• Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said at a TED conference on Saturday that his company's culture of open information sharing among its employees makes it like an "anti-Apple."
• "We're like the anti-Apple. They compartmentalize, we do the opposite. Everyone gets all the information," he said. 
• Hastings, a Facebook board member, also discussed Facebook's recent privacy scandals and explained how social networks like Facebook are "are clearly trying to grow up quickly."

Netflix CEO and Facebook board member Reed Hastings spoke on his company's culture and Facebook's recent privacy scandals at a TED conference in Vancouver on Saturday.

Hastings said that Netflix's open culture of information-sharing among its employees makes it an "anti-Apple," in that Apple witholds sensitive information and product developments from many within its company, Wired reports.

"We're like the anti-Apple. They compartmentalize, we do the opposite. Everyone gets all the information," Hastings said. "I find out about big decisions made all the time that I had nothing to do with."

Hastings, who is leading Netflix in a charge to spend roughly $8 billion on content this year, said that his company's tactic of information sharing fosters healthy debate in Netflix's decision-making processes. 

"We want people to speak the truth, and we say, 'To disagree silently is disloyal.'" He added, "It's not ok to let a decision go through without saying your piece. We’re very focused on trying to get to good decisions with a good debate." 

Hastings also discussed how criticism of Facebook over its Cambridge Analytica data-harvesting scandal was "not completely unfairly," adding that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was "leading the charge on fixing" the social network's issues. 

Hastings said that social media networks like Facebook "are clearly trying to grow up quickly," and he compared the rise of social media to the controversies that surrounded television in the 1960s, as Recode notes.

“When television was first popular in the 1960s in the U.S., it was called a 'vast wasteland.' And television was going to rock the minds of everybody," Hastings said. "And it turns out everybody’s minds were fine. There were some adjustments. So I think of it as all new technologies have pros and cons. And in social we're just figuring that out."

SEE ALSO: Netflix's 34 original drama series, ranked from worst to best

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A neuroscientist explains why reality may just be a hallucination

• With its $55 million opening-weekend take in China, Dwayne Johnson's latest movie, "Rampage," is further evidence he's one of the few actors who can bring in major coin across the world.
• But his dominance in China, the world's second-largest movie market, has been years in the making.

For many studio heads these days, glancing at how their latest movie did in China is in some ways more important than seeing how it did in North America. That is because things are changing drastically for an industry in which the domestic box office had been considered the true indicator of a movie's worth for over a century.

Since the early 2000s, the movie market in China has gone from almost nonexistent to second behind only the US. And it could become No. 1 by 2020, as movie theaters continue to be built at a hurried pace to feed the interest of not just the Hollywood titles but those made by the country's burgeoning homegrown production industry.

Everyone in Hollywood is trying to figure out how to navigate this sea change. Which stories work best? Which are duds? And which movie stars can rake in the cash?

That last one has become an easy answer: Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.

His latest CGI (and testosterone) heavy blockbuster, "Rampage," won the US box office over the weekend with a $35.8 million take for its studio Warner Bros. But what the movie did in China has the studio ecstatic, as it took in $55.2 million there as part of a $115.7 million international gross.

But this is far from an overnight success. The Rock has been big in China for a while.

Dominance years in the making

Johnson's elevation to a global box-office draw came when he joined the "Fast and the Furious" franchise with 2011's "Fast Five." But his potential worth in China expanded dramatically over the next few years.

In 2013, "Fast & Furious 6" became the first movie in the Universal franchise to play in China (though years' worth of bootlegs of the previous movies were undoubtedly floating around the country). It took in a respectable $66.5 million there. But when "Furious 7" played there in 2015, it went gangbusters, taking in $391 million in China. A few months later, Johnson showed he didn't need the "Fast" fam to make it in China, where "San Andreas" went on to earn $103.2 million.

The next movie starring Johnson that went to China was the 2016 animated film "Moana" ($32.7 million), and then in 2017 "The Fate of the Furious" found incredible success there with $392.8 million, helping the movie earn $1.2 billion worldwide.

With audiences in China already getting a glimpse of Johnson this year when "Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle" opened there in January ($78 million), the $55 million "Rampage" opening suggests it doesn't matter whether he's with an ensemble or solo: They want to see Johnson.

"Johnson continues to prove that he is the most bankable star in the world with his growing global appeal," the comScore box-office analyst Paul Dergarabedian told Business Insider. "It's hard to imagine any other star who could have catapulted 'Rampage' to a nearly $150 million worldwide debut."

But in an indication of just how important China is, The Rock made sure to spend some time there before "Rampage" opened.

Mr. Johnson goes to Shanghai

It's pretty standard to tour the globe for publicity on a major Hollywood release, but when you're a huge star like Dwayne Johnson, the hustle can be narrowed down to some key regions. And Warner Bros. made sure one of Johnson's stops was in China.

Johnson went on a promotional tour in Shanghai for "Rampage," his first time visiting the country's largest city, a studio source told Business Insider.

And the way he was treated, he's certain to return.

The movie's press conference in the city was live-streamed through multiple partners across the country, there was a fan screening in Shanghai's biggest theater, and Johnson extended his likability across all ages after he befriended three kids who were dressed as the three monsters from the movie during the press conference (the movie is based on a popular video game in which giant monsters destroy cities).

"Dwayne, or 'Johnson' as they call him in China, was in great spirits and charmed all of the audiences with his signature enthusiasm and humor," the source said.

Along with the $55 million opening weekend, "Rampage" took in $15.7 million on its opening day in China, the third-highest opening day ever for a Warner Bros. movie in the country.

"Dwayne Johnson and giant monsters — that's the perfect recipe for a hit in China these days," Jeff Bock, a senior analyst for Exhibitor Relations, told Business Insider. "In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the tipping point for 'Rampage' getting green-lit in the first place."

In an era when the mega movie stars are considered less of a draw than a good superhero movie with "regular" stars, Johnson is showing he's an exception to the trend. He is already a household name in the US, and he's ahead of most stars in conquering China.

SEE ALSO: All the Marvel Cinematic Universe details you need to remember before seeing "Avengers: Infinity War"

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How all-you-can-eat restaurants don't go bankrupt

• Sega unveiled a miniature version of its classic Sega Genesis console, also known as the Mega Drive, over the weekend.
• The new device is similar to the NES Classic Edition and Super NES Classic Edition consoles from Nintendo, which contain sets of classic games.
• The Sega Mega Drive Mini is scheduled to launch in Japan this year, with other regions getting the console eventually.

Remember the Sega Genesis? Perhaps you grew up outside North America, in places where it was called the Sega Mega Drive?

It's the console that was home to classic video games like "Sonic the Hedgehog," "Streets of Rage," and "Golden Axe." And now in 2018, it's getting a refresh: The Sega Mega Drive Mini is expected to arrive at some point in 2018 — a miniature version of the original console with a set of games packed in.

The console was announced during a Sega fan event in Tokyo over the weekend.

As you can see above, the console is tiny — it can't hold Genesis game cartridges. It's a Sega Genesis (or Mega Drive) in looks alone.

Instead of cartridges, games are built directly into the Sega Mega Drive Mini.

Like Nintendo's NES Classic Edition and Super NES Classic Edition, the Sega Mega Drive Mini is intended as a standalone device — there's no way to buy additional games, and it's likely to come with at least one controller. It's also unlikely to connect to the internet, and the controllers are likely to be wired.

Indeed, most details about the Sega Mega Drive Mini are unknown. How much does it cost? What games does it come with? When does it come out? Who's making it? All the major questions are still up in the air.

It appears that a company named AtGames is responsible for the console. AtGames is a third-party electronics manufacturer that is known for poorly received versions of classic game consoles, including a version of the Sega Genesis (one major review of the console is literally "Do Not Buy AtGames' Sega Genesis Flashback Console").

AtGames' Facebook page was reported to have announced the company's involvement, even answering some questions from fans. Those posts do not currently appear on the page.

Sega, on the other hand, is announcing details about the console only through its Japanese social-media accounts.

Representatives for Sega told Business Insider that more details were coming about a global release for the console, and to "stay tuned." AtGames told Business Insider it was "not commenting at this time."

SEE ALSO: Everything we know about the new $80 Super Nintendo

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to stop your Facebook friends from giving away your data

• The wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will begin at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle at midday (UK time) on Saturday, May 19.
• The Dean of Windsor will conduct the service and the Archbishop of Canterbury will officiate as the couple make their vows.
• At 1 p.m. the newly married couple will embark on a carriage procession through Windsor Town.
• A lunchtime reception hosted by Her Majesty the Queen will follow at St George's Hall for the couple and guests from the congregation.
• Around 200 guests have also been invited to an evening reception at Frogmore House in the evening, hosted by Prince Charles.
• Scroll down to see what time the celebrations will start where you live.

Prince Harry just got official consent from Her Majesty the Queen to marry Meghan Markle at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle on Saturday, May 19 — but wedding plans have been underway for months.

The wedding service will begin at midday, meaning it's unlikely to clash with the 2018 FA Cup Final that falls on the same date, but that usually kicks off later in the day, according to The Guardian.

The Dean of Windsor will conduct the service and the Archbishop of Canterbury will officiate as the couple make their vows.

Here's an outside look at the Chapel...

...and here's a glimpse inside.

At 1 p.m. Harry and Meghan will embark on a carriage procession from St George's Chapel through Windsor Town returning to Windsor Castle along the Long Walk, which will offer some members of the public a glimpse of the newly married couple.

Kensington Palace said the couple "hope this short journey will provide an opportunity for more people to come together around Windsor and to enjoy the atmosphere of this special day."

They'll also be inviting over 2,000 members of the public into the grounds of Windsor Castle to watch the couple and their guests arrive, and to watch the carriage procession as it departs from the castle.

There will be a reception for the couple and their guests from the congregation at St George's Hall following the service.

Here's a photo inside St George's Hall:

Prince Charles will host a private evening reception for the couple and their close friends and family later that evening.

If you want to mark it in your diary, here's what time the royal wedding will start in major cities across different time zones on Saturday, May 19:

• London (GMT) 12 p.m.
• Paris (CEST): 1 p.m.
• Moscow (MSK): 2 p.m.
• Tokyo (JST): 8 p.m.
• Sydney (AET): 9 p.m.
• Honolulu (HAST): 1 a.m.
• Los Angeles (PT): 4 a.m.
• Las Vegas (PT): 4 a.m.
• Denver (MT): 5 a.m.
• Chicago (CT): 6 a.m.
• New York (ET): 7 a.m.
• Seoul (KST): 8 p.m.

SEE ALSO: 'Knocked Up' and 'Grey's Anatomy' star Katherine Heigl has confirmed she's joining the cast of 'Suits' as Meghan Markle departs

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What will happen when Earth's north and south poles flip

• Captain America (Chris Evans) and Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.) will reunite in "Avengers: Infinity War" for the first time since they fought in "Captain America: Civil War."
• The two disagreed about whether superhumans should be forced to register with the government, with Cap anti-registration and Iron Man pro.
• Business Insider's Carrie Wittmer and Travis Clark argue their cases for who is right in this debate.

Marvel's "Avengers: Infinity War" comes to theaters April 27, and it's the first time some major characters in the Marvel Cinematic Universe will be reunited since they butted heads in 2016's "Captain America: Civil War."

Most importantly, the "Big Two" of the MCU — Steve Rogers/Captain America (played by Chris Evans), and Tony Stark/Iron Man (played by Robert Downey, Jr.) — will join forces against Thanos after their "Civil War" disagreement, which ended with half of the Avengers escaping an underwater prison. 

The last time the two leading Avengers were on screen together, they were trading punches over the registration of superhumans, which would essentially make the Avengers government employees. This initiative, called the Sokovia Accords, was started by the Secretary of State and Tony Stark after the devastating events in "Age of Ultron" and an incident early on in "Civil War" in which Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), who is still learning to control her powers, accidentally destroys a building with innocent people in it. 

Rogers is against the Sokovia Accords because of his mistrust of the government that essentially made him ("The safest hands are still our own"), while Stark is pro-registration ("If we don't do this now, it's going to be done to us later").

Both heroes have fair arguments.

It's the kind of debate that even rages on in our own real-world politics, which is what made "Civil War" so powerful. Rogers argued that the superhumans' right to choose would be stripped away by the Sokovia Accords, while Stark argued that their powers needed to be put in check in order to prevent the destruction of cities like New York ("The Avengers") and Sokovia ("Age of Ultron"). 

The debate between Cap and Tony sparked heated debates between the biggest MCU fans on Business Insider's entertainment team. Here, Business Insider's Carrie Wittmer and Travis Clark make their cases below — Carrie for Captain America, and Travis for Iron Man.

Iron Man (Travis Clark)

If you compare the superhuman registration debate in "Captain America: Civil War" to the real-world debate of gun control in the U.S., then the answer — at least in my eyes — is clear: Tony Stark is right. 

I'm going to get this out of the way early: I admittedly admire Captain America more than Iron Man. I think Cap's heart is always in the right place, whereas Stark's decision-making is consistently questionable.

In fact, Stark is partly responsible for why the government proposes the superhuman registration in the first place. The destruction of the country Sokovia came during the battle with Ultron in "Avengers: Age of Ultron," and Ultron was created by Stark. 

But if you focus on the debate itself more than the personalities or history of either of them, I can't deny Stark is on the right side of this one. The Avengers have proven to be national security threats just as much as they may save the world from destruction. 

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is not grounded in reality, but the conflict of "Captain America: Civil War" reflects a very real debate raging in America. If we compare super powers to guns, it becomes clear the Avengers have powers that need to be controlled. That's evidenced by the beginning of the film, when Scarlet Witch accidentally kills a group of Wakandan diplomats. 

A main argument against gun control is that it is a slippery slope to the government banning guns entirely. That's where Captain America's head seems to be at: He doesn't want to see his friends, like Scarlet Witch, at the government's mercy. He thinks he can better handle her than the government can.

But Captain America, as good as his intentions may be, isn't thinking logically. At the end of the day, people like Scarlet Witch, the Hulk, and any other superhumans with both unimaginable power (and a lack of control) need to be controlled for the public's own good.

Stark thinks it will happen eventually no matter what, and if he can get ahead of it, he can manage it. Stark is thinking logically, whereas Cap is thinking with his emotions. That's the biggest difference between them, and while Cap is admirable, this isn't a debate settled by emotion.

Cap also wants to protect his friend Bucky Barnes, who is framed for an explosion at a United Nations conference in the movie. As noble and well-intentioned as this may be, at the end of the day Cap is putting the safety of one man over that of the public.

So, as questionable as Tony's actions have been in the past, he's the one trying to do the right thing in "Captain America: Civil War."

Your move, Carrie.

Captain America (Carrie Wittmer)

OK. You really got me on the gun control thing. I absolutely believe that purchasing a gun should be more regulated. But this is different because these are human beings. I understand the point you're trying to make, but I don't think it's fair to compare these people, whether they chose to be superhuman (Stark) or not (Bruce Banner/Hulk) to gun control. 

Before I continue my rant, I will also admit my bias: Although I absolutely love "Iron Man" and "Iron Man 3" (a Christmas movie!), I hate Tony Stark. I get that being an alcoholic jerk who wears tinted sunglasses is his thing, but his character hasn't evolved since 2008. The only thing that seems to change is his ego — which only gets bigger — and his relationship status with Pepper Potts, which if we're being honest is completely dependent on Gwyneth Paltrow's availability. 

You say that the Avengers are a security threat. This is true, but they're a threat when there is already a more dangerous threat out there. This is Cap's point, which is clouded in "Civil War" by his bond with Bucky Barnes and by his distrust of the government. But Cap's distrust of the government is fair: while S.H.I.E.L.D. is not a government entity, it might as well be, and it was literally run by HYDRA in the past. Remember Robert Redford in "The Winter Soldier?" He told Cap what to do, and he was the enemy the whole time. How can Cap and other heroes trust and fight for an entity that is so vulnerable?

And what about the cases when one or more of our heroes see a threat, but the government either doesn't see it as essential, or they straight up don't believe them? If the UN, for example, doesn't see a worthy threat in the pink-headed man named Thanos who wants a bunch of stones so he can destroy half of the universe (very specifically not the whole universe), what are the Avengers going to do? Just let it happen? They most certainly will not. 

Cap is thinking logically because he's applying the limitations of the Sokovia Accords to his own experiences, like the mishap with Robert Redford that I already mentioned in "The Winter Soldier." And in "Captain America: The First Avenger," he goes on an unapproved mission in Germany to save Bucky Barnes, planned with the help of the late Agent Peggy Carter and Howard Stark.

Stark is the one thinking with his emotions. His approach is completely rooted in ego, not a concern for humanity. Minutes into "Civil War," Stark meets a woman whose son was killed in Sokovia, and is so threatened by the idea that someone out there hates him that he goes straight to the Secretary of State behind his friends' backs, writes legislation, and simply throws it onto a table in front of them. 

Do superheroes need to be controlled? Yes! But the Sokovia Accords is not the right way. My solution: There is a lovely bald man named Xavier who has a very nice school in upstate New York, and Disney bought Fox so this can be in the MCU canon now. 

CLOSING STATEMENTS

Travis Clark: You make fair points, Carrie, but I don't think it's fair to assume that Stark is only pro-registration because of his ego. It shows progression in his character that he would be pushed by the pain he sees in that mom who confronts him. It would be natural for anyone with a conscience. Are we supposed to condemn him for having a conscience? Stark has power and influence, and ever since the first "Iron Man" after he escaped captivity, he's been using that power and influence to better not only himself, but the world. He doesn't always make the best choices, but he at least learns from his mistakes. Captain America is so stubborn and rooted in his ways that he will stand by Bucky out of pure emotion. There's no place for such blind loyalty when national security is at stake. Stark's entire point is to get in front of registration and handle it on his terms before the government handles it on its — things would have been much worse if he hadn't.

Carrie Wittmer: I'm not assuming that Stark is pro-registration because of his ego. I know he is. I understand that Stark's reasoning stretches beyond his own interests, but his ego is where it started, and it's the only reason he took any action in the first place. If the government initiated the Sokovia Accords on its own, "Civil War" would've been a completely different movie, more boring than any MCU villain, because I have a feeling everyone would be on Cap's side. Your points are great, but have not changed my mind because I disagree on Cap's motivations. Yes, he's trying to protect Bucky, but it's bigger than that. He knows the government has made the wrong calls before, and he's fairly anticipating that it will again.

Can we still be friends?

More on Marvel:

• All the MCU details you should know before seeing 'Avengers: Infinity War'
• 12 comics to read if you love the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies
• Zoe Saldana slams 'elitists' who look down on Marvel movies
• Marvel TV shows are both compelling and boring at the same time
• The 'Avengers: Infinity War' directors changed their Twitter profile pictures, and fans think it's a clue to Captain America's fate

SEE ALSO: Where you can watch all 18 movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe before you see 'Infinity War'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why Apple makes it so hard to get a new iPhone battery

Netflix has a lot of original content in store for the rest of this year.

We've already seen the premiere of several new original shows, including the sci-fi series "Altered Carbon" and David Letterman's new talk show.

Among the shows still to come is the new series "Maniac," a dark comedy starring Jonah Hill and Emma Stone, along with second seasons of "Marvel's Luke Cage" and "GLOW."

Netflix has said it will spend $8 billion on shows and movies in 2018 — up from the $6 billion it spent in 2017. 

To help you sort through all of the upcoming content, we've compiled a list of original shows that Netflix has confirmed are coming out in 2018. This excludes movies, kids' shows, and series that might not come out until 2019 or later.

Here are all the shows we know Netflix is for sure putting out in 2018, along with their release date if available:

SEE ALSO: All 65 of Netflix's notable original shows, ranked from worst to best

"Lovesick" (Season 3) — Released January 1

Netflix description: "In his quest for true love, Dylan found chlamydia. Joined by friends Evie and Luke, he relives past encounters as he notifies all his former partners."

"The End of the F***ing World" (Season 1) — Released January 5

Netflix description: "A budding teen psychopath and a rebel hungry for adventure embark on a star-crossed road trip in this darkly comic series based on a graphic novel.

"Disjointed" (Season 1 - Part 2) — Released January 12

Netflix description: "Pot activist Ruth Whitefeather Feldman runs a medical marijuana dispensary while encouraging her loyal patients to chill out and enjoy the high life."

Nintendo's next big thing isn't a video game or a video game console.

It's foldable cardboard.

Nintendo "Labo" — pronounced "lab-oh," like "laboratory" — is an entirely new concept from the quirky Japanese gaming powerhouse. Starting at $70, you get a kit full of buildable cardboard toys to complement the wildly popular Nintendo Switch console. There are games, of course, which are included in the package. 

More importantly, there are step-by-step instructions for building each of the toys in the set. Think: Lego meets model airplanes, but more fun.

I got to try Nintendo Labo back in February ahead of its launch on April 20. What I found was a surprisingly brilliant learning tool aimed at kids growing up in a digital world.

SEE ALSO: Nintendo just unveiled an ambitious, bizarre new project called 'Labo' — here's how it works

DON'T MISS: Nintendo’s new idea ‘Labo’ may sound strange, but it’s actually a perfect fit given the company’s 128-year history

Here's the starter kit for Nintendo Labo, which is known as the "Variety Kit."

The $70 "Variety Kit," seen above, is the base level for Nintendo Labo; an $80 "Robot Kit" is also available, which contains a large and complicated robot suit. 

There are two main aspects to Labo: Building with cardboard, and then using those creations to play Labo games on the Nintendo Switch.

It's important to note here that you need a Nintendo Switch to play Nintendo Labo games. Think of Labo as essentially a game for the Switch that comes with buildable toys, (though that's underselling it).

In the Variety Kit, there are several different devices to build. I got to try building an RC Car and a fishing pole.

Each Labo build begins with a large sheet of relatively thin cardboard. The cardboard doesn't feel especially tough, but the final creations made with the cardboard are tougher than you'd think.  

The RC Car, for instance, begins with the sheet of cardboard seen above. Various shapes are perforated from the cardboard, which get punched out per a set of very charming instructions.

Here's the final product:

You could, of course, just punch out everything immediately — and some people assuredly will do that, especially little kids. That's fine. The instructions will still identify each piece and explain how they all fit together. 

Labo, as I discovered, is tremendously forgiving. Just like cardboard! That's kind of the point.

• Regulators are talking seriously about imposing new regulations on Facebook and other big tech companies.
• But Netflix CEO Reed Hastings thinks his company will be unaffected by a regulatory crackdown.
• Unlike other tech giants, the streaming video company doesn't sell ads, and is much more of a media company, he argued on a conference call following Netflix's first-quarter earnings report.
• Hastings sits on Facebook's board of directors.

In the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the Russian government's alleged attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election, policymakers in the US and abroad are talking seriously about new regulations targeting big tech companies.

Netflix is often grouped with Facebook and Google in the lists of large technology firms, but company CEO Reed Hastings thinks his company has little to worry about when it comes to the heightened scrutiny of regulators. The streaming video giant doesn't have an advertising-based business and it's more of a media company than a tech firm, he noted on a video conference call Monday following the company's earnings report.

"I think we're substantially inoculated from the other issues that are happening in the industry," Hastings said. "And that's great."

Hastings is intimately familiar with Facebook's business model, because he serves on its board as a director.

"I'm very glad that we built this business to not be advertising supported, but to be subscription," he said. "We're very different from an ad-supported business."

Last week, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified on Capitol Hill about his company's data protection and privacy practices following news that data on up to 87 million Facebook users was leaked to a data analysis firm linked to President Trump's election campaign. During the hearings, members of Congress brought up the possibility of new laws to protect consumer privacy, and to ensure transparency in online political ads. They also touched on the potential for new antitrust actions against some of tech's giants.

But Netflix stands apart from Facebook because it doesn't sell advertisements, Hastings said. Unlike Facebook, which at one point allowed app developers to download data it had collected about its users, Netflix has placed a premium on protecting the information it has on its customers' viewing habits, he said.

Furthermore, Netflix differs from other tech companies, because it's much more focused on producing, acquiring, and licensing movies and television shows than it is on building technology, Hastings said. The company expects to spend more than $10 billion on such content this year, compared with about $1.3 billion on technology, he said.

"We're really pretty different from the pure tech companies," Hastings said.

Earlier on Monday, Netflix announced that it added 5.5 million subscribers in the first quarter, exceeding Wall Street's expectations. The company's also announced earnings and revenue that were in-line with analyst forecasts.

SEE ALSO: Roku's boxes offer thousands of channels — but viewers are largely just tuning in Netflix

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Netflix is headed for a huge profit milestone in 2018

• The attack on YouTube by Nasim Aghdam may be isolated act by a disturbed person but former employees say workers receive threats anytime major changes are made to the site.
• YouTube's management stationed an armed guard outside one employee's house a decade ago after a user threatened her and her family.
• Former employees say Facebook, Twitter or any other platform that offers a chance at notoriety should be concerned with implications of Aghdam's case.

YouTube managers had no way to predict Nasim Aghdam would go on a bloody rampage, but they had plenty of reasons to fear that someone like her might one day show up, say former employees.

Aghdam was the 38-year-old, disgruntled YouTube video creator who arrived at the company's San Bruno, California, headquarters on April 3 and began blasting away with a 9mm handgun. She wounded three staffers before she killed herself. Police say leading up to the shooting Aghdam, who was from San Diego, believed YouTube sought to censor her and ruin her life.

This kind of violence is unprecedented in YouTube's 13-year-history, though Aghdam's anger and paranoia aren't unique among the millions of people who create and post videos to the site, according to five former YouTube employees. In exclusive interviews, they told Business Insider that going back to the service's earliest days, frustrated creators — seething over one of YouTube's policy changes or the other — have threatened staffers with violence.

Typically the threats were delivered via email. At least once, a video creator confronted a YouTube employee face-to-face and promised he would "destroy" him. In another instance, a man enraged by the suspension of his account, promised to harm Mia Quagliarello, YouTube's first community manager, and her family. The person created a crude web page that was filled with menacing images and slurs against Quagliarello and her family. In an interview, Quagliarello said company managers considered the situation serious enough to station an armed guard outside her home for three days.

"I forwarded (the threats) to Google security and they took it super seriously," said Quagliarello, who worked at YouTube from 2006 to 2011. "They sent over someone, like an ex-cop type, to sit on my block, like 24-7."

Neither Google, which owns YouTube, nor YouTube responded to requests for comment.

Before Aghdam arrived, all the threats turned out to be just that: threats. All the employees interviewed said they knew of no other time when a creator tried to physically harm a YouTube employee. At this point, the indications are that Aghdam's attack was the kind of event that has become all too familiar in American society: an isolated act committed by a person with a shaky grip on reality.

People who may have developed an unhealthy dependency isn't a problem exclusive to YouTube, the former employees said. At least three of those interviewed have worked at some of the other top social networks and say employees there have also received threats.

As online services like Facebook, YouTube and Snapchat have emerged as broadcast mediums for the masses, in many cases offering tools and financial incentives that make it easy for anyone to try their hand at building a career as a viral star, the potential for problems increases.

"When you have a platform that serves everyone, there are going to be people who are emotionally unstable," said a former YouTube employee who requested anonymity. "Whenever platforms change, you get a lot of emails, some of them are rational. Some of them are irrational."

"I'm going to destroy you"

In the case of YouTube, the world's largest video-sharing site, the Google-owned company has a reputation as a star-maker. Anyone with the ability to attract viewers has the chance at generating notoriety and a share of ad revenue.

As YouTube's following has expanded and revenues ballooned, the opportunities for amateur videographers has also grown. In recent years, this has resulted in more and more people becoming financially and emotionally dependent on the service, say the former employees.

So, what happens when the spigot is turned off? Often in YouTube's history, managers have tried making improvements to the site. Sometimes these changes have led to reduced viewership and ad money for videographers.

YouTube has been dealing with the problem for at least nine years, going back to a 2009 homepage redesign. Although YouTube was not formally sharing ad revenue with video creators at the time, the currency of video "views" was incredibly valuable to people seeking a path to mainstream stardom.

After a YouTube product manager published a blog post announcing the 2009 homepage changes, he was barraged with angry notes in the comments section — including at least one death threat, say several people with knowledge of the matter.

Former YouTube staffers say that too often in such situations, irrational people try to take out their frustrations on YouTube's workers.

Eric Meyerson, a former head of YouTube's advertiser and creator marketing departments, said a male video creator approached him during a 2013 YouTube event at Google's offices in Santa Monica, California.

"He was in a really bad frame of mind," said Meyerson, who worked for YouTube from 2010 to 2013. "He said something to the effect that ‘If you keep fucking with my channel I’m going to destroy you. I’m going to hurt you,' and he implied that he was going to take it out on employees of YouTube ... although it was a threat and obviously I want to take it seriously, we were used to a lot of volatility among the creator community."

People hanging around outside the building

A year ago, revelations surfaced that ads appearing at YouTube from respectable companies were running alongside such fare as recruiting videos for terrorist groups and commentaries that included hate speech.

YouTube responded by removing material that advertisers might find unappealing — part of a series of rule changes called "demonetization."

Apparently, Aghdam's clips, mostly focused on fitness and animal rights, were caught up in the purge. She claimed the new policies were designed to censor her.

This type of thinking may seem paranoid but it's not unique among video creators, according to Meyerson. He said that though the vast majority of creators respond to changes at YouTube in a reasonable fashion, a fringe element always sees conspiracies and plots in every move made by the company's leadership.

"That’s a fairly typical complaint among creators," Meyerson said. "'My stuff isn’t that bad. Why am I getting demonetized?' People think it's because of their political views. Conservatives are especially paranoid about this. 'I’m being demonetized because I’m a conservative and Google is a bunch of liberals' ... [When] YouTube decided to demonetize controversial content, they happened to affect the most passionate people who had the most intense ideas. Whether it was about guns or controversial opinions," he added.

One former employee who requested anonymity, said that though he never saw any violence, he was accosted several times. He said people would wait outside YouTube's offices to speak with employees about changes to the homepage or algorithm that was affecting them.

"One time there was a guy in a suit who drove from Los Angeles," said the source. "He had my LinkedIn page open and he knew who I was. He wanted to talk to someone about his channel, I think. That's the only time I really got scared because this guy knew who I was ... when I heard about the shooting, that was my first thought. That it was one of those people hanging around outside."

Apparently such threats were common enough to prompt Google security to implement a reporting procedure, or an "escalation path," for employees to follow, according to another source who also preferred to remain anonymous.

Both Meyerson and Quagliarello said they always felt safe at YouTube's headquarters and that the company's security team takes the job seriously. One unnamed source made it a point to applaud the efforts of Marty Lev, the former vice president of security at Google who left the company in 2016 and is now head of physical security at Amazon Web Services.

Whatever security YouTube had before, it's about to get stronger. Alphabet has said following Aghdam's attack that it will increase security at its offices.

Asked if it would bother her to drive past YouTube's headquarters and see that the campus resembles a bunker or fortification, Quagliarello, YouTube's former community manager, said: "It would make me feel sad, but at the same time I’ve been thinking that we need more security in [Silicon Valley]. I feel like we’ve been pretty laid back here. Unfortunately I think it’s time to buckle up."

SEE ALSO: A tragic day at YouTube: Photos show the chaotic scene as police responded to the shooting

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to stop your Facebook friends from giving away your data

• Craig McNamee, founder of Catalyst Health, says he was personal trainer to Meghan Markle for three years while she was filming "Suits" in Toronto.
• He revealed Meghan Markle's workout routine in an interview with Women's Health.
• She is apparently "very focused on her health."
• He revealed the types of exercises and gym equipment they would incorporate into her circuit-based strength training together.
• They went for lighter weights in higher reps over heavier weights, he said.

In the leadup up to her wedding to Prince Harry, Meghan Markle will likely be very busy with preparations. The future royal is reportedly "very focused on her health" and previously blogged about health and fitness, so it's likely that her pre-wedding prep will involve a strict workout routine.

And if you were wondering just what that was, you're in luck because her personal trainer of three years, Craig McNamee, founder of Catalyst Health in Toronto, Canada, has revealed the types of workouts that he used to design for the actress while she was filming the TV show "Suits."

McNamee told Women's Heath that Markle is "very focused on her health" and that when he met her she was already in good shape as she regularly ran and practised yoga (her mother is a yoga instructor).

"So it was up to me to take it to the next level," he said. This, he explained, meant adding in circuit-based strength training to her routine.

According to McNamee, the pair would meet up together between three and four times per week for 45-minute sessions.

This, he said, would typically be broken down into five minutes of cardio to warm up, five minutes of dynamic stretching, a 30-minutes circuits session, finished off with five minutes of stretching.

"Generally speaking, we had a full-body approach," he said. "And since Meghan was onscreen, we really focused on posture."

To this end he would build in posterior chain movements that work the glutes, back, and hamstrings — which can include things like squats and deadlifts — as well as exercises that work the core, specifically the abs, back, obliques, and pelvic floor.

In a typical circuits workout with Markle, he would introduce TRX suspension equipment, dumbbells (5-10lbs), a 10-lb kettlebell, and a mini band — which Markle apparently particularly liked using to do lower body exercises, something that's also popular with Victoria's Secret Angels.

Below, the Toronto-based boutique gym congratulated their client on her cover feature with a Canadian magazine via Instagram, and reshared her post in which she gives them a shoutout.

They went for lighter weights in higher reps (20 to 25) over heavier weights.

"Our big focus with all of our sessions was to not be too repetitive and really create a dynamic workout with a lot of variety," McNamee said.

"This workout is great for celebs and regular gym goers alike. It hits all the right areas and helps you work toward a long, lean, camera-ready look."

Her upcoming marriage to Harry has put physical distance between Markle and her trainer, but he says they're still in touch and believes she's still incorporating their strength training into her exercise routine.

"Meghan is dedicated to her health, it's a big aspect of her life. So for her, now it's about keeping up with the workouts we did together, and making them count."

SEE ALSO: This personal trainer to Hollywood royalty and supermodels lost 130 pounds after being diagnosed with heart failure at 21 — here's the key to his workouts

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Facebook can still track you even if you delete your account — here's how to stop it

• Netflix added more subscribers in the first-quarter than Wall Street expected and the stock is soaring. 
• The company added 1.96 million new subscribers in the US and 5.46 million internationally, while earnings $0.64 per share on revenues of $3.701 billion in revenue.
• Follow Netflix's stock price in real-time here.

Shares of Netflix jumped more than 8% after the closing bell Monday after the streaming giant added more subscribers than Wall Street analysts had expected. 

On a financial basis, the company said it earned an adjusted $0.64 per share on revenue of $3.7 billion. Both in line with the Street's expectations.

Subscriber growth is a closely watched metric for investors. The company said it added 1.96 million new customers domestically and 5.46 million internationally — both above the expected 1.45 million at home and 4.98 million abroad.

This continued subscriber growth has been pushed forward by the strength of Netflix's original TV shows, both in quality and quantity. In Q1, Netflix released a few high-profile originals like sci-fi series "Altered Carbon," David Letterman's new talk show, the "Queer Eye" reboot, and a new season of "Jessica Jones."

Netflix has also jumped into movies in a serious way, and plans to release 80 original films in 2018. This hasn't been without its problems, as Netflix has publicly sparred with the Cannes Film Festival and recently decided to not screen any of its original films there. Hollywood insiders are split on whether this will affect Netflix's business in a tangible way.

All these original TV shows and movies haven't been cheap. Netflix has said it will spend $8 billion on content in 2018 and expects negative free cash flow to rise to $3 billion.

"We’re investing in more marketing of new original titles to create more density of viewing and conversation around each title (i.e bigger hit in a nation or demographic)," the company said in a press release. "We believe this density of viewing helps on both retention and acquisition, because it makes our original titles even less substitutable."

Shares of Netflix have easily outpaced their peers in the so-called FAANG basket in 2018 so far, rising more than 63% compared to second-place Amazon's 21%.

"The international content story keeps getting stronger," Bernstein analyst Todd Juenger said in a note to clients Tuesday morning following earnings. "We like the way management framed their proposition to the creative community as, essentially, 'giving the greatest creators around the world the greatest global platform for their work'. We agree."

Nathan McAlone contributed to this report. 

SEE ALSO: Millennial investors are loading up on Netflix ahead of earnings

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Wall Street's biggest bull explains why trade war fears are way overblown

• ESPN's cable-free streaming service, ESPN+, will  be available on Roku devices, the company announced Monday.
• Roku surged more than 8% after-hours on the news. 
• Steve Cohen's Point72 hedge fund also acquired a 5% stake in the company last week. 
• Follow Roku's stock price in real-time here.

Shares of Roku jumped more than 8% in early trading Tuesday after the streaming-device maker announced a deal with ESPN to stream its new direct-to-consumer channel on the platform. 

ESPN+, which was announced earlier this year, is designed to complement rather than compete with ESPN's traditional cable services, and therefore will only carry certain National Hockey League, Major League Baseball, Major League Soccer, and other select games that are not already licensed for the cable channel.

"Roku customers have enjoyed the ESPN channel for years, Scott Rosenberg, general manager of Roku's platform business said in a press release. "The launch of ESPN+ marks an exciting moment for the OTT sports experience, giving consumers more sports content from their favorite pastimes than ever. Roku customers that subscribe to ESPN+ will enjoy access to more live sports events, original shows and films, exclusive studio programs and ESPN’s unmatched on-demand library."

Disney, which has owned ESPN since 1996, has been seeking to move to its own proprietary streaming products for a while. The company announced last year it would pull its movies from Netflix as it prepares its own direct-to-consumer streaming lineup.

ESPN+ stems from the company's acquisition of BAMTech from Major League Baseball's Advanced Media division for $1 billion in 2016. The service will cost $4.99 per month, or $49.99 per year, the company said.

Roku's boost began earlier in the week after Steve Cohen's Point72 Asset Management hedge fund disclosed it had bought up a 5% stake in the company, according to a filing made public Monday. 

Shares of Roku have declined by 33% since the beginning of 2018.

Disney, which was up less than 1% after the agreement was announced, is down 12% this year.

SEE ALSO: Roku’s CEO explains why he hasn't been crushed by giants like Apple and Amazon — and why a newcomer can conquer the streaming TV market

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Wall Street's biggest bull explains why trade war fears are way overblown

Beginning on Wednesday, the Tribeca Film Festival kicks off another year of spotlighting fascinating movies, TV shows, and the latest projects from the world of virtual reality.

That isn't even mentioning the anniversary screenings of treasured classics like “Schindler’s List" and “Scarface,” accompanied by talks with the legends behind the works.

But not everyone can make it to New York City to take in all the fun. Here are 14 movies showing at the fest that you should seek out when they are eventually released in theaters and streaming.

SEE ALSO: "Westworld" season 2 is even better than the first and transcends the last sci-fi tropes holding it back

“The American Meme”

This documentary looks at the people who are famous for being famous — Paris Hilton, The Fat Jew, Emily Ratajkowski, among others — and dissects what you really have to do to become a social media brand. [Seeking distribution]

“Disobedience”

Following up his best foreign film Oscar for “A Fantastic Woman,” Chilean filmmaker Sebastián Lelio gives us the story of a taboo romance set in North London’s Orthodox Jewish community, starring Rachel Weisz and Rachel McAdams. [Released by Bleecker Street on April 27]

“The Fourth Estate”

Oscar-nominated documentary filmmaker Liz Garbus (“What Happened, Miss Simone?”) looks at the first year of Donald Trump’s presidency from inside one of the papers he criticizes the most: The New York Times. [Airing on Showtime May 27]

On Sunday, news broke that former first lady Barbara Bush is in "failing health" and is now focusing on comfort care at home.

The 92-year-old is battling Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and congestive heart failure, and has been hospitalized several times over the last year.

Bush, who resided in the White House for four years while her husband, former President George H.W. Bush, served as Commander in Chief, has been married to the 41st president of the United States for 73 years.

Described as a true love story, here is an inside look at the longest marriage in US presidential history:

SEE ALSO: Inside the marriage of Donald and Melania Trump, who broke up once before, reportedly sleep in different bedrooms, and are weathering rumors of his affairs

DON'T MISS: Inside the marriage of Barack and Michelle Obama, who met at work and kissed outside an ice cream store on their first date

Barbara Pierce and George Bush met at a dance over Christmas vacation in 1942. She was 17 and he was 18, and Barbara claims that George was the first boy she ever kissed.

Source: Associated Press

After dating for a year and a half, the two became engaged and planned to get married before George went off to serve in World War II as a Navy pilot. He famously named three of his Navy planes after her, and the two shared love letters while he was away.

On January 6, 1945, the couple married at the First Presbyterian Church in Rye, New York while George was on leave from war. He was 20 and she was 19.

• Apple is planning to launch a premium subscription for news, Bloomberg reported Tuesday.
• Last month it bought Texture, a magazine subscription service that costs $9.99 a month.
• The Apple News subscription could look a lot like Apple's streaming-music service, Apple Music.

Apple is planning to launch its own premium subscription service for news, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday.

The subscription could launch later this year in an updated version of the Apple News app, according to the report. Last month, Apple bought Texture, a magazine-subscription service that costs $9.99 a month. Most of Texture's employees will be integrated into the Apple News team, according to Bloomberg.

Apple News today offers the ability to sell advertisements to participating publishers, but given Apple's personal-privacy policies, a subscription service may be a better fit for the iPhone company. Apple plans to share subscription revenue with publishers, according to the report. Apple already sells a $9.99 monthly all-you-can-stream subscription under Apple Music.

Apple News and Apple Music are part of Apple's services division, which CEO Tim Cook has highlighted in recent years as one of the strongest growth categories for the company. The line item, which includes revenue from iCloud, Apple Music, and the App Store, posted $30 billion in sales for 2017.

Apple executives have said they plan to hit a target of $50 billion in services revenue by 2021.

Apple previously emphasized magazines as a key part of its iPad strategy in 2010.

Read the entire report at Bloomberg.

SEE ALSO: The iPad was supposed to revolutionize news, books, and computers. So what happened?

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's the best smartphone camera you can buy

Video games: They're generally pretty good! 

They can be fun, and smart, and beautiful, and challenging, and — sometimes — all of those at once.

And then sometimes, they can be none of those things at all. Sometimes, they're real, real bad.

Such is the case with the games you'll find below — the worst 50 games of all time, ranked according to their respective Metacritic scores.

These aren't the games we liked the least, or the games that told us we'd never amount to anything. Instead, what we've got here is something slightly more scientific: Reviews aggregation site Metacritic compiles all reviews of games, then it averages those scores into an overall average. This is the bottom 50 from that list (of over 15,000 games), with duplicates removed.

These 50 games are the absolute worst of the worst, according to critics:

SEE ALSO: The 50 best video games of all time, according to critics

50. "Basement Crawl"

Critic score: 27/100

User score: 2.8/10

Plot summary (from Metacritic): "Enter the basement, explore dark, sinister arenas and be at one with the insanity. 'Bomberman'-inspired mechanics bring party games to the next generation level. Staying alive won't be easy. The only way to survive is to become death itself, crushing all opponents. Fight with, or against your friends in a intensive, packed with action online and offline game modes. And remember, because of the horror-based graphics and themes, it's best if you don't play this game alone in the dark. You never know what might be hiding behind you. "

Platform(s): PlayStation 4

49. "Looney Tunes: Acme Arsenal"

Critic score: 27/100

User score: 5.1/10

Plot summary (from Metacritic): "'Looney Tunes: Acme Arsenal' is an action-adventure game featuring seven playable Looney Tunes characters, including Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Tazmanian Devil, Foghorn Leghorn, Marvin the Martian, Gossamer and a special secret character, all rendered in high-definition, next-generation graphics. Engaging in one or two player cooperative gameplay, gamers find themselves immersed in fast-paced combat, puzzle solving challenges and vehicle-based action in rich environments inspired by the popular, outlandish cartoon tales. "

Platform(s): Nintendo Wii, PlayStation 2, Xbox 360

48. "GoDai: Elemental Force"

Critic score: 27/100

User score: 3.8/10

Plot summary (from Metacritic): "The time has finally come for Hiro to avenge his family and face the forces of darkness alone. His mastery of the four elements is strong, but not yet powerful enough to face the fifth element: the Void. Now Hiro must become a Master of the Elements and complete the Trials of Earth, Wind, Water and Fire. Only then will he be ready to face the powers of darkness in the realm of the final element ... the Void awaits."

Platform(s): PlayStation 2

• Jimmy Kimmel mocked Fox News host Sean Hannity on Monday night over the revelation that Hannity was President Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen's mysterious third client.
• Kimmel and Hannity were embroiled in a Twitter feud earlier, in which Kimmel attacked Hannity's support of Trump and Hannity called Kimmel "Harvey Weinstein Jr."
• Hannity denied on Twitter that Cohen has represented him, and Kimmel picked apart Hannity's tweet in his monologue. 

Jimmy Kimmel took aim at Sean Hannity on Monday night over the federal court revelation that the Fox News host was President Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen's mysterious third client. 

Kimmel's monologue on Monday represents the latest in a series of barbs between Kimmel and Hannity, who were embroiled in a Twitter feud earlier this month.

That feud included Hannity calling Kimmel a racist, pervert, and "Harvey Weinstein Jr.," while Kimmel ultimately drew criticism and apologized for making what many saw as a homophobic joke about Hannity's apparent love for Trump. 

But on Monday's "Jimmy Kimmel Live!," Kimmel again seized the opportunity to mock Hannity for his connection to Cohen. 

“Shockingly, turned out to be my pal Sean Hannity," Kimmel said of Cohen's third client. "Isn't that interesting, that he would need advice from Michael Cohen."

Hannity denied on Twitter that Cohen has represented him. 

"I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective," Hannity tweeted on Monday. "I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party."

"Apparently he works for free," Kimmel said of Cohen. He added, "What kind of legal advice doesn’t involve a third party, unless maybe Sean Hannity was thinking about suing himself?"

"If this is the biggest witch hunt in history, we're running out of spots on the broomstick," Kimmel said.

Watch the monologue below:

SEE ALSO: Fox News star Sean Hannity revealed to be Michael Cohen's mysterious 3rd client — along with Trump and a man who paid off a former Playboy model

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A neuroscientist explains why reality may just be a hallucination

• Actor and comedian Jim Carrey continued his attacks on Fox News host Sean Hannity Monday night with a drawing of Hannity as a manatee on Twitter.
• Earlier this month, Carrey tweeted a drawing of Hannity as a WWE wrestler, as part of his recent spate of political art. 
• On Monday, Hannity was revealed to be the mysterious third client of President Trump's personal lawyer Michael Cohen, who is under FBI investigation. 

Actor and comedian Jim Carrey isn't backing down from his attacks on Sean Hannity. This time, Carrey tweeted a drawing of the Fox News host as a manatee.

Carrey posted the drawing to his Twitter Monday night with the caption: "Sean Manatee: some endangered species aren't worth saving! ;^P #SeanHannity."

Earlier this month, Carrey — who has gained a reputation for being a political artist on Twitter — tweeted a drawing of Hannity as a WWE wrestler fighting InfoWars host Alex Jones in front of an audience, writing "if you believe wrestling is real u may even believe Fox News," but "wrestling doesn't harm viewers."

On Monday, Hannity was revealed to be the mysterious third client of Trump's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. The FBI raided Cohen's office last Monday as part of an investigation into possible bank fraud and election law violations.

Carrey jumped on the opportunity to go after Hannity by depicting him as a manatee — which is listed as a threatened species by the US Interior Department — implying that Hannity's career may be in jeopardy after the revelation.

SEE ALSO: Jim Carrey goes after Sean Hannity with a drawing of him as a WWE wrestler

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How all-you-can-eat restaurants don't go bankrupt

• Netflix is surging Tuesday after another stellar earnings report.
• Credit Suisse says the company is nearing "escape velocity" as it gains even more ground on competitors.
• Follow Netflix's stock price in real-time here. 

Netflix continues to top Wall Street's expectations, and the company is nearing "escape velocity" from its streaming competitors, according to Credit Suisse.

"Netflix continues to reap the benefits of its programming win streak, as it wields its large content acquisition budget as a weapon to put greater distance between itself and its competitors." analyst Stephen Ju said in a note to clients Tuesday titled "Getting Closer and Closer to Achieving Escape Velocity."

"We find it hard to argue with the accelerated pace of subscriber additions as the conceptual proof of its capital allocation decision, and we also expect the Street to continue to underwrite the investments," Ju said.

Credit Suisse raised its price target for Netflix shares to $330 from $260 following the company's first-quarter results, released Monday afternoon. The streaming giant added 1.96 million new customers domestically and 5.46 million internationally — both above well above Wall Street estimates.

The company said it earned $0.64 a share on revenue of $3.7 billion, both in-line with expectations.

Credit Suisse's new price target and reiterated "neutral" rating brings it up to par with the Street's average target of $322, but the firm is still feeling the anxiety shared by other sell-side research departments. Netflix's plan to spend $8 billion on 700 pieces of original content this year is drastically increasing its negative cash flow and debt load, worrying analysts. 

"We remain on the sidelines for now on balanced risk/reward and maintain our Neutral rating," Ju said in the note

Netflix's competitors have also taken up markedly different approaches to Netflix's intense investments in content.

"In a crowded marketplace, it matters how you put things out into the world," HBO's president of original programming Casey Bloys told The Hollywood Reporter this week. "We don’t put a new show out every week. We take our time, and we try to make every show feel like an event — something special because they are special to us."

For now, Netflix's binging on original content seems to be paying off. Shares of the company have easily outpaced their so-called FAANG peers in 2018, rising 56% compared to second-place Amazon's 24%.

SEE ALSO: Netflix is soaring after adding more subscribers than expected

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Wall Street's biggest bull explains why trade war fears are way overblown

• EA executive Patrick Söderlund said EA "got it wrong" with "Star Wars Battlefront 2."
• The game launched in late 2017 and was met with anger from fans, who felt that the game's loot box system took advantage of them.
• EA has since altered the game's loot box system, and Söderlund says future EA games will learn from the company's recent mistakes.

"We got it wrong," EA chief design officer Patrick Söderlund said in an interview with The Verge this week.

It was a surprisingly candid admission after last year's "Star Wars Battlefront 2" controversy, which pitted "Star Wars" fans against the sporadically hated/loved EA.

"We can’t afford to make similar mistakes. And we won’t," Söderlund said.

The "mistakes" he's referring to are directly tied to "Battlefront 2," a major "Star Wars" game for the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC that infuriated players by locking away major content and encouraging additional spending on so-called "loot boxes" — virtual boxes with randomized virtual items that cost real money.

The game was still a sales success, but did comparatively worse than its predecessor.

"Star Wars Battlefront 2" was the poster boy for controversy surrounding the entire concept of loot boxes. Players were furious that the game let people pay real money for access to enhancements and major characters that would otherwise take dozens of hours to unlock by playing the game.

In short: If you paid more, you likely were better equipped than the competition.

This concept of "pay to win" is especially contentious among video game players — it seemingly undercuts the entire concept of challenge and mastery associated with so many games.

EA subsequently removed the loot-box system from "Star Wars Battlefront 2," and Söderlund promised in his interview this week that upcoming major games like "Anthem" and this year's "Battlefield" won't repeat the same mistakes.

SEE ALSO: The new 'Star Wars' game is embroiled in controversy, and fans are furious — here's what's going on

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The top 10 games coming in 2018