January 2025, when Universal Music Group (UMG) and Spotify announced a new multi-year agreement. This partnership aims to enhance opportunities for artists and consumers through innovative subscription tiers and an enriched audio-visual catalog.[60]

The music industry's response to music streaming was initially negative. Along with music piracy, streaming services disrupted the market and contributed to the fall in US revenue from $14.6 billion in 1999 to $6.3 billion in 2009. CDs and single-track downloads were not selling because content was freely available on the Internet. By 2018, however, music streaming revenue exceeded that of traditional revenue streams (e.g. record sales, album sales, downloads).[61] Streaming revenue is now one of the largest driving forces behind the growth in the music industry.

COVID-19 pandemic

[edit]
Theater ticket sales declined with the rise of streaming services, and theaters did not fully recover from declines during the COVID-19 pandemic when many were closed.[62]

By August 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic had streaming services busier than ever. The pandemic contributed to a surge in subscriptions, in the UK alone, 12 million people joined a new streaming service that they had not previously had.[63] Global subscriptions skyrocketed passing 1 billion.[64] Within the first 3 months, back in 2020, nearly 15.7 million people signed up for Netflix.[65]

An impact analysis of 2020 data by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) indicated that remuneration from digital streaming of music increased with a strong rise in digital royalty collection (up 16.6% to EUR 2.4 billion), but it would not compensate the overall loss of income of authors from concerts, public performance and broadcast.[66]  The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) recompiled the music industry initiatives around the world related to the COVID-19. In its State of the Industry report, it recorded that the global recorded music market grew by 7.4% in 2022, the 6th consecutive year of growth. This growth was driven by streaming, mostly from paid subscription streaming revenues which increased by 18.5%, fueled by 443 million users of subscription accounts by the end of 2020.[67]

The COVID-19 pandemic has also driven an increase in misinformation and disinformation, particularly on streaming platforms like YouTube and podcasts.[68]

Local/home streaming

[edit]
A TV set streaming an audio file from a local home server

Streaming also refers to the offline streaming of multimedia at home. This is made possible by technologies such as DLNA, which allow devices on the same local network to connect to each other and share media.[69][70] Such capabilities are heightened using network-attached storage (NAS) devices at home, or using specialized software like Plex Media Server, Jellyfin or TwonkyMedia.[71]

Technologies

[edit]

Bandwidth

[edit]

A broadband speed of 2 Mbit/s or more is recommended for streaming standard-definition video,[72] for example to a Roku, Apple TV, Google TV or a Sony TV Blu-ray Disc Player. 5 Mbit/s is recommended for high-definition content and 25 Mbit/s for ultra-high-definition content.[73] Streaming media storage size is calculated from the streaming bandwidth and length of the media using the following formula (for a single user and file): storage size in megabytes is equal to length (in seconds) × bit rate (in bit/s) / (8 × 1024 × 1024). For example, one hour of digital video encoded at 300 kbit/s (this was a typical broadband video in 2005 and it was usually encoded in 320 × 240 resolution) will be: (3,600 s × 300,000 bit/s) / (8 × 1024 × 1024) requires around 128 MB of storage.

If the file is stored on a server for on-demand streaming and this stream is viewed by 1,000 people at the same time using a Unicast protocol, the requirement is 300 kbit/s × 1,000 = 300,000 kbit/s = 300 Mbit/s of bandwidth. This is equivalent to around 135 GB per hour. Using a multicast protocol the server sends out only a single stream that is common to all users. Therefore, such a stream would only use 300 kbit/s of server bandwidth.

In 2018 video was more than 60% of data traffic worldwide and accounted for 80% of growth in data usage.[74][75]

Protocols

[edit]
Unicast connections require multiple connections from the same streaming server even when it streams the same content.

Video and audio streams are compressed to make the file size smaller. Audio coding formats include MP3, Vorbis, AAC and Opus. Video coding formats include H.264, HEVC, VP8, VP9 and AV1. Encoded audio and video streams are assembled in a container bitstream such as MP4, FLV, WebM, ASF or ISMA. The bitstream is delivered from a streaming server to a streaming client (e.g., the computer user with their Internet-connected laptop) using a transport protocol, such as Adobe's RTMP or RTP.

In the 2010s, technologies such as Apple's HLS, Microsoft's Smooth Streaming, Adobe's HDS and non-proprietary formats such as MPEG-DASH emerged to enable adaptive bitrate streaming over HTTP as an alternative to using proprietary transport protocols. Often, a streaming transport protocol is used to send video from an event venue to a cloud transcoding service and content delivery network, which then uses HTTP-based transport protocols to distribute the video to individual homes and users.[76] The streaming client (the end user) may interact with the streaming server using a control protocol, such as MMS or RTSP.

The quality of the interaction between servers and users is based on the workload of the streaming service; as more users attempt to access a service the quality may be affected by resource constraints in the service.[77] Deploying clusters of streaming servers is one such method where there are regional servers spread across the network, managed by a singular, central server containing copies of all the media files as well as the IP addresses of the regional servers. This central server then uses load balancing and scheduling algorithms to redirect users to nearby regional servers capable of accommodating them. This approach also allows the central server to provide streaming data to both users as well as regional servers using FFmpeg libraries if required, thus demanding the central server to have powerful data processing and immense storage capabilities. In return, workloads on the streaming backbone network are balanced and alleviated, allowing for optimal streaming quality.[78][needs update]

Designing a network protocol to support streaming media raises many problems. Datagram protocols, such as the User Datagram Protocol (UDP), send the media stream as a series of small packets. This is simple and efficient; however, there is no mechanism within the protocol to guarantee delivery. It is up to the receiving application to detect loss or corruption and recover data using error correction techniques. If data is lost, the stream may suffer a dropout. The Real-Time Streaming Protocol (RTSP), Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) and the Real-time Transport Control Protocol (RTCP) were specifically designed to stream media over networks. RTSP runs over a variety of transport protocols,[79] while the latter two are built on top of UDP.

HTTP adaptive bitrate streaming is based on HTTP progressive download, but contrary to the previous approach, here the files are very small, so that they can be compared to the streaming of packets, much like the case of using RTSP and RTP.[80] Reliable protocols, such as the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), guarantee correct delivery of each bit in the media stream. It means, however, that when there is data loss on the network, the media stream stalls while the protocol handlers detect the loss and retransmit the missing data. Clients can minimize this effect by buffering data for display. While delay due to buffering is acceptable in video-on-demand scenarios, users of interactive applications such as video conferencing will experience a loss of fidelity if the delay caused by buffering exceeds 200 ms.[81]

Multicasting broadcasts the same copy of the multimedia over the entire network to a group of clients.

Unicast protocols send a separate copy of the media stream from the server to each recipient. Unicast is the norm for most Internet connections but does not scale well when many users want to view the same television program concurrently. Multicast protocols were developed to reduce server and network loads resulting from duplicate data streams that occur when many recipients receive unicast content streams independently. These protocols send a single stream from the source to a group of recipients. Depending on the network infrastructure and type, multicast transmission may or may not be feasible. One potential disadvantage of multicasting is the loss of video on demand functionality. Continuous streaming of radio or television material usually precludes the recipient's ability to control playback. However, this problem can be mitigated by elements such as caching servers, digital set-top boxes, and buffered media players.

IP multicast provides a means to send a single media stream to a group of recipients on a computer network. A connection management protocol, usually Internet Group Management Protocol, is used to manage the delivery of multicast streams to the groups of recipients on a LAN. One of the challenges in deploying IP multicast is that routers and firewalls between LANs must allow the passage of packets destined to multicast groups. If the organization that is serving the content has control over the network between server and recipients (i.e., educational, government, and corporate intranets), then routing protocols such as Protocol Independent Multicast can be used to deliver stream content to multiple local area network segments.

Peer-to-peer (P2P) protocols arrange for prerecorded streams to be sent between computers. This prevents the server and its network connections from becoming a bottleneck. However, it raises technical, performance, security, quality, and business issues.

Content delivery networks (CDNs) use intermediate servers to distribute the load. Internet-compatible unicast delivery is used between CDN nodes and streaming destinations.

Recording

[edit]
A candidate being livestreamed with a smartphone, in the 2022 Hamilton, Ontario, municipal election

Media that is livestreamed can be recorded through certain media players, such as VLC player, or through the use of a screen recorder. Live-streaming platforms such as Twitch may also incorporate a video on demand system that allows automatic recording of live broadcasts so that they can be watched later.[82] YouTube also has recordings of live broadcasts, including television shows aired on major networks. These streams have the potential to be recorded by anyone who has access to them, whether legally or otherwise.[83]

Recordings can happen through any device that allows people to watch movies they do not have access to or be at a music festival they could not get tickets to. These live streaming platforms have revolutionized entertainment, creating new ways for people to interact with content. Many celebrities started live streaming during COVID-19 through platforms like Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok offering an alternate form of entertainment when concerts were postponed. Live streaming and recording allow for fans to communicate with these artists through chats and likes.

View recommendation

[edit]

Most streaming services feature a recommender system for viewing based on each user's view history in conjunction with all viewers' aggregated view histories. Rather than focusing on subjective categorization of content by content curators, there is an assumption that, with the immensity of data collected on viewing habits, the choices of those who are first to view content can be algorithmically extrapolated to the totality of the user base, with increasing probabilistic accuracy as to the likelihood of their choosing and enjoying the recommended content as more data is collected.[84]

Applications and marketing

[edit]

Useful and typical applications of streaming are, for example, long video lectures performed online.[85] An advantage of this presentation is that these lectures can be very long, although they can always be interrupted or repeated at arbitrary places. Streaming enables new content marketing concepts. For example, the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra sells Internet live streams of whole concerts instead of several CDs or similar fixed media in their Digital Concert Hall[86] using YouTube for trailers. These online concerts are also spread over a lot of different places, including cinemas at various places on the globe. A similar concept is used by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. There is also a livestream from the International Space Station.[87][88] In video entertainment, video streaming platforms like Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+ are mainstream elements of the media industry.[89]

Marketers have found many opportunities offered by streaming media and the platforms that offer them, especially in light of the significant increase in the use of streaming media during COVID lockdowns from 2020 onwards. While revenue and placement of traditional advertising continued to decrease, digital marketing increased by 15% in 2021,[90] with digital media and search representing 65% of the expenditures.

A case study commissioned by the WIPO[91] indicates that streaming services attract advertising budgets with the opportunities provided by interactivity and the use of data from users, resulting in personalization on a mass scale with content marketing.[92] Targeted marketing is expanding with the use of artificial intelligence, in particular programmatic advertisement, a tool that helps advertisers decide their campaign parameters and whether they are interested in buying advertising space online or not. One example of advertising space acquisition is Real-Time Bidding (RTB).[93]

Challenges

[edit]
[edit]

For over-the-top media service (OTT) platforms, the original content captures additional subscribers.[94] This presents copyright issues and the potential for international exploitation through streaming,[95] widespread use of standards, and metadata in digital files.[96] The WIPO has indicated several basic copyright issues arising for those pursuing work in the film[97] and music industries[98] in the era of streaming.

Streaming copyrighted content can involve making infringing copies of the works in question. The recording and distribution of streamed content is also an issue for many companies that rely on revenue based on views or attendance.[99]

Greenhouse gas emissions

[edit]

The net greenhouse gas emissions from streaming music were estimated at between 0.2 and 0.35 million metric tons CO2eq (between 200,000 and 340,000 long tons; 220,000 and 390,000 short tons) per year in the United States, by a 2019 study.[100] This was an increase from emissions in the pre-digital music period, which were estimated at "0.14 million metric tons (140,000 long tons; 150,000 short tons) in 1977, 0.136 million (134,000 long tons; 150,000 short tons) in 1988, and 0.157 million (155,000 long tons; 173,000 short tons) in 2000."[101] However, this is far less than other everyday activities such as eating. For example greenhouse gas emissions in the United States from beef cattle (burping of ruminants only - not including their manure) were 129 million metric tons (127 million long tons; 142 million short tons) in 2019.[102]

A 2021 study claimed that, based on the amount of data transmitted, one hour of streaming or videoconferencing "emits 150–1,000 grams (5–35 oz) of carbon dioxide ... requires 2–12 liters (0.4–2.6 imp gal; 0.5–3.2 U.S. gal) of water and demands a land area adding up to about the size of an iPad Mini." The study suggests that turning the camera off during video calls can reduce the greenhouse gas and water use footprints by 96%, and that an 86% reduction is possible by using standard definition rather than high definition when streaming content with apps such as Netflix or Hulu.[103][104] However, another study estimated a relatively low amount of 36 grams per hour (1.3 ounces per hour), and concluded that watching a Netflix video for half an hour emitted only the same amount as driving a gasoline-fuelled car for about 100 meters (330 ft), so not a significant amount.[105]

One way to decrease greenhouse gas emissions associated with streaming music is to make data centers carbon neutral by converting to electricity produced from renewable sources. On an individual level, the purchase of a physical CD may be more environmentally friendly if it is to be played more than 27 times.[106][dubiousdiscuss] Another option for reducing energy use is downloading the music for offline listening to reduce the need for streaming over distance.[106] The Spotify service has a built-in local cache to reduce the necessity of repeating song streams.[107]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Streaming media is the real-time delivery of content, including audio and video, over packet-switched networks such as the , permitting consumption on end-user devices without the need to complete files in advance. This process relies on protocols for segmenting data into packets, buffering for playback continuity, and adaptive techniques to adjust quality based on available bandwidth, distinguishing it from store-and-forward methods like full . Emerging from 1990s prototypes, such as PARC's early live video demonstrations in 1993, streaming achieved practical deployment with ' in 1995, which supported audio and rudimentary video over nascent connections. Widespread adoption accelerated post-2007 with Netflix's pivot to online delivery, coinciding with ubiquity and growth, fundamentally altering entertainment by enabling on-demand, personalized access over scheduled broadcasts or . By May 2025, streaming captured 44.8% of total U.S. television usage, surpassing combined broadcast and cable for the first time, driven by platforms like and that leverage content delivery networks to scale globally. Its bandwidth demands are substantial, with video projected to comprise 74% of mobile traffic by late 2024, necessitating robust infrastructure investments to mitigate congestion and latency. Defining achievements include democratizing content distribution for independent creators and correlating with music industry revenue recovery amid declining piracy rates, though causal links remain debated in empirical studies. Controversies center on market dynamics, where top platforms hold over 70% share, fueling antitrust scrutiny over and content exclusivity, yet analyses indicate intensifying competition since 2020 through pricing innovation and niche offerings rather than outright monopolization.

Fundamentals

Definition and Core Concepts

Streaming media is the transmission of audio, video, or content over a packet-switched network, such as the , in a continuous that enables real-time playback on a client device without requiring the full file to be downloaded in advance. This process involves sending compressed data packets from a server to the end user, who consumes the content as it arrives, contrasting with file downloading where the entire media asset must be stored locally before access. Streaming supports both live broadcasts, such as sports events or webcasts occurring in real time, and on-demand playback of pre-recorded material, like movies or podcasts. At its foundation, streaming relies on buffering, where an initial segment of data—typically seconds' worth—is pre-loaded to compensate for network variability and prevent interruptions, followed by ongoing delivery synchronized with playback speed. Compression algorithms reduce file sizes to fit bandwidth constraints; for instance, video often employ codecs like H.264 to balance quality and transmission efficiency. Delivery typically occurs via protocols, sending individualized to each viewer, though methods can optimize bandwidth for group audiences by replicating data only at branch points in the network. A key distinction from downloading lies in storage and accessibility: streaming does not retain the complete file on , enabling instant consumption but necessitating a persistent connection with sufficient bandwidth—commonly 5 Mbps or more for standard-definition video—to avoid degradation. Adaptive streaming technologies further enhance reliability by dynamically adjusting resolution and bitrate based on real-time network conditions, ensuring playback continuity over variable connections. This approach has driven widespread adoption, as it minimizes local storage demands while facilitating scalable distribution, though it remains vulnerable to latency from or congestion.

Historical Precursors

Traditional technologies served as conceptual precursors to streaming media by enabling real-time, one-to-many delivery of audio and video content without requiring end-user storage or download. Radio transmission originated with Guglielmo Marconi's wireless experiments in the late 1890s, but the first audio broadcast of human voice and music occurred on December 24, 1906, when transmitted from Brant Rock, , using over long distances. Commercial commenced with station KDKA's inaugural scheduled program on November 2, 1920, covering the Harding-Cox presidential election results, marking the shift to widespread public via electromagnetic waves. These systems relied on analog signals for synchronous playback, prefiguring the temporal challenges in digital streaming. Television broadcasting extended these principles to visual media, with mechanical scanning experiments by demonstrating moving images in 1925, followed by electronic transmission milestones such as Philo Farnsworth's tube in 1927. Regular analog TV services launched in the with the BBC's high-definition broadcasts on November 2, 1936, from , using 405-line resolution for live programming to multiple receivers via over-the-air signals. In the U.S., experimental TV broadcasts began in 1928 by Charles Jenkins, evolving into commercial viability by the 1940s, with networks like and distributing content in real-time over cables and radio frequencies. , introduced in the late 1940s in to enhance signal reception in remote areas, introduced wired multicast distribution, transmitting a single signal to numerous households simultaneously—a direct analog to modern protocols. Early digital networking concepts further bridged to streaming, with packet-switched multicast transmission emerging in the 1980s as an efficient method for replicating data streams across networks without redundant unicast sends. IP multicast was formalized in standards by 1986, enabling group-addressed delivery akin to broadcast efficiency but over data networks. The Multicast Backbone (MBone), deployed experimentally in 1992 across the internet, facilitated initial real-time media tests, such as audio multicast via tools like vat (Visual Audio Tool), laying groundwork for synchronized playback despite high latency and bandwidth constraints of the era. These precursors highlighted causal challenges like signal propagation delays and receiver synchronization, which persisted into digital streaming architectures.

History

Early Development

The earliest demonstrations of streaming media occurred in the early 1990s, with PARC showcasing live video transmission over the in 1993, marking a proof-of-concept for real-time digital delivery without full file downloads. This experiment highlighted the potential of protocols for continuous media flow, though limited by narrow bandwidth and rudimentary compression. A pivotal advancement came in April 1995, when Progressive Networks (later ) released 1.0, the first commercial software to enable audio streaming over the using progressive download techniques and custom codecs. allowed users to listen to live or on-demand audio broadcasts in near real-time via dial-up connections, bypassing the need to wait for entire files to download. Within four months, approximately 230,000 users downloaded the player, primarily technology enthusiasts accessing radio-style streams from early adopters like affiliates. Video streaming followed suit in the mid-, with tools like early versions of Microsoft's NetShow and ' emerging to handle compressed clips over low-bandwidth links. Key protocols such as () and (), standardized in the late by the IETF, provided foundational frameworks for packetizing and controlling media streams, enabling and error resilience despite internet congestion. These developments remained niche, constrained by speeds under 56 kbps and high server costs, but laid the groundwork for broader adoption as infrastructure expanded.

Expansion in the 1990s and 2000s

The expansion of streaming media in the began with the commercialization of audio streaming technologies amid the rapid growth of the , though constrained by dial-up connections' limited bandwidth of typically 28-56 kbps. Progressive Networks (later ) launched on April 15, 1995, introducing the first proprietary audio format and player for real-time audio delivery over IP networks without full file downloads. This enabled early applications such as live radio broadcasts by partners including ABC News and National Public Radio, with around 230,000 downloads of the software in the first four months despite compression artifacts and buffering issues inherent to transmission. RealAudio's success demonstrated streaming's viability for on-demand and live content, spurring competitors like Microsoft's NetShow (later Windows Media Services) in 1996. Video streaming followed in 1997 with ' release of , the first widely deployed for compressed live and on-demand video over the , supporting formats up to version 15 by later iterations. Events like University's live on November 8, 1999, using highlighted potential for delivery, but persistent challenges included high CPU demands on 1990s hardware and , limiting streams to low resolutions like 160x120 pixels at 10-15 frames per second. These technologies proved streaming's core concept—progressive downloading with buffering for playback continuity—but remained niche, primarily for corporate intranets, webcams, and early news feeds, as dial-up's (upload speeds far below ) restricted . The 2000s marked accelerated growth as adoption surged, with U.S. household penetration rising from under 5% in 2000 to over 50% by 2007 via DSL and cable modems offering 1-10 Mbps speeds, enabling reliable higher-bitrate streams. This infrastructure shift, coupled with Adobe Flash's dominance for cross-platform playback and the RTMP protocol's introduction around 2002 for low-latency delivery, facilitated the era's "Flash and RTMP" phase. platforms proliferated; , founded on February 14, 2005, by former PayPal employees , , and , officially launched on December 15, 2005, achieving over two million daily video views by early 2006 through simple upload and embedding tools. By mid-decade, professional services integrated streaming into business models. initiated on-demand video streaming via its "Watch Now" feature on January 16, 2007, initially offering select titles to subscribers alongside DVD rentals, leveraging partnerships with content owners and to mitigate variability in connection speeds. This complemented emerging ad-supported platforms like , launched in 2007 by NBC Universal and ., which aggregated TV clips and episodes. Expansion was further propelled by mobile advancements and protocols, though piracy via file-sharing networks like , peaking in the early , indirectly pressured legal streaming by highlighting demand for instant access while underscoring bandwidth's role in reducing illegal downloads' appeal as matured. By decade's end, streaming accounted for growing shares of , setting the stage for 2010s dominance through improved encoding and content licensing.

The Streaming Boom of the 2010s

The streaming boom of the was propelled by advancements in infrastructure, the proliferation of internet-connected devices such as smartphones and smart TVs, and consumer demand for on-demand access over scheduled broadcasts or . By 2010, DVD sales had peaked years earlier, signaling a shift toward digital delivery, with streaming services capitalizing on declining revenues. This period saw over-the-top (OTT) platforms disrupt traditional distribution, as households increasingly opted for subscription-based models offering vast libraries without geographic or time constraints. Netflix exemplified the video streaming surge, starting the decade with just over 12 million subscribers—primarily from its DVD-by-mail service—and transitioning to emphasize streaming with original productions like House of Cards in 2013. By 2016, its paid subscriber base reached 79.9 million, climbing to 151.5 million by 2019, driven by global expansion and investments exceeding $13 billion annually in content by the late decade. Competitors like (launched in 2008 but scaling in the 2010s) and (2011) followed, fragmenting the market while accelerating ; U.S. pay-TV penetration fell from 88% in 2010 as cable providers lost over 25 million subscribers by the decade's end amid rising streaming alternatives. In music streaming, Spotify's U.S. launch in July 2011 marked a pivotal expansion from its 2008 European debut, growing to 20 million monthly active users by 2012 and helping propel the sector's share of U.S. recorded music revenues from 7% in 2010 to 80% by 2019. Paid music subscriptions in the U.S. ballooned from 1.5 million in 2010 to 61.1 million by mid-2019, correlating with a sharp decline in piracy rates as legal on-demand options proliferated. This dual boom in video and audio streaming reshaped content production, favoring algorithm-driven and serialized formats suited to consumption, while challenging legacy media's advertising-dependent models. Traditional TV episode output surged 153% from 2009 levels by 2019, much of it funneled to streaming platforms rather than cable networks.

Developments in the 2020s

The in 2020 accelerated adoption of streaming services, with lockdowns driving a surge in viewership as consumers shifted from traditional TV and theaters; reported adding 37 million subscribers globally in the first half of the year alone, while Disney+ reached 57.5 million by August 2020 following its late-2019 launch. This period marked the peak of the "streaming wars," with launches like Max in May 2020 and Peacock intensifying competition among platforms backed by media conglomerates. Global video streaming revenue expanded rapidly, with the subscription video-on-demand (SVoD) segment projected to reach $119.09 billion in 2025, reflecting a influenced by post-pandemic normalization but sustained by original content investments. In the U.S., the video streaming services industry grew at a CAGR of 12.8% from 2020 to 2025, though growth tapered as market saturation set in, leading to higher churn rates and a pivot toward profitability over subscriber acquisition. Platforms like and Disney+ faced slowing domestic gains, with adding only 700,000 U.S. and Canadian subscribers from December 2020 to early 2022, contrasted by HBO Max's 7.1 million and Disney+'s 6.6 million in the same period. From 2023 onward, streaming services implemented password-sharing restrictions to monetize informal sharing, which had inflated perceived user bases; Netflix's crackdown beginning May 23, 2023, resulted in its four largest single-day household additions in U.S. history shortly after. followed with Max's restrictions in early 2025, introducing paid "extra member" add-ons at $8 monthly, while Disney+, , and others enforced similar policies, contributing to revenue stabilization amid rising content costs. Ad-supported tiers emerged as a dominant to attract price-sensitive users and diversify revenue, with 71% of net new U.S. streaming subscriptions from Q1 2023 to Q1 2025 opting for ad plans, reaching 100 million ad-supported subscriptions industry-wide by mid-2025. 's ad tier, launched in 2022, tripled its subscriber base by Q2 2025, comprising 15% of ad-supported market share, while led at 24%. This shift mirrored traditional TV models, enabling platforms to offset losses—Netflix achieved profitability in 2023 after years of deficits—but raised concerns over viewer tolerance for ads amid fragmented choices and price hikes. Live streaming gained prominence, evolving into a $100 billion global market by 2024, driven by , events, and social platforms, though profitability challenges persisted due to high bandwidth demands and competition from short-form video apps. Overall, the decade saw consolidation pressures, with bundling experiments like Disney's Hulu-ESPN-Max package in 2024, as services grappled with antitrust scrutiny and the end of unchecked expansion.

Technical Foundations

Bandwidth and Infrastructure Requirements

Streaming media services require sufficient bandwidth to deliver content without interruptions, with requirements scaling according to video resolution, compression efficiency, and content type. For standard definition (SD) video, a minimum of 3-5 Mbps is typically sufficient, while high definition (HD) at 1080p demands 5 Mbps or higher per stream. Ultra-high definition (4K) streaming necessitates 25 Mbps or more to maintain quality, as recommended by major platforms like Netflix and YouTube. These bitrate requirements correspond to data usage for one hour of video streaming, approximated by the formula Data (GB/hour) ≈ bitrate (Mbps) × 0.45; for example, 15 Mbps yields ~6.75 GB, 25 Mbps ~11.25 GB, and 40 Mbps ~18 GB. Audio-only streaming, such as music services, requires far less, often 0.3-1 Mbps depending on bitrate. Adaptive bitrate streaming technologies adjust quality dynamically based on available bandwidth to mitigate buffering. Infrastructure supporting these bandwidth needs includes content delivery networks (CDNs), which consist of distributed proxy servers and data centers connected by high-speed fiber optic cables to cache and deliver content from locations closest to users, thereby reducing latency and transit bandwidth demands. CDNs employ edge servers in points of presence (PoPs) worldwide to handle traffic efficiently, minimizing the load on central origin servers where content is initially stored and encoded. High-capacity data centers provide the backbone for storage and processing, often leveraging providers for during peak events like live sports broadcasts. Scalability challenges arise from unpredictable viewer surges, which can overwhelm bandwidth and server resources, leading to latency or quality degradation. Services address this through elastic infrastructure that auto-scales resources and employs load balancing to distribute . Global undersea cables and terrestrial fiber networks form the critical interconnects, but bottlenecks in last-mile delivery persist in underserved regions, necessitating ongoing investments in expansion.

Protocols and Delivery Standards

Streaming media protocols facilitate the transmission of audio, video, and associated data across networks, enabling real-time playback without full file downloads. Key protocols include (RTMP) for live video ingestion from sources to servers, and adaptive HTTP-based standards such as (HLS) and (MPEG-DASH) for end-user delivery. These protocols segment content into manageable chunks, often employing (ABR) techniques where multiple bitrate variants of the media are prepared, allowing clients to dynamically select streams matching available bandwidth to minimize buffering and optimize quality. RTMP, originally developed by Macromedia in the early 2000s and later maintained by Adobe, operates over TCP for reliable, low-latency delivery of live streams, typically handling chunks of 128 bytes or larger for audio, video, and metadata. It supports persistent connections and handshakes for session establishment but has been largely supplanted for final delivery due to firewall traversal issues and the rise of HTTP compatibility. In contrast, HLS—introduced by Apple in 2009—uses standard HTTP/HTTPS for serving segmented TS (MPEG-2 Transport Stream) files referenced in M3U8 playlists, enabling compatibility with web caches and CDNs while adapting to network fluctuations through client-side bitrate switching. HLS mandates ABR support, with segments typically 6-10 seconds long, and has evolved to include low-latency modes reducing delay to under 5 seconds in recent implementations. MPEG-DASH, standardized by the as ISO/IEC 23009-1 in 2012 with subsequent editions up to the fifth in 2022, provides an open, royalty-free alternative to HLS, using MPD (Media ) files to describe DASH segments in formats like fragmented MP4. It supports broader codec flexibility, including across devices, and is widely adopted for its vendor-neutral approach, though adoption varies by platform—e.g., Android favors DASH while iOS prioritizes HLS. Both HLS and DASH rely on ABR, where encoders prepare "ladders" of 3-8 bitrate profiles (e.g., 360p at 400 kbps to at 5 Mbps), and players monitor throughput to switch variants seamlessly, improving viewer experience on variable connections. Delivery standards distinguish between unicast and multicast methods. Unicast transmits individualized streams from server to each client, scaling linearly with viewers and consuming more bandwidth but suiting internet protocols like TCP/UDP over IP, as it requires no special network configuration. Multicast, conversely, sends a single stream to multiple recipients via IP multicast groups (e.g., using IGMP for join/leave), conserving bandwidth for one-to-many scenarios like enterprise IPTV but facing deployment challenges over the public internet due to limited router support and ISP restrictions. Hybrid approaches, including content delivery networks (CDNs) with edge caching, enhance unicast efficiency by replicating content geographically, reducing origin server load for high-concurrency events. Emerging standards like incorporate UDP-based protocols for ultra-low latency peer-to-peer or server-relayed delivery, though primarily for interactive use cases rather than broadcast-scale streaming.

Digital Rights Management

Digital Rights Management (DRM) in streaming media encompasses technologies that encrypt content and enforce access controls to prevent unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or modification, thereby enabling content owners to monetize licensed material securely. These systems verify user authentication and device compliance before decrypting streams, typically integrating with protocols like or HLS for adaptive bitrate delivery. In practice, DRM facilitates granular licensing, such as time-bound access or device limits, which underpins subscription models for platforms like and by mitigating revenue loss from illicit sharing. Prominent DRM implementations include Google's , Microsoft's , and Apple's , each tailored to specific ecosystems while supporting Common Encryption (CENC) standards for interoperability. , deployed since 2010, offers three security levels—L3 (software-based) to L1 (hardware-secured)—and powers Android devices and browsers like Chrome, handling over 90% of global video streams. , introduced by Microsoft in 2007, emphasizes robust key management for Windows and Xbox platforms, while , Apple's proprietary system since 2003, integrates natively with and , requiring hardware roots of trust like Secure Enclave. Major services often employ multi-DRM strategies; for instance, combines all three to achieve cross-device compatibility, acquiring licenses dynamically from servers during playback. DRM's effectiveness stems from raising technical barriers to , correlating with observed declines in unauthorized following streaming's mainstream adoption; U.S. rates fell from 20% in 2007 to under 5% by 2020 as platforms like implemented encrypted streams. Industry analyses indicate DRM deters casual infringement by complicating screen captures and redistributions, though sophisticated actors occasionally exploit vulnerabilities, as in the 2016 L1 cracks affecting premium content. Empirical data supports DRM's role in enabling licensing deals, with unprotected alternatives historically yielding unsustainable economics due to rampant duplication, unlike subscription revenues exceeding $30 billion globally in video streaming by 2023. Critics contend DRM imposes undue restrictions, such as prohibiting permanent backups or fair-use excerpts, and fosters via incompatible formats, potentially violating user expectations under doctrines like first sale. User inconvenience arises from license revocations or hardware dependencies, exemplified by Apple's limiting transfers, while privacy risks emerge from persistent tracking of viewing habits. Proponents counter that such measures reflect contractual realities of digital scarcity, absent in , and that circumvention undermines incentives for original production; studies show platforms without strong DRM, like early services, collapsed under pressures exceeding 90% unauthorized access rates. Legally, the U.S. of 1998 fortifies DRM by criminalizing circumvention tools and processes, even for non-infringing purposes like research, with penalties up to five years imprisonment for first offenses. This framework shields streaming providers under safe harbor provisions (Section 512), requiring expeditious removal of infringing streams upon notice, which handled over 10 million takedowns annually by 2022. Internationally, equivalents like the EU Copyright Directive echo these protections, though exemptions for archival or uses exist; enforcement prioritizes technical measures over post-hoc litigation, causal to streaming's viability amid proliferation.

Recommendation Algorithms and Personalization

Recommendation algorithms in streaming media employ techniques, such as and content-based methods, to analyze user interactions including viewing or listening history, ratings, and metadata like or audio features, thereby generating content suggestions. identifies patterns among similar users, while content-based approaches match item attributes to user preferences; hybrid systems combine both for improved accuracy. These algorithms process vast datasets—, for instance, evaluates factors like time of day, device, and viewing duration—to rank and display recommendations on homepages and search results. enhances user retention by prioritizing likely-engaging content, with attributing 75-80% of viewer hours to such suggestions as of 2023. In music streaming, platforms like integrate for lyrics analysis, raw audio signal extraction, and to curate playlists such as Discover Weekly, which has driven billions of hours of listening since its 2015 launch. 's models also incorporate user feedback loops and expert curation in "algotorial" playlists to balance algorithmic outputs with human oversight, fostering sustained engagement. Video services similarly personalize; Netflix's system, evolved through of thousands of variants, correlates user behaviors across its 300 million-plus subscribers to predict long-term satisfaction rather than short-term clicks. These mechanisms causally link data inputs to outputs, where historical patterns inform future predictions, often amplifying popular content due to reliance on aggregate trends. While personalization boosts consumption volume, empirical studies indicate mixed effects on content diversity; Spotify's algorithms have correlated with broader exposure among users, countering expectations of severe homogenization. Evidence for filter bubbles—wherein recommendations isolate users into narrow preferences—remains limited in streaming contexts, with analyses showing platforms often expand cultural consumption diversity compared to traditional media, though benefits accrue disproportionately to heavy users, widening engagement gaps. Algorithmic biases, such as over-reliance on past successes, can perpetuate trends like blockbuster dominance in video recommendations, potentially sidelining niche content unless explicitly mitigated through diversification tweaks. In politically charged video streaming subsets, like integrations, asymmetries exist—recommendations may asymmetrically deter far-right content while tolerating extremes elsewhere—but such findings vary by platform and lack uniform replication across pure subscription streaming services. Overall, causal realism underscores that while algorithms optimize for observed behaviors, their outputs reflect training data limitations rather than inherent ideological tilts, with platforms iteratively refining models via empirical validation to prioritize verifiable engagement metrics over unproven social harms.

Business Models and Platforms

Music Streaming Platforms

Music streaming platforms deliver content over the , enabling users to access vast catalogs of recorded music on-demand without permanent downloads. These services emerged as a legal alternative to in the early 2000s, with launching in 2008 as a pioneer offering both ad-supported free tiers and premium subscriptions to licensed content from major record labels. By 2025, the global music streaming market has grown to dominate consumption, with platforms accounting for over 67% of U.S. music in 2023 and continuing to expand amid rising subscriber bases. Spotify holds the largest market share at approximately 31.7%, supported by 615 million monthly active users and 305 million premium subscribers as of Q1 2025. Apple Music, launched in 2015 and bundled with Apple devices, commands around 15-20% share with an estimated 94-120 million subscribers, emphasizing lossless audio and spatial formats for iOS users. YouTube Music follows with ad-supported access tied to Google's video ecosystem, capturing second place globally through free tiers and algorithmic recommendations. Other notable platforms include Amazon Music, integrated with Prime memberships for bundled access, and Tidal, which prioritizes high-fidelity audio and higher artist payouts at $0.0125 per stream compared to Spotify's $0.003. Business models primarily revolve around structures for broad adoption—such as Spotify's free ad-interrupted playback converting to $10.99 monthly premiums—or subscription-only approaches like Apple Music's $10.99 tier, generating revenue from user fees that fund licensing deals. Platforms allocate 60-70% of net revenue to rights holders via pro-rata distribution, where royalties are pooled and divided based on a track's share of total streams, favoring high-volume hits over niche artists. This system has drawn for low per-stream rates, often $0.003 to $0.007, requiring an artist to garner millions of plays for viable income, though platforms counter that streaming has revived industry revenues post-piracy era. Proposed alternatives, like user-centric models directing subscriber fees to personally streamed tracks, remain unadopted amid label resistance. Competition drives features like personalized playlists, podcast integration, and social sharing, with Spotify's algorithm-heavy discovery contrasting Tidal's artist-focused equity model offering 10% ownership stakes to select performers. Market consolidation persists, as evidenced by Spotify's acquisitions and bundling pressures, yet independent platforms struggle against the of tech giants controlling distribution and . Overall, these platforms have shifted music from to access, boosting global revenues to projected $53 billion growth by 2029 while intensifying debates over equitable compensation.

Video Streaming Services

Video streaming services deliver on-demand audiovisual content, such as films and television series, over the to end-user devices, enabling viewers to select and watch material at their preferred time without adhering to fixed broadcast schedules. These platforms primarily operate through three monetization models: subscription video on demand (SVOD), where users pay a recurring for unlimited access to a library of content, typically ad-free; advertising-based video on demand (AVOD), which offers free access supported by pre-roll, mid-roll, or post-roll advertisements; and transactional video on demand (TVOD), allowing users to rent or purchase individual titles for temporary or permanent access. Hybrids of these models have emerged, such as ad-supported tiers in SVOD services to broaden accessibility amid rising subscription fatigue. SVOD platforms dominate the market, with holding the largest share at approximately 301.6 million global paid subscribers as of 2025, generating revenue through exclusive original productions and licensed content. follows with an estimated 200 million subscribers, leveraging bundling with the broader Prime membership that includes perks, which enhances retention through integrated ecosystem value. Disney+ reports 127.8 million subscribers, focusing on family-oriented content from its franchises like Marvel, , and Star Wars, though it has faced challenges from content cannibalization across bundled offerings. Other notable SVOD services include Max (formerly HBO Max), , and Apple TV+, each carving niches with premium scripted series, live TV integration, or device ecosystem synergies, respectively. AVOD services emphasize scale and , exemplified by , which commands a 12.5% in video streaming usage and attracts billions of monthly active users through algorithmic recommendations and ad revenue sharing with creators. Platforms like and provide free, ad-interrupted linear and on-demand channels, aggregating licensed content to compete on cost while relying on for profitability. TVOD models persist via services like Apple , Google Play Movies, and Vudu, where users pay per title—typically $3–$6 for rentals or $10–$20 for purchases—often in conjunction with SVOD libraries for newer releases.
ServiceEstimated Subscribers (2025)Primary ModelKey Focus
301.6 millionSVODOriginal series and films
200 million (est.)SVODBundled with
Disney+127.8 millionSVODFranchise-based family content
Billions of monthly usersAVODUser-generated and premium videos
These services have proliferated globally, with regional players like iQIYI in China and Hotstar in India adapting to local languages and preferences, though Western platforms maintain dominance in subscriber metrics due to aggressive international expansion and content investment. Market consolidation trends, including bundles like Disney's Hulu-Disney+-ESPN+ package, aim to combat churn rates averaging 5–8% monthly by offering perceived value through diversified libraries.

Monetization Strategies

Streaming platforms primarily monetize through subscription-based models (SVOD), where users pay a recurring for unlimited access to a content , generating predictable revenue streams that accounted for a significant portion of the $233 billion global video streaming market in 2024. This approach, exemplified by early strategies, prioritizes user retention via exclusive content licensing, though it faces challenges from subscriber fatigue amid rising prices. Ad-supported models (AVOD) provide free access interrupted by advertisements, broadening reach to price-sensitive audiences and leveraging scale for ad sales, as seen with YouTube's revenue-sharing system for creators. Free ad-supported streaming TV (FAST) channels, offering linear-style programming like , generated $4.9 billion in U.S. revenue in and are projected to grow at a 13.8% compound annual rate through 2029, capitalizing on cord-cutters seeking familiar broadcast formats without subscription costs. Transactional video on demand (TVOD) enables per-title purchases or rentals, suitable for high-value releases like new films on platforms such as or Apple TV, allowing platforms to capture premium pricing for specific content without diluting library access. Hybrid models increasingly dominate, combining SVOD with lower-priced ad tiers to drive subscriber growth; ad-supported options accounted for 43% of U.S. streaming subscriptions by late 2024 and fueled 70% of net adds for premium services over nine quarters ending in 2025. For instance, reported its ad-tier sign-ups outpacing ad-free plans in available markets, with ad revenue expected to double in 2025, reflecting a shift toward diversified amid economic pressures on consumers. These hybrids mitigate churn by offering tiered pricing—ad tiers often rising slower than ad-free ones—while enabling data-driven ad targeting for higher yields. In music streaming, platforms like employ structures blending AVOD for entry-level users with SVOD upgrades, further illustrating adaptability across media types.

Market Competition and Consolidation

The streaming media market features intense competition among a handful of dominant platforms, primarily driven by subscriber acquisition, content exclusivity, and pricing strategies. maintained the largest global subscriber base in 2025, exceeding 260 million paid users, while closely trailed as a bundled service within Prime memberships, capturing significant market share through its integration with and logistics. Other key players, including Disney+, Max (formerly Max), and , competed aggressively for market share, with the overall subscription video-on-demand (SVoD) sector projected to reach user penetration of 19.3% worldwide in 2025 amid a fragmented landscape of over 200 services. This rivalry has led to escalating content spending, with platforms vying for high-profile originals, licensed IP, and live events like to reduce churn rates, which rose across major services including Prime Video, , and Disney+ in early 2025. To counter competitive pressures and achieve , streaming services have increasingly adopted ad-supported tiers and bundling arrangements, reflecting a broader shift toward profitability over pure growth. For instance, Netflix's ad-tier launch in 2022 gained traction by 2025, comprising a growing portion of new sign-ups, while bundled , ESPN+, and to retain family-oriented audiences. These tactics address rising customer acquisition costs and password-sharing crackdowns, yet competition from hyperscale social video platforms like and has eroded traditional streamers' dominance in short-form content discovery. The global video streaming market, valued at $811.37 billion in 2025, underscores this cutthroat environment, where platforms differentiate via algorithmic personalization and live programming to combat viewer fatigue. Consolidation has accelerated as legacy media firms seek to consolidate fragmented assets amid ballooning production costs exceeding $20 billion annually for top players. The 2022 merger of WarnerMedia and Discovery Inc. created Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), merging HBO Max with Discovery+ to pool premium scripted and unscripted content, though the entity announced a split by mid-2026 into separate streaming/studios and linear networks businesses to streamline operations. Disney's acquisition of full control over Hulu from Comcast in late 2023, valued at $8.6 billion, exemplified vertical integration to bolster its ecosystem against rivals. Amazon's purchase of MGM Studios further pressured competitors, enabling exclusive rights to franchises like James Bond, while stalled joint ventures—such as the proposed Disney/ESPN-WBD-Fox sports streaming alliance—highlight regulatory and strategic hurdles to broader M&A. These moves aim to rationalize duplicate services and leverage synergies in distribution and data, though analysts note ongoing risks from antitrust scrutiny and uneven profitability, with Netflix leading in positive cash flow while others lag.

Adoption and User Behavior

Transition from Traditional Media

The transition from traditional media, including broadcast television, cable subscriptions, and rentals, to streaming services accelerated with the expansion of internet access in the United States and globally during the early 2000s. adoption enabled higher-speed data transmission necessary for reliable video and audio streaming, with U.S. household penetration rising from approximately 50% in 2003 to over 80% by 2010, directly correlating with increased online media consumption. This infrastructural shift reduced reliance on schedules and physical distribution, allowing consumers to access content on-demand via -connected devices. A pivotal milestone occurred on January 16, 2007, when launched its "Watch Now" streaming feature, pivoting from its model to digital delivery and offering instant access to a library of titles for subscribers. This innovation disrupted traditional video rental chains like Blockbuster, which filed for in 2010 partly due to competition from streaming alternatives, and pressured cable providers by providing a lower-cost, flexible viewing option without bundled channel packages. Early streaming adoption grew modestly amid limited content libraries and bandwidth constraints but gained momentum as competitors like (launched 2007) and expanded offerings. Cord-cutting, the practice of canceling pay-TV subscriptions in favor of streaming, intensified in the as service quality improved and pricing models evolved. By 2023, the number of U.S. households—those without traditional pay-TV—surpassed pay-TV households for the first time, reaching about 68.9 million compared to declining cable subscriber bases. In the first nine months of 2024 alone, an estimated 5.7 million U.S. subscribers dropped pay-TV services, contributing to a total of 73.2 million households by year-end. This exodus was driven by factors including rising cable fees, averaging over $100 monthly by 2020, versus streaming subscriptions often under $20, alongside preferences for ad-free, binge-watchable content. In music, a parallel shift occurred from radio broadcasts and physical sales to on-demand streaming, exemplified by Spotify's U.S. launch in 2011 following its 2008 , which reduced and boosted legal digital consumption. By May 2025, streaming platforms achieved a historic , capturing more total television usage share in the U.S. than the combined viewership of broadcast and cable networks for the first time, reflecting the near-complete dominance of internet-delivered media over legacy distribution. Traditional media outlets responded by launching their own streaming services, such as Disney+ in 2019, but faced challenges in retaining audiences accustomed to fragmented, algorithm-driven recommendations rather than fixed schedules.

Role of Peer-to-Peer Sharing and Piracy

(P2P) emerged in the late 1990s, with Napster's launch in June 1999 enabling millions of users to exchange music files without authorization, rapidly expanding to video content via successors like by 2001. This technology demonstrated consumer preference for instant, cost-free digital access over and scheduled broadcasts, but inflicted substantial revenue losses on the music industry, where U.S. recorded music sales fell approximately 50% during the . Video industries faced similar disruptions, with unauthorized downloads of films and television episodes becoming prevalent, prompting legal actions and technological countermeasures. The prevalence of P2P piracy accelerated the shift toward legal streaming by underscoring the viability of decentralized and pressuring content providers to offer convenient alternatives. Platforms like , which began streaming in 2007, analyzed piracy trends on to identify high-demand titles for licensing, thereby tailoring offerings to user behavior revealed through illegal channels. In regions where streaming services launched, P2P traffic notably declined; for instance, usage in dropped by about 50% following Netflix's 2010 entry. Music streaming services, such as Spotify's 2008 debut, correlated with reduced rates, with global music piracy visits falling 18.6% to 13.9 billion in 2024 amid rising platform adoption. Despite these shifts, P2P and related persist as competitors to licensed streaming, adapting to include stream-ripping tools and illegal aggregation sites that bypass paywalls. Recent data indicate a resurgence, with global site visits surging from 130 billion in 2020 to 216 billion in 2024, 96% involving content originating from legitimate streaming platforms, driven by subscription fatigue, content fragmentation across services, and regional access gaps. In markets without affordable local options, such as pre-launch for , searches rose 19.7% for available titles. This ongoing dynamic compels streaming providers to refine pricing, expand libraries, and enhance enforcement, as unchecked continues to erode potential revenues estimated at $29.2 to $71 billion annually in the U.S. for video alone. Overall, P2P sharing and catalyzed streaming's growth by validating digital delivery models while serving as a persistent benchmark for user expectations regarding and cost, influencing platform strategies to prioritize broad availability over restrictive traditional models.

Pandemic-Driven Acceleration

The , beginning in early 2020 with widespread lockdowns implemented in March across many countries, significantly accelerated the adoption of streaming media as consumers shifted entertainment consumption to home-based digital platforms amid theater closures and measures. In the United States, streaming video accounted for 25% of total viewing time in streaming-capable households by mid-2020, reflecting a marked increase driven by stay-at-home orders that curtailed traditional outings. Globally, video streaming traffic surged, with platforms like , , and others reporting up to a 140% rise in usage during peak lockdown periods. Major video streaming services experienced unprecedented subscriber growth in the first half of 2020. Netflix added 16 million paid subscribers in the first quarter alone, a 23% year-over-year increase, bringing its global total to over 183 million by April. Similarly, Disney+ reached 73.7 million subscribers by October 2020, up from approximately 60 million earlier in the year, as families sought indoor alternatives to disrupted live events and cinema releases. Total streaming minutes in the U.S. more than doubled for the week of March 16, 2020, compared to the prior year, underscoring the causal link between restricted physical access to media and heightened digital engagement. This acceleration extended beyond temporary spikes, embedding streaming deeper into daily routines and hastening the decline of legacy broadcast and cable models. Internet data usage in U.S. homes rose 18% in early March 2020 versus 2019, with streaming contributing substantially to overall bandwidth demands that increased 40-60% globally during the initial waves. While growth moderated post-lockdown as economies reopened, the compressed years of projected adoption into months, with services like and Disney+ surpassing multi-year targets ahead of schedule due to formed user habits rather than mere novelty. This shift was empirically tied to reduced alternatives, not inherent platform superiority alone, as evidenced by sustained post-2020 penetration rates exceeding pre-pandemic forecasts.

Household and Multi-Device Usage

In the , streaming media penetration in households reached approximately 96% by the second quarter of 2025, encompassing access via subscription video-on-demand services and other platforms. This high adoption rate reflects a shift from traditional cable or , with 83% of households subscribing to at least one streaming service as of 2025. Globally, similar trends appear in regions with robust , though penetration varies; for instance, connected (CTV) devices are present in 87% of U.S. households, enabling streaming across televisions, set-top boxes, and gaming consoles. Households increasingly support streaming through multiple connected devices, with U.S. households averaging 17 such devices in 2023, including smartphones, tablets, , and dedicated streaming players. Among these, 68% of U.S. households owned a and 46% a streaming media player as of late 2024, up from 54% and 42% in 2020, respectively. This proliferation facilitates seamless content access across screens, with 46% of households maintaining multiple over-the-top (OTT) subscriptions to accommodate diverse device ecosystems and user preferences within the home. Multi-device usage patterns in households often involve simultaneous streaming, where family members consume content concurrently on separate screens—such as a primary for shared viewing alongside individual mobile devices or tablets. Streaming platforms typically enforce household-based concurrent stream limits (e.g., 2–5 streams per account, depending on the service and plan) to permit intra-home sharing while restricting external account use, as verified through detection and device fingerprinting. CTV accounts for over 38% of total U.S. usage time as of , with households leveraging a mix of devices for both primary and secondary screens, including second-screen behaviors where users access complementary content like or apps during TV streaming. This setup demands sufficient capacity, with 81% of U.S. households integrating streaming into their routines alongside linear TV.

Societal and Economic Impacts

Disruption to Legacy Media Industries

The advent of streaming media has profoundly disrupted traditional television and cable industries, primarily through cord-cutting, where households abandon pay-TV subscriptions for internet-based alternatives. In the United States, pay-TV households declined from 84 million in 2019 to approximately 58 million in 2023, with cord-cutting households reaching 56 million, or 46% of internet households, by early 2025. This shift accelerated as streaming's share of total television usage surpassed the combined broadcast and cable share for the first time in May 2025, driven by consumer preference for on-demand content and lower costs. Cable operators reported double-digit primetime viewership declines in 2024, contributing to parent companies' earnings shortfalls. Advertising upfronts for linear TV fell 4% in 2024, contrasting with streaming's 35% growth, while subscription revenues are projected to drop $15 billion annually by 2027 due to accelerating subscriber losses. In the music sector, streaming platforms supplanted physical sales and downloads, forcing traditional record labels to restructure revenue models around licensing deals and per-stream royalties. Global streaming revenues grew from $400 million in 2011 to over $20.4 billion in 2024, enabling overall industry recovery from earlier piracy-induced declines, though per-stream payouts remain low at fractions of a cent. Labels, dominated by three majors controlling over 85% of Spotify streams, receive about 50-70% of platform revenues, but the model favors high-volume hits over mid-tier artists, compressing margins for legacy operations reliant on album sales. This transition, while boosting aggregate earnings, eroded independent labels' bargaining power and shifted power toward platforms like Spotify. The film industry faced similar upheaval, with over-the-top (OTT) streaming eroding theatrical dominance by offering immediate home access, reducing windows between cinema release and digital availability. Studios increasingly prioritize subscription retention over ticket sales, leading to hybrid releases that combine theatrical runs with quick streaming availability for major productions, cannibalizing theater revenues while increasing overall content output. Streaming dominance has resulted in substantially increased production budgets and annual output of movies and series, with platforms investing billions annually. For instance, pandemic-era strategies persisted, injecting OTT fees but diminishing cinema dependency. This has strained exhibitors, with models challenged by streaming's scale, though original OTT content investments—billions annually—have not fully offset legacy losses for theaters. Print media, including newspapers, experienced collateral disruption as streaming extended to and video content, diverting audiences and dollars to digital platforms. U.S. daily circulation, including digital, fell 32% from 2018 to 2023, with nearly 40% of local papers closing by , leaving 50 million without reliable local coverage. Ad revenues plummeted as adoption shifted spending online, with journalist employment at newspapers dropping 39% since 2008; streaming video further fragmented traditional audiences. These changes reflect causal drivers like for and , outpacing legacy media's .

Cultural Shifts and Content Consumption

The advent of streaming media has fundamentally altered content consumption patterns, transitioning audiences from scheduled linear television to on-demand, individualized viewing. In the United States, streaming accounted for 44.8% of total usage in May 2025, surpassing the combined share of broadcast and for the first time, with streaming usage increasing 71% since May 2021. This shift reflects broader preferences for flexibility, as 83% of U.S. adults reported using streaming services in 2025, compared to far lower subscription rates for traditional cable or , particularly among those under 50 where usage nears 90%. Globally, over 90% of users in surveyed markets consume content via streaming monthly, exceeding traditional broadcast reach in many cases. A hallmark of this evolution is the rise of , where viewers consume multiple episodes consecutively, enabled by platforms releasing full seasons simultaneously. Approximately 60% of U.S. adults aged 18-45 prefer this format, with over 50% of those under 45 engaging in binge sessions regularly as of surveys through 2024. Features like autoplay further extend sessions, though empirical data from user studies indicate varied impacts, with some participants reducing total viewing time when disabling it to regain control over patterns. This practice has diminished synchronous "watercooler" discussions tied to weekly broadcasts, fostering instead spoiler-heavy online forums and personalized pacing that prioritizes immersion over communal timing. Streaming has also democratized access to diverse and niche content, reducing reliance on mass-appeal programming dictated by advertiser-driven networks. Platforms prioritize algorithmic recommendations over fixed schedules, enabling consumption of specialized genres that traditional often sidelined, with U.S. viewers spending roughly double the time on (eight hours daily) compared to legacy formats. This has spurred , as services invest in localized originals—, for instance, produced content in over 20 languages by 2023—promoting globalized storytelling with cross-cultural and multi-language elements, breaking language barriers through and , thus expanding non-domestic viewership while challenging local industries with U.S.-centric dominance. However, while promoting cultural exchange, this influx has not uniformly elevated foreign-language demand in markets like the U.S., where domestic preferences persist amid algorithmic curation.

Economic Growth and Job Creation

The streaming media sector has driven substantial economic expansion through revenue growth in subscription video-on-demand (SVOD), advertising-supported models, and ancillary services like content licensing. In 2024, the global video streaming industry, encompassing platforms such as , , and Disney+, generated $233 billion in revenue, including free ad-supported tiers. This figure reflects accelerated adoption post-pandemic, with the U.S. video streaming services market alone reaching $97.6 billion in 2025, up from prior years at a (CAGR) of 12.8%. Worldwide SVOD revenues are forecasted to hit $119.09 billion in 2025, contributing to the broader entertainment and media industry's $2.9 trillion total in 2024, a 5.5% year-over-year increase. These gains stem from scalable , which reduces physical production costs compared to traditional media while enabling global reach and data-driven to boost user retention and , incorporating AI for production tasks such as casting assistance. Audio streaming has similarly bolstered economic output, with music streaming alone contributing over $14 billion to the U.S. economy in 2021 through direct wages, supplier spending, and induced effects, including $2.6 billion in direct income. The global media streaming market is projected to reach $108.73 billion in 2025, growing at a CAGR of 8.6%, fueled by integrations with smart devices and live events. This growth has incentivized investments in original content—, for instance, spent $17 billion on programming in 2023—spurring multiplier effects in related sectors like broadband infrastructure and , where demand for data centers has risen commensurately with bandwidth-intensive streaming. However, while streaming expands value chains, its reliance on and user data has concentrated benefits among dominant platforms, potentially limiting broader dispersal without regulatory intervention. Job creation in streaming has materialized primarily in digital content ecosystems, with U.S. digital creator roles—encompassing influencers, podcasters, and video producers on platforms like and —expanding to 1.5 million in 2024, a 7.5-fold rise from 200,000 in 2020. The global media and entertainment sector, propelled by streaming, employed 12.3 million in 2025, a 4.7% increase year-over-year, with U.S. figures exceeding 2.7 million across creative, technical, and support functions. Roles in , data analytics, and localized content production have proliferated, as platforms commission region-specific programming to penetrate international markets; for example, SVOD growth has supported ancillary in subtitling, , and . In and content provision, U.S. stood at 340,400 in 2024, though streaming's shift from linear TV has redirected jobs toward agile, on-demand formats. Net gains favor skilled, tech-proficient workers, but legacy roles in physical distribution and cable operations have contracted, highlighting streaming's causal role in sectoral reallocation rather than unqualified expansion.

Global Accessibility and Market Expansion

The global video streaming market reached an estimated USD 129.26 billion in 2024, with projections indicating growth to USD 416.8 billion by 2030 at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21%, fueled by expanding broadband infrastructure and mobile internet access in previously underserved regions. This expansion has democratized access to on-demand content, particularly through subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) services, where worldwide revenue is anticipated to hit USD 164.41 billion by 2030 following a 6.66% CAGR from 2025 onward. Accessibility has been enhanced by declining data costs and smartphone proliferation, enabling streaming in areas with limited fixed-line internet; for instance, mobile data networks now support seamless video playback in over 1.39 billion global users across devices as of 2024. Major platforms have prioritized international markets for subscriber growth, with reporting 277 million paid memberships worldwide as of mid-2024, including significant additions of 41.32 million subscribers from 2023 to 2024, predominantly outside . Global SVOD subscriptions approached half of consumers in key markets by 2024, led by the but with rapid uptake in and . Strategies such as phased market entry—beginning with proximate regions and scaling via localized originals—have driven this, as seen in 's investments in non-English content to capture diverse audiences. In emerging markets, adoption has accelerated due to rising middle-class incomes and penetration, with 's largest economies witnessing explosive subscription growth tied to investments. Latin America's media streaming sector is forecasted to reach USD 24.69 billion by 2033 at a 9.03% CAGR, supported by mobile-first consumption and regional partnerships. In , over 560 streaming services operated as of 2025, leveraging hybrid models amid improving data affordability, though penetration remains lower than in due to bandwidth constraints. Localization efforts, including AI-assisted and in local languages, have boosted engagement by adapting content to cultural contexts, while platforms like in exemplify region-specific scaling with 128.9 million subscribers by early 2023. Overall, global subscribers are projected to exceed 1.1 billion by , reflecting streaming's shift from Western-centric to ubiquitous media delivery, though sustained expansion hinges on addressing disparities in digital infrastructure and regulatory hurdles in select jurisdictions.

Challenges and Controversies

Legitimate streaming services protect through licensing agreements with content owners and implementation of (DRM) technologies. DRM systems, such as Google Widevine, Apple FairPlay, and Microsoft PlayReady, encrypt video streams and require device authentication to prevent unauthorized copying and distribution. These measures ensure that only subscribed users can access content, with encryption keys delivered exclusively to authorized devices. Despite these protections, illegal streaming sites and services pose significant challenges to enforcement, accounting for over 80% of global incidents. volumes have surged, with pirated video content receiving more than 230 billion views annually and illegal streaming visits rising from 130 billion in 2020 to 216 billion in 2024. This growth is exacerbated by content fragmentation across multiple platforms, which limits access to paid services and drives demand for pirated alternatives. Transnational operations of pirate sites, often based in jurisdictions with lax enforcement, further complicate efforts to curb infringement. Copyright holders rely on mechanisms like the (DMCA) for enforcement, issuing millions of takedown notices annually. In 2024 alone, rightsholders sent 26.2 million DMCA notices targeting pirate live streams, though suspension rates hovered around 19%. Legal actions include lawsuits against operators of illegal platforms; for instance, in July 2025, five individuals behind Jetflicks—one of the largest unauthorized TV streaming services—were sentenced to prison terms for distributing over 180,000 episodes without permission. Similar crackdowns occurred with the shutdown of Streameast, a major illegal sports streaming site, in September 2025, and an Irish High Court ruling awarding €480,000 in damages for sports streaming infringement in October 2025. Repeat offenders and platforms present ongoing hurdles, as automated systems struggle to detect sophisticated evasions while platforms face under safe harbor provisions. Enforcement efforts have achieved some site blocks and fines, such as Italy's measures against IPTV pirates in 2025, but piracy's economic toll—estimated at $29 billion in annual U.S. revenue losses—underscores the need for international cooperation and technological advancements.

Antitrust Issues and Market Concentration

The streaming media industry has experienced significant , with a handful of vertically integrated conglomerates dominating subscriber bases, content libraries, and revenue streams. As of 2025, and lead the U.S. market, comprising a duopoly that outpaces competitors by approximately 14% in metrics such as downloads and . This concentration is exacerbated by the high fixed costs of content acquisition and production, which create substantial for smaller players, leading to an oligopolistic structure where the top five services—, Prime Video, Disney+, Max, and —account for over 80% of subscription video-on-demand (SVoD) hours viewed in the U.S. Vertical integration has intensified these dynamics, as media conglomerates like , (WBD), and control both content production and distribution platforms, potentially enabling practices such as withholding licensed content from rivals or favoring in-house services. For instance, 's ownership of , , and following its 2019 acquisition of assets allowed it to bundle sports and entertainment offerings, raising concerns about foreclosure of competition in live sports streaming. Similarly, the industry's shift toward proprietary content—exemplified by Netflix's $17 billion annual spending on originals—reduces reliance on third-party licensing, further entrenching incumbents and limiting or content portability across platforms. Antitrust scrutiny has focused on mergers and s that could amplify this concentration. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) blocked the proposed Venu Sports in August 2024, a collaboration among , , and WBD to offer a bundled sports streaming package, citing risks of reduced competition and higher prices in the live sports market, where these firms already control key rights. Proposed deals, such as a potential Paramount acquisition of WBD in 2025, have prompted warnings of heightened DOJ review, given the combined entity's control over 20-25% of premium content and potential overlaps in , , and streaming distribution. Critics argue that lax enforcement of prior mega-mergers, including AT&T-Time Warner (2018) and -, contributed to current imbalances by prioritizing short-term efficiencies over long-term competitive harms, though empirical evidence of consumer harm remains debated amid falling average subscription prices due to churn and promotional pricing. Regulatory responses have included calls for updated antitrust frameworks tailored to , emphasizing closer examination of horizontal and vertical combinations to preserve content diversity and innovation. The (FTC) and DOJ's 2025 joint inquiry into anticompetitive conduct in entertainment sectors signals ongoing vigilance, though enforcement has historically favored approvals with behavioral remedies rather than outright blocks, reflecting challenges in defining relevant markets amid fragmented viewing habits. Despite proliferation of services—reaching 96% U.S. household penetration in Q2 2025—sustained concentration risks stifling independent producers and exacerbating bargaining power imbalances in talent and rights negotiations.

Environmental Resource Consumption

Streaming media services, reliant on vast data center infrastructures and global networks, consume substantial for , storage, and transmission. Data centers and networks supporting streaming account for approximately 2-3% of global consumption, contributing to about 0.6% of total . Video streaming alone is estimated to contribute around 1% of global , driven by the in data traffic from high-definition and ultra-high-definition content. The of streaming varies by resolution, device, and regional energy grids, with estimates ranging from 36 grams of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) per hour for standard-definition video in 2019 to 55g CO2e per hour in , where the viewing device often represents the largest share. For major platforms like , one hour of streaming equates to roughly 55g CO2e, leading to annual emissions in the hundreds of thousands of tonnes for high-usage services. Discrepancies in reported figures arise from differing methodologies, such as inclusion of end-user devices versus backend , highlighting challenges in standardizing environmental assessments for streaming. Beyond energy, streaming exacerbates water resource strain through data center cooling systems, which evaporate large volumes to dissipate heat from servers handling petabytes of video . A single large can consume up to 5 million gallons of daily, comparable to the needs of 10,000 to 50,000 residents, with streaming services contributing via high-bandwidth video delivery. usage averages about 0.74 liters per of processed, intensifying pressures in water-stressed regions where centers are sited for cheap power. A 1-megawatt , typical for supporting streaming loads, may require 25.5 million liters annually for cooling alone. Industry responses include commitments to and efficiency gains; , for instance, has matched 100% of its electricity use with renewables since 2022 and targets halving emissions by 2030 relative to 2022 levels. However, growth in streaming demand—projected to rise with AI-enhanced content and higher resolutions—could offset reductions unless paired with technological shifts like and to minimize data travel. Rapid decarbonization of grids might limit digital content's climate impacts to 12% of budgets in some scenarios, but current trajectories suggest streaming could claim up to 40% without intervention.

Data Privacy and Surveillance Concerns

Streaming platforms extensively collect user to personalize content recommendations, optimize algorithms, and enable , including viewing histories, search queries, device identifiers, IP addresses, and geolocation . Services such as , , and Disney+ integrate this data across ecosystems—for instance, Disney+ combines streaming data with theme park and merchandise interactions to build comprehensive user profiles. This practice raises concerns over excessive surveillance-like monitoring, as platforms track behaviors in real-time to predict churn or upsell subscriptions, often without granular user consent for secondary uses. Data breaches underscore vulnerabilities in these systems; in September 2025, Plex notified users of a exposing data, prompting password resets. Similarly, an unprotected database for MagentaTV leaked over 324 million logs containing sensitive user details in August 2025. Broader threats include credential theft and insider risks, amplified by the sector's reliance on unpatched services and misconfigurations that expose internal streams. Privacy advocates, including the , criticize ad-driven models for fostering commercial surveillance that prioritizes revenue over data minimization. Government surveillance intersects with streaming via programs like , which since 2007 has enabled the NSA to access communications from U.S. tech providers, potentially encompassing streaming traffic routed through compliant intermediaries. While platforms deny direct handovers, the program's scope—targeting non-U.S. persons but incidentally collecting domestic data—amplifies risks of unwarranted monitoring, as revealed in 2013 leaks. The FTC's 2024 report on streaming firms highlighted intertwined , , and AI risks, urging scrutiny of data practices amid antitrust concerns. Regulatory responses include GDPR ; Netflix faced a €4.75 million fine from the Dutch Data Protection Authority in December 2024 for inadequate transparency on for . Such penalties reflect causal links between opaque policies and user harm, though remains inconsistent, with platforms often litigating to minimize . Critics argue that self-reported compliance underestimates systemic biases toward data hoarding, driven by competitive pressures rather than inherent necessity.

Content Moderation and Algorithmic Effects

Streaming platforms, particularly those hosting like , employ to remove or restrict material violating policies on violence, , , and explicit content, often through automated tools supplemented by human reviewers. For instance, Spotify's platform rules prohibit excessively violent, graphic, or sexually explicit content, with enforcement including removal or reduced discoverability. Similarly, 's systems have been criticized for recommending videos that breach its own policies on disturbing or hateful material, as identified in a 2021 investigation analyzing algorithmic outputs. These practices aim to mitigate harms but face accusations of inconsistency and overreach, exemplified by Spotify's 2022 Joe Rogan podcast controversy, where artists pressured the platform over episodes, prompting the formation of a safety advisory council to refine moderation policies. Curated services like rely less on reactive moderation due to centralized content acquisition, focusing instead on internal guidelines for licensed material, though partnerships such as the 2025 Spotify-Netflix video podcast deal raise questions about cross-platform enforcement. Controversies persist, including a 2023 dismissed U.S. alleging YouTube's disproportionately restricted and creators, highlighting claims of algorithmic and human in enforcement, though courts found insufficient evidence of intentional . Broader critiques argue that , often opaque, prioritizes advertiser-friendly environments over user autonomy, with platforms like publishing explicit policies in 2022 amid public pressure but still facing uneven application. Recommendation algorithms in streaming services personalize content feeds to maximize , using on viewing history, dwell time, and metadata to suggest videos, tracks, or shows. On , these systems drive over 70% of watch time but have been accused of ideological bias, with studies showing recommendations can narrow content diversity over time, potentially reinforcing user preferences into chambers. However, empirical audits, such as a 2023 PNAS analysis of real-user sessions, indicate rarely funnels most viewers into extremist "rabbit holes," instead favoring mainstream or mildly polarizing content aligned with initial interests, countering sensational claims of widespread . In music streaming, Spotify's algorithms influence taste formation by prioritizing familiar genres, with a 2025 study finding users' playlists increasingly homogenize around algorithmic curations, reducing serendipitous discovery. Effects include heightened addiction risks, as engagement-optimized feeds exploit psychological triggers like novelty and familiarity, leading to prolonged sessions; surveys show 26% of U.S. viewers now select content primarily via streamer algorithms over word-of-mouth. For vaccines or politics, biases emerge—e.g., YouTube recommendations skew toward certain viewpoints based on query phrasing—but these stem more from training data reflecting societal distributions than deliberate platform intent. Overall, while algorithms enhance retention, they can amplify polarized niches, though causal evidence for broad societal harms like deepened divisions remains mixed and often overstated in media narratives.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.