...because the large library of available content, whether that's legacy items like 80's TV on Hulu, or user-generated stuff from YouTube. Newer content competes with a vast amount of less expensive older content, which diminishes its value. Once "newness" becomes a content's major selling point, dramatic savings can be realized: I've finally managed to monetize obstinacy and apathy. A move ticket rivals the monthly cost of Netflix, where I can watch many movies a month, so all I have to do is wait long enough or not care and watch something else. Some of those "Classic" films are pretty good. Video games are fun too.
When file sharing began, content lost value due to its availability from free sources. Then everything was put into digital, and now it has lost value due to the availability of other content. In this manner, media approaches its actual value: I'd really have to love something to want to own a hard copy, when realistically I'm only going to watch something once. So I think we really pay content hubs for breadth of selection rather than delivery. As long as the fees remain affordable and the advertising doesn't get too aggressive, it's an epic win for consumers. On top of all that, I still view entertainment as a luxury. I could get a hobby. Or read a book. Or go outside. Boredom may be unpleasant but it's not fatal, so all this stuff is only as valuable as I allow it to be. I can always just turn it off and walk away.