[gspencley]

"I think most would agree that there should be some fixed line to judge what goes too far and shouldn't be on their platform."

I can see the need for things like parental filters, or better user controls to be able to get recommendations for things you actually want to see.

I would also be the first person to agree that Netflix has the right to decide what content they want to distribute.

But from a customer point of view what I want from Netflix is to give give me maximum choice. Give me absolutely every kind of content imaginable, offensive or G-rated, and then give me the tools to be able to limit what my children can view and to fine tune the sorts of recommendations I get.

I'm a huge believer in "if you don't like it, watch something else" and "if someone else likes it, that's none of your business."

[handoflixue]

Unfortunately, from a business perspective, there will always be a trade off of "buying a license to X means we can't afford to license Y or Z". They spent millions to get this special, and probably could have gotten a dozen works from less-famous comedians for that same money.

[wutbrodo]

That's driven by how many people will watch it (demonstrably, very many, in Chappelle's case), not by the magnitude of offense taken by some number of people.

The proportion of people not watching a show will always be far higher than those watching it, so there's room for offense from non-watchers to drive product decisions. The parent comment is saying that he doesn't want that to factor in at all, which is orthogonal to the question of Netflix needing to allocate resources between content.