Governments worldwide are attempting to reshape the way streaming services operate with both regulations and encouragement; thereby limiting the overall types of content offered by streaming services.

Many streaming apps give you the impression that you are the sole individual making the decision about what videos to select. However, behind these choices is a battle between government regulators, lobbyists, and various other stakeholders as they negotiate the types/amounts of video content that are produced and who will pay for producing this content.

There is a growing trend of countries worldwide utilizing regulations on video content to not only protect their film industries but also to preserve their culture and counteract the influence of large video-on-demand services (like Amazon and Netflix) in their markets. These regulations are evolving throughout the world with increasing complexity, variables, and implications for the overall film industry.

Streaming platforms in Europe are required by the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services (AVMS) Directive to allocate a minimum of 30% of their entire catalogue (i.e. every title available to subscribers) to European content, if they are located within the EU and provide services to subscribers who reside within the borders of the EU. The AVMS Directive allows EU member states to mandate that streaming services invest a portion of their domestic revenue in local production.

France has been at the forefront of taking action against this issue. Their mandate requires that streaming services invest between 20-25% of their French revenue back into producing French content, which European producers have characterized as “the most ambitious plan yet.” Many other EU member states (Denmark, Spain and France) have established a 5% tax on the revenue generated by streaming services which is sent directly to the nation’s domestic content fund.

The reasoning behind these requirements is fairly simple; without this type of intervention, english-language content would completely dominate the rest of the world’s content. Global streaming platforms are effectively built upon economies of scale, which means that smaller language markets would have a very difficult time competing for budget alone.

The success of South Korean entertainment demonstrates that non-English materials can succeed globally if the government supports them. This has included funding for film industry development, enforcing screening quotas for Korean films at cinemas and establishing content creation facilities and trade promotion.

Films like Parasite and TV shows like Squid Game were not created by happenstance or just by a free marketplace, but rather through a government making an investment in storytelling as a national priority. Other nations observing the loss of their domestic video industry should think not only about limiting foreign competition, but establishing similar forms of government investment so that their domestic industries can grow and prosper.

The 2016 film The Great Wall, a US-China co-production starring Matt Damon, became a widely cited example of Hollywood tailoring an entire film around Chinese market access — a strategy that ultimately failed at the box office on both sides

To encourage reshaping of how streaming services work and limit types of content provided, governments across the globe are making various attempts at changing the methods and parameters under which these streaming services will continue towork.

The perception of most streaming applications is that the user has complete control over what to view. However, a major influence on what is offered to users on these platforms comes from negotiations between regulators, lobbyists, and other interested stakeholders regarding the quantity and type of content that will be produced and who will provide funding for the production.

There is a growing trend among countries worldwide to utilise regulations on video content, which is intended to protect domestic film industries, promote their cultural identity, and limit the influence of large video-on-demand providers (i.e., Amazon Prime, Netflix, etc.) in their respective markets. Regulating authorities around the world are introducing regulations that will continue to evolve in complexity and affect the film industry globally.

The government of China uses more than just rules to change what goes into movies; they sometimes do it in secret. In a 2020 report from PEN America called "Made in Hollywood, Censored by Beijing" (updated in 2024), they explain how studios are changing scripts, casting, dialogue and entire storylines, just so they can sell their films to the huge movie market in China.

There are many good examples in the report: The Chinese regulators were invited to the filming of Marvel's Iron Man 3 (2013) to let the filmmakers know what scenes would be cut from the Chinese version of the movie. In the trailer for Top Gun: Maverick, they edited out the Taiwanese flag that was shown in the original version of the trailer at the request of a Chinese financial investor. The flag was put back into the trailer when it was learned the financial investor pulled their investment in the movie.

This type of self-censorship doesn't happen because of a government mandate, but because of financial incentive and will ultimately be difficult to find and even more difficult to fight against. According to the Hollywood Reporter, this is part of the trend for Hollywood to "normalize" self-censorship due to how it affects the way stories are built before the audience even sees them.