Most television shows are available to be streamed on free sites such as Youtube, Hulu, Vimeo, etc. There are also Premium Streaming sites that cost less than Cable but provide just as much content (Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime Streaming).
With a streaming service still comes the choice. The stress relief of TV comes from the fact that one does not have to engage. Even with a "random movie" button, one still has to make the choice between "choose yourself" and "random." It is the inherent "choicelessness" of TV that makes it appealing
How is choosing RANDOMLY remotely better than having some person thinking about what is good or not? Someone says "Oh, I totally recommend watching Game of Thrones" and you're like "Nah, I think I'll pick a random series".
It's the same concept. There are also thinkers on the Internet. "Randomly" maybe was too much radical but you can pick an interesting channel or broadcasting service which will be the same as TV channels. And you have plenty of more things on the Internet.
this statement is too vague. Cable subscriptions will be dead eventually, but television will still exist, watched through streaming services on televisions connected over the internet. The exact same content will be available on the same device, only the source of the content will differ. TV lives.
Of course I'm assuming, would there be discussion if not? The fact is that new technologies offer more broadcast selection freedom. And yes, radio is still surviving, and I supposed the reason of this (it isn't easy to change for users with radio listening habits)
This conclusion is not just correct, its also relevant. This is an alternative to radio when there is no internet. Saved songs on an ipod are always accessible, given enoguh battery power. Its also on demand, just like hulu and netflix. Isn't this what youre arguing?