AT FIRST glance, the results of this year’s Emmy Awards, which included wins for Succession as outstanding drama and The Bear as outstanding comedy, would seem to confirm that quality TV programming is alive and well. But, if you look more closely, you’ll notice red flags flying, warning us about the future. No matter how much you like the shows that won or were nominated, don’t expect another slate this good any time soon.

The era of so-called Peak TV was kicked off in the late 1990s by The Sopranos. It happened because HBO, looking to disrupt the industry, broke rules, took risks and pushed creative boundaries. Today, beleaguered programming executives are hampered by cost-cutting and cowed by market upheavals. Almost no one is looking to be a disrupter anymore. In fact, the goal is just to survive, in part by undoing the disruptions of the past. That might be a fiscal necessity, but it’s not a recipe for ground-breaking TV. Anyone hoping for a repeat of the achievements of the last two decades has to look at what the disrupters did then, not at what they’re doing now.

Consider the parallel fates of the two most important recent disrupters, Netflix and HBO. Netflix, in its infancy, took pains to define itself against the old studios and networks. Reed Hastings, Netflix’s co-founder, along with Ted Sarandos, his top executive, disdained ads while producing risky, niche programming. For a time, it worked. When Netflix acquired House of Cards in 2011 by extending an unprecedented offer for two full seasons – the show went on to win three Emmy Awards in 2013 – it was a coming-out party. Intoxicated by his company’s rapid growth, Hastings rashly proclaimed that Netflix’s biggest competition was sleep.

Rare, however, is a content provider that can prosper just by selling content. Movie theatres have long made money at the concession stand, selling M&Ms and Raisinets. For the networks, profits traditionally came from selling ads. Without ads, Netflix has been bleeding money to support its spectacular growth – until 2022, when it ceased growing at the rate to which it had been accustomed.

Netflix is in the midst of a correction, and released about 130 fewer originals in 2023 than it did the previous year. Its one show in contention for outstanding drama series at this year’s Emmys, The Crown, has already ended. Although the miniseries Beef cleaned up, we can expect even fewer original scripted shows in Netflix’s future, as the streamer shifts towards reality-based material such as documentaries, stand-up, talk shows and sports.

HBO is having its own issues. Back at the dawn of the prestige era, The Sopranos battled NBC’s The West Wing every year for the title of outstanding drama series. It finally won in 2004, initiating the reign of HBO, which culminated in a record 12 Emmys for Game of Thrones in 2015 – a feat it repeated in 2016 and again in 2019. In 2023, HBO had a whopping four shows up for outstanding drama series, including the eventual winner, Succession, as well as The White Lotus, The Last of Us and House of the Dragon.

A NEWSLETTER FOR YOU

Friday, 2 pm

Lifestyle

Our picks of the latest dining, travel and leisure options to treat yourself.

Sign Up

This might seem like proof that the original disrupter is back on top. But there’s a problem. The HBO we once applauded as the avatar of quality programming no longer exists in its previous form. As a result of the current mania for mergers, WarnerMedia, which owned HBO, merged with Discovery in the deal that created Warner Bros Discovery. In the process, its streaming arm was rebranded. HBO Max, its new moniker, was reduced to, simply, Max, a hollow handle suggesting, at best, “more” or “most” – but certainly not quality.

HBO’s programming is now diluted by appearing alongside shows such as the upcoming reality series Human vs Hamster. As strong as HBO’s slate of Emmy nominees for outstanding drama may have appeared, House of the Dragon is a prequel, The White Lotus is an anthology series, The Last of Us is based on a video game and Succession has ended its run.

If you’re looking for an existing contender to challenge these fading giants, don’t get your hopes up.

Hastings boasted that his biggest competition was sleep, but he was wrong. His competition is the blizzard of streamers that followed in his footsteps. Their goal is the biggest and broadest audience possible, unleashing a race towards the mainstream. No longer is there a discernible difference between disrupters and disrupted. Netflix’s recent hits such as The Crown could easily have been produced by a network. Some of its other hits were. Young Sheldon, still going strong on CBS, is available on Netflix.

Streaming services are also adding lower-cost, ad-supported tiers to their hitherto ad-free programming. But ad-supported tiers open the door to pressure from advertisers – who typically don’t want their products appearing next to scenes of sex, violence or controversy of any sort. That is precisely what neutered broadcast television in the first place and gave rise to HBO and the bracing, challenging programming it offered. We’ve come full circle.

My one consolation is that disruption is also cyclical. Eventually, TV’s contraction will yield a new Netflix, a new HBO, looking to exploit a desire for bold programming. In the meantime, this year’s Emmys felt like a party on the deck of the Titanic. It was a chance to raise a glass to glorious accomplishments even as it’s only icebergs ahead. NYTIMES

The writer is a cultural critic and the author, most recently, of Pandora’s Box: How Guts, Guile and Greed Upended TV, and Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex-Drugs-and-Rock ’N’ Roll Generation Saved Hollywood