Streaming frees us from the bundles that held us hostage

For decades, Americans endured an infuriating reality: anyone who wanted a single beloved channel—whether ESPN, the Disney Channel, or another must-have—was forced to pay for dozens of others that held no interest. Cable companies insisted bundling was the only viable option, pairing desirable programming with shopping networks like QVC and channels few viewers would ever watch. Excuses were endless: a la carte programming was declared technically impossible, or if achievable, prohibitively expensive for the average family. Essentially, consumers were told there was no choice.

Now, that illusion has finally crumbled.

According to a Pew study released July 1, a staggering 83% of U.S. adults say they use streaming services, while just 36% still subscribe to cable or satellite TV at home (the curious math indicates that many people use both).

More than half of Americans—55%—watch streaming services without any cable or satellite subscription at all. This marks a decisive shift, confirming what many of us suspected for years: the supposed technical barriers to a la carte programming were little more than corporate myths designed to keep us locked into overpriced, bloated packages.

Streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime Video lead the pack, used by 72% and 67% of Americans, respectively. Even among older Americans, streaming adoption is strong. The Pew data shows that while adults over 65 remain the most likely to subscribe to cable (64%), a majority of them also use streaming services. This broad embrace of streaming crosses age and income lines, proving that the demand for freedom from bundled programming was never a niche desire—it was universal.

Of course, streaming isn’t perfect. Rising subscription fees are a growing concern, and 31% of streaming users told Pew their services aren’t worth the cost. Yet 44% say they’re satisfied with the value they receive, and 65% of Americans overall report they’re extremely or very likely to continue using streaming services in the coming year. That’s a vote of confidence cable companies can only dream of today.

This evolution in how we consume entertainment is more than a simple technological trend; it represents a long-overdue realignment of power between consumers and content providers. In the cable era, viewers had virtually no control over what they paid for. Streaming has flipped that relationship. Now, households can pick and choose exactly which services fit their interests—and drop them just as easily if they don’t. This puts pressure on streaming companies to deliver value instead of relying on contractual traps.

Critics argue the growing number of streaming options risks re-bundling in disguise, as consumers sign up for multiple services to chase their favorite shows. Yet the critical difference is that every subscription today is a choice, not a requirement. Gone are the days when getting Nickelodeon meant paying for shopping channels you never watched. Streaming restored a sense of agency to our viewing habits, and that’s something worth celebrating.

Cable companies spent years telling us a la carte programming was impossible. Now, it’s the norm. The public’s overwhelming embrace of streaming shows we were right to demand better—and that when technology and competition work in favor of consumers, market-controlling practices can finally give way to freedom and choice.