Why isn't Sony showing The Interview on the streaming site it already owns?

Sony has reversed its position on whether The Interview will be released or not so many times now that it's officially turned itself around in a circle, but there's something strange about its latest statement.

On Wednesday, after pulling the film, the studio said it had no plans to release it, even on DVD or Video On Demand. Then, today, after President Obama said he believed Sony had made a mistake, Sony Entertainment CEO Michael Lynton went on CNN to say that, actually, the company was planning to release The Interview — just not at Christmas. He also said the company had looked to find a VOD partner to release the film but had been unable to do so. Sony, he said, doesn't have a direct link to such a thing.

"We don't have that direct interface with the American public, so we need to go through an intermediary to do that," Lynton told CNN's Fareed Zarakia.

Except, uh, as Wall Street Journal reporter Joe Flint points out in this tweet, Sony does have such a thing.

Step 7: Go on TV and say you'd like to release but have no way to directly reach public. Step 8: Hope no one remembers Crackle.

— Joe Flint (@JBFlint) December 19, 2014

See, Sony owns the online streaming site Crackle, something that's not widely known. And, gee, if you owned a streaming site you were trying to bring attention to, wouldn't showing a movie many theaters refused to screen, because of terrorist threats by a hacking group backed up by a foreign government, be just the thing to draw attention to that site? Wouldn't a story that's all over the news be the best kind of free publicity?

Yes, Crackle (as an ad-supported streaming site — think Hulu) is slightly different from the "pay to view" model of traditional VOD. But Sony could surely find a way to take people's credit card information. Or, at the very least, set up a Paypal account or something.

Really makes you think.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via