In terms of business ingenuity, I’ve been surprised Netflix isn’t courting indie TV producers. For a much lower price, they could reach passionate niche audiences *and* tell stories in a way that’s truly different from legacy television. There are tens of thousands of people who’d appreciate Netflix supporting smaller players. But that’s not HBO and won’t get nominations in top Emmy categories. Netflix knows it’s better to be a cable channel than a web network these days.

This continuity will cable you’ve identified explains how they were able to secure so many nominations so quickly. I’ve spoken with programmers of awards and festivals, and they tell me their older memberships/leaders need programming that looks like and is distributed similarly to (in terms of producing robust DVDs) television. Ultimately if networks with money like Netflix don’t push voters to expand their conceptions of television, we will just get cable on the internet.

Because the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences is so conservative (as Faculty Seminar participants can confirm), doesn’t it seem logical it would grant its imprimatur to programs that fit existing conventions?

Given that conservatism–and the longtime oh so vehement resistance to the evil internet–it may be that what is notable here is only that Academy members are finally feeling comfortable enough with a new platform to include it in its self-celebration. “Netflix is one of us!” The comparison to cable is evidence of that: the Academy eventually got used to cable, after much grousing, now it’s graciously accepting the next new kid on the block. And the first step in acceptance is rewarding what is familiar, not what is actually innovative, different, or challenging.

Netflix’s canny wooing of the TV establishment is, to me, quite impressive as a business strategy. As a supporter of innovative program forms, yes, Netflix may indeed fall short, at least for now, but, hey, Emmy awards are great marketing tools, and more subs will lead to more shows, some of which may begin to fulfill the promises of new media. Someday!

Riffing off of you, I also wonder if Netflix deserves some of this attention because of its complete separation from the “other guys” in its business model. While its programs may resemble (and indeed derive from) traditional television outlets, it owes nothing to advertisers. It doesn’t live and die by ratings, and in fact refrains from sharing that data publicly (an annoyance, but one that nevertheless distinguishes the service).

While you can compare Netflix to HBO, and there are many comparisons to behold, Netflix so far has remained independent of the cable industry, while HBO remains stubbornly committed to its marriage with MSOs.

I’m not a Netflix fan, but I have been a longterm observer, hoping it can persist if only as a symbol of the possibility to produce and distribute television differently. My bar is low, too–slight difference (not being beholden to advertisers, for example) gives me some hope for greater change to come.

In some ways, NOT being recognized by the Emmy’s may be a greater feather in the cap of a show/network trying to do something different. An Emmy nom connects Netflix to the old, boring, and mainstream. Meanwhile, FX, BBC America, and webseries like the delightful “Lizzie Bennet Diaries” can take comfort in avoiding the taint of the Emmy’s.