Which is why, I think, the nets are reticent to do this. They're likely facing enormous pressure from cable and satellite providers to keep their content as part of larger bundle that they can repackage.
Cable and sat providers actually don't like bundles (well, they like selling bundles, they just don't like paying for bundles). That was a big sticking point between Viacom and DirecTV a couple years ago. Viacom would only sell DirecTV its content as a package deal but DirecTV just wanted the big brands like MTV, Nickelodeon, etc.,). Ultimately Viacom won that argument.
Be that as it may, many execs still claim that they haven't found a way to properly "monazite" streaming. (I think a more likely explanation is that they haven't found a way to monazite it to their liking.)
I spent most of the mid-to-late 2000's working with original web content and the money just isn't comparable. The 1am time slot on a 2nd tier cable channel is significantly more valuable, in terms of what advertisers will pay, than a VOD web stream. If a popular show airs on Mondays at 8:30pm on channel XYZ there is an inherent scarcity of ad space (one block of time on one specific channel) which means you can charge more for it. The more viewers that tune in the more you can charge. On demand, and even live-simulcasting, fragments the audience and decreases the scarcity which reduces the value to advertisers.
The ratings system is evolving (slowly) to factor in streaming, DVRs, etc., so that all the 'eyeballs' are being counted (which is good), but audience fragmentation still drives ad revenue down.
For cable channels that don't have ads, like HBO, they still depend on ratings because that's how their worth is determined when it comes time to renegotiate their contracts with cable and sat providers. I'd love an HBOGO app that wasn't tied to a cable provider but I understand why HBO is hesitant to put one out. If they offered a stand alone app it would cannibalize there own ratings thus making them worth less to cable/sat providers. This is one reason why there is a one hour delay to watch a new episode of a show on HBOGO. IMO a stand alone HBOGO app would have to generate significantly more revenue (taking into account the loss of cable/sat revenue as well as DVD sales) for it to be worth the financial risk.
Producers are also very cognizant of how iTunes reduced the likelihood of consumers downloading entire albums, in favor of tracks a la carte. If people are purchasing shows a la carte, Networks run the risk of becoming irrelevant, as consumers can effectively purchase their content directly from the producers, which is essentially how Netflix has set up their model.
Networks are the ones that pay for shows to be made. When Production Company ABC has an idea for a show they'll pitch it to a TV or cable network. If they network likes it they will order a season's worth of episodes (if the show does well they'll order more episodes). This is part of what makes the TV game so much more complicated than the music game. People want to watch The Walking Dead but they don't want to pay for AMC even though AMC is foots the bill for the making of The Walking Dead. The channels that people want to cut out of the picture are the ones that pay for the shows to get made.
Netflix rarely works with content producers directly (it's first party content being the biggest exception). Netflix makes deals with cable channels, TV networks and movie studios to pay for the right to distribute their content via on demand steaming. So, for example, when Netflix wanted to get the rights to the TV show Lost they talked to ABC, not J.J. Abram's production company. Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Streaming, iTMS (TV/movie side), etc., would not exist without TV shows and movies that were paid for by TV/cable networks and movie studios. This is why Netflix, Hulu and Amazon are all trying to create original programing because controlling your own IP can be much more lucrative (and stable) than distributing other people's IP.
Apple, on the other hand, wants to sell iDevices so they are more than happy to be a low-overhead, middleman that takes a 30% cut from each sale. I doubt they'll take on the risk of paying for content creation like Netflix et al. are.
'New media' is just 'old media' (paid for by the companies that are hip to hate) via a new delivery method.
