Binge-watcher? Netflix-backed study shows you're in good company.

A majority of binge-watching didn't feel much guilt about all that TV, either. 

Netflix
Netflix says the results of a new survey prove users gravitate towards 'multi-episodic' viewing.

We binge watch and we don't feel the least bit bad about it. 

That's the takeaway of a new survey, conducted by Harris Interactive on behalf of Netflix. According to Harris, which surveyed 1,500 "regular" TV streamers – here defined as streaming a TV show once a week, at least – 61 percent of viewers copped to participating in a binge-watching escapade at least once a week, and a full 73 percent say that they have a "positive" feeling toward all that TV. 

Some other interesting data from the survey: Roughly a third of all binge-watchers do it solo, while the majority – 51 percent – prefer to binge with a pal. And 80 percent – ourselves included! – would much rather "stream a good TV show than read a friend's social media posts." Meanwhile, the majority of respondents defined binge-watching as taking in 2 to 6 episodes in a single setting. 

"Our viewing data shows that the majority of streamers would actually prefer to have a whole season of a show available to watch at their own pace," Ted Sarandos, Chief Content Officer of Netflix, said in a press release today. He added that Netflix original series, such as Orange is the New Black, "are created for multi-episodic viewing, lining up the content with new norms of viewer control for the first time." 

In related news, although editors at Oxford named "selfie" the word of the year, "binge-watch" was reportedly a close second. 

"Mindless couch-potato behaviour aside, it’s something that traditional broadcasters should be watching closely, and no doubt are, as [couch] potatoes like me get hooked on a series available on Netflix or elsewhere online, or make repeated trips for DVD rentals," Michael Babad of the Globe and Mail writes in a column this week on the binge-watching phenomenon. "Though, yes, occasionally there’s pay-per-view, as well." 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.