The problem with your argument defending smaller TV seasons is that it presumes that the best version of TV involves the serialized story arc. You joke about the pointlessness of episodes which slow down or veer away from the all-important reveals and cliff-hangers of some big unfolding uber-narrative. However this was not even something TV did for the first fifty years of its existence -- except maybe on soap operas. Individual episodes stood alone for the most part. The network could (and often did) air them out of shooting order. The viewer could miss a few shows and not feel lost and not need a two minutes spread-sheet of re-cap at the top to jump back in. Shows were designed to be little standalone one act plays with human-sized stakes and complications -- never big manic rollicking plots with the fate of our entire universe and several other quantum universes on the line. The idea of watching a TV show was to bond each week with characters and immerse yourself in their interesting world. If the show survived a few seasons you would naturally get to know these folks better, see new facets and watch them develop a bit as people, but rampaging ever-forward toward some "important" plot culmination was not the priority -- and I think the shows were better for it. The current TV landscape is a frenetic glut of disposable sameness -- "This slick new show didn't grab you? Not to worry. We'll throw another one at you next week, and then ten more the week after that. Anything to keep you engaged." New confusing limited-episode programs constantly thrust at us, many of which undoubtedly started out as unsold screenplays, which got diced into breathless eight-episode sassy slam-a-roos. And if you actually make it to the final chapter of these plot-driven little novels for TV how many actually serve up an ending worth all the bother? I'll answer this one: Not many.
I agree that the piece desiring longer seasons was poorly reasoned. I think I would advocate for "right-sizing" based on the nature of the show and streamer. X-Files is a good example of one show where shorter seasons probably would have benefited the show overall. Of course there are the great standalone episodes, but arguably part of why the mythology became so non-sensical was because 20+ episodes needed to be churned out each year (also, there were a lot of BAD episodes that were standalone).
My argument is that more shows need to consider something like what Slow Horses does. Especially more episodic shows (sitcoms, but also shows like Poker Face) benefit from getting to put out more episodes as that allows writers and viewers to better understand and build relationships with characters. Slow Horses releases its seasons every 6-9 months. My argument is that streamers should look at making some cheaper shows designed to run 6-10 episodes every 6-9 months. The Netflix belief that longer seasons tend to have lower completion rates does not really come into play with that much time in between, but viewers still get greater regularity, which can minimize cost in promotion since viewers are less likely to have forgotten about the show over a shorter time period.
The problem with your argument defending smaller TV seasons is that it presumes that the best version of TV involves the serialized story arc. You joke about the pointlessness of episodes which slow down or veer away from the all-important reveals and cliff-hangers of some big unfolding uber-narrative. However this was not even something TV did for the first fifty years of its existence -- except maybe on soap operas. Individual episodes stood alone for the most part. The network could (and often did) air them out of shooting order. The viewer could miss a few shows and not feel lost and not need a two minutes spread-sheet of re-cap at the top to jump back in. Shows were designed to be little standalone one act plays with human-sized stakes and complications -- never big manic rollicking plots with the fate of our entire universe and several other quantum universes on the line. The idea of watching a TV show was to bond each week with characters and immerse yourself in their interesting world. If the show survived a few seasons you would naturally get to know these folks better, see new facets and watch them develop a bit as people, but rampaging ever-forward toward some "important" plot culmination was not the priority -- and I think the shows were better for it. The current TV landscape is a frenetic glut of disposable sameness -- "This slick new show didn't grab you? Not to worry. We'll throw another one at you next week, and then ten more the week after that. Anything to keep you engaged." New confusing limited-episode programs constantly thrust at us, many of which undoubtedly started out as unsold screenplays, which got diced into breathless eight-episode sassy slam-a-roos. And if you actually make it to the final chapter of these plot-driven little novels for TV how many actually serve up an ending worth all the bother? I'll answer this one: Not many.
I agree that the piece desiring longer seasons was poorly reasoned. I think I would advocate for "right-sizing" based on the nature of the show and streamer. X-Files is a good example of one show where shorter seasons probably would have benefited the show overall. Of course there are the great standalone episodes, but arguably part of why the mythology became so non-sensical was because 20+ episodes needed to be churned out each year (also, there were a lot of BAD episodes that were standalone).
My argument is that more shows need to consider something like what Slow Horses does. Especially more episodic shows (sitcoms, but also shows like Poker Face) benefit from getting to put out more episodes as that allows writers and viewers to better understand and build relationships with characters. Slow Horses releases its seasons every 6-9 months. My argument is that streamers should look at making some cheaper shows designed to run 6-10 episodes every 6-9 months. The Netflix belief that longer seasons tend to have lower completion rates does not really come into play with that much time in between, but viewers still get greater regularity, which can minimize cost in promotion since viewers are less likely to have forgotten about the show over a shorter time period.