Netflix reported another slowdown in quarterly growth on Tuesday, marking the fourth consecutive quarter in which the company’s growth rate has declined. Although revenue continues to rise, the results fell short of Wall Street’s expectations for future performance, sending shares sharply lower.

The company generated $12.9 billion in revenue during the third quarter, meeting analysts’ forecasts, but projected $13.4 billion for the final three months of the year, below Wall Street’s expectations. The projected annual growth rate for the fourth quarter is 11.5%, down from 17.6% during the same period last year.

Netflix attributed part of the revenue shortfall to its advertising business, which is expected to generate $300 million less than the company had anticipated. Investors reacted negatively to the outlook, with Netflix shares falling 7% and reaching a two-year low. At $66 per share, the stock was trading nearly 50% below its level the previous summer.

The financial pressure comes as Netflix reassesses the quality of its entertainment offerings. Co-CEOs Greg Peters and Ted Sarandos have reportedly begun restructuring the company’s leadership in an effort to address concerns about its programming. The changes include the departures of longtime Chief Content Officer Bela Bajaria and film chief Dan Lin, who had held that position for just over two years.

Netflix is also pursuing cost reductions, including plans to eliminate 1,000 jobs, representing approximately 6% of its workforce. The company now faces the challenge of reducing expenses while improving the content that keeps subscribers watching.

One measure of that challenge is the amount of time viewers spend watching streaming services on television sets. Netflix accounts for approximately 7.8% of TV viewing, placing it second behind YouTube, which commands a share closer to 14%. The comparison highlights the competition Netflix faces from a platform built largely around user-generated videos rather than expensive, professionally produced original programming.

For critics of Netflix’s content strategy, the viewing figures raise questions about whether the company’s substantial investment in original productions is translating into an experience audiences actually want. Viewers who struggle to find appealing shows may simply turn elsewhere, even when a service continues to release new titles.

The criticism also extends to Netflix’s programming choices. Some former subscribers have objected to the prominence of LGBTQ-related themes in its shows and films, while others have gravitated toward YouTube for genres such as true crime. In that category, critics argue that YouTube creators can offer more direct, focused storytelling than Netflix’s heavily produced documentary series.

However, reversing the company’s slowdown may require more than leadership changes and budget cuts. Netflix will need to determine which programming decisions are failing to attract or retain viewers and whether its strategy reflects the interests of its audience.

Conservative critics argue that an emphasis on progressive social messaging can undermine storytelling when ideological themes take precedence over believable characters and compelling plots. From that perspective, Netflix’s challenge is not simply to produce more content or spend less money, but to deliver stories that viewers find engaging without making the narrative feel driven by an agenda.

Whether Netflix’s restructuring will improve its performance remains to be seen. The company continues to generate billions of dollars in quarterly revenue, but its declining growth rate and competition for television viewing time underscore the pressure it faces to demonstrate that its programming strategy can sustain audience interest.