There's nothing disturbing about paying for a product. Just because digital music can easily be shared doesn't mean it should; it doesn't change the fact that it requires money and resources to produce in the first place.
What the fuck is the big deal about paying for music? It's one of the best bargains out there. You buy it once and get a lifetime of use out of it and it never degrades. What other product can you say that about?
Maybe I could write up a pretty cogent argument about why it is disturbing, or I could take issue with the claim that the music we buy never degrades. I don't have time, and it would be beside the point. I'll just clarify that the headline is poking fun at the moral content commonly found in the press when music sharing is the topic.
Weak! You have become quite skilled at the art of rhetoric young jedi. You COULD write up a pretty cogent argument, and you COULD dispute the claim, but rather than doing that you just mention these things as though they're given to be true - you just don't have the time to back it up. Your dismissal implies that your claims need no arguments to back them up anyways.
Continuing with the music issue, I find disturbing the lack of principals that illegal downloading reflects. Sure its not theft in the sense that one is not depriving another of his property by downloading a copy of a song. But to continue on like this is to disregard accountability and the basic idea of the marketplace, that is, the exchange of goods and services.
Sure, it is the seller's responsibility to protect his product and the marketplace, you certainly cannot trust the consumer to act altruistically. But its the short-sightedness and lack of accountability on the part of downloaders whom I know that upsets me.
First: I've been skilled at rhetoric for a long time.
Second: I could bite the hook you've cast, and argue with you about this or that, but i truly do not have the time now. This is not a rhetorical trick, this is a fact. I wrote what I wrote to provide a link to information in an amusing way, you've interpreted it in a way that was not what I was getting at, dig?
Third: I wrote "maybe I could write up a pretty cogent argument..." I qualified the statement so much because, hey, maybe it wouldn't be a great argument, and maybe it's not a position I hold. I don't think that what I wrote in any way implies that the cogent argument I could maybe write would be TRUE just 'cus. In fact, I don't know if it would be an argument I would even believe. You're brain is adding a lot to my words this morning.
Fourth: I've always been ambivalent about file sharing. On one hand, people who make music need to make a living at it, they need to get paid for the fruits of their labor. On the other hand, to me the the article in this post can be interpreted like this:
Universal, EMI, BMG, Warner and Sony are in back in charge. HOO-RAY! Go back to bed America. And of course they weren't colluding to keep the cost of CDs up. Go back to bed.
Speaking of back to bed, lunch is over and the art director calls.
True, my perspective on music downloading lacks a sense of humor. I took umbrage not so much at your comments but at what I perceive as a prevailing attitude among people my age and younger.
The whole thing's not that humorless though. I was pokin fun at your dismissal of my opinion. Troll, maybe - but I do believe in what I'm saying, its nothing I wouldn't say to your face.
Anyways to expand my original point, its not only a moral issue, but a pragmatic one. If people start believing its pointless to pay for something, the marketplace as you know it will break down. Its not generally seen this way, but music record labels provide a service which most people benefit greatly from. Everyone loves music but how would they go about getting it otherwise? Not to say music would cease to exist, but your average person might be hard-pressed to find some suitable shit to put in their stereo's.
It doesn't matter anyways. The technology will adapt and soon illegal downloading will become restrictively difficult. It will become the domain of the geek and most other people will just do the easier thing and pay.
Hello, public. As an anonymous high-level record executive, i feel compelled to offer our side of the story, which the biased press chooses to keep from you. First of all, the little people. Musicians are little people. Very little people. And they deserve some sort of compensation for their work, whether that be in the form of cocaine filled suitcases or or the right connections for landing their song on a pepsi commercial. And let's not forget the time required to make a truly great and marketable album. Arists need time to brood, to imbibe various substances, to fight with their bandmates. How anyone could ever, ever make an album worth listening to while working at any kind of job is beyond me. I've heard some ok demos and even some releases from smaller labels that were almost alright, but no one can compare with the midas touch of a major label. But there are many things that we at the major labels do besides just taking someone's unique personal vision and making it palatable for as many people as possible. Without us, your precious top 40 lists would fall apart. Just to make things easier, we've begun writing them up two months in advance, based on how much we plan to promote certain artists. Without this system in place, its we're really only one step away from complete and total sonic chaos. But your hard-earned money goes to more than just the artists. Oh, the places it goes! I could go on forever about "promotional" costs as we say in the business. All those videos you love to watch on MTV? That's right, the money comes from cd's. And flying Jessica Simpson to Chicago to be on Oprah? That's right, cd sales. And what about if a real money-making artist has a strange demand, such as having only 25 watt bulbs in their dressing room? Well, we'd probably have an intern take care of that for free...but sometimes things aren't so easy. And let's not forget the executives that make all these things work. Perhaps you've even met a few of us, or if you're really lucky, heard about us being at a show of yours or your friend's. Unless, of course, you don't live in one of the four cities we pay attention to. Another place money is siphoned to from music sales is our funding of our ever present army of hangers-on. Many of the people connected with the music industry may not seem to be doing much, or even really care about music; this is true. But I can tell you what you'll see if they are stripped of their hair gel and leather jackets: cold, cruel, anarchy.
9 comments:
what next, paying for porn?
There's nothing disturbing about paying for a product. Just because digital music can easily be shared doesn't mean it should; it doesn't change the fact that it requires money and resources to produce in the first place.
What the fuck is the big deal about paying for music? It's one of the best bargains out there. You buy it once and get a lifetime of use out of it and it never degrades. What other product can you say that about?
Maybe I could write up a pretty cogent argument about why it is disturbing, or I could take issue with the claim that the music we buy never degrades. I don't have time, and it would be beside the point. I'll just clarify that the headline is poking fun at the moral content commonly found in the press when music sharing is the topic.
Weak! You have become quite skilled at the art of rhetoric young jedi. You COULD write up a pretty cogent argument, and you COULD dispute the claim, but rather than doing that you just mention these things as though they're given to be true - you just don't have the time to back it up. Your dismissal implies that your claims need no arguments to back them up anyways.
Continuing with the music issue, I find disturbing the lack of principals that illegal downloading reflects. Sure its not theft in the sense that one is not depriving another of his property by downloading a copy of a song. But to continue on like this is to disregard accountability and the basic idea of the marketplace, that is, the exchange of goods and services.
Sure, it is the seller's responsibility to protect his product and the marketplace, you certainly cannot trust the consumer to act altruistically. But its the short-sightedness and lack of accountability on the part of downloaders whom I know that upsets me.
You behave like a troll with no sense of humor.
First:
I've been skilled at rhetoric for a long time.
Second:
I could bite the hook you've cast, and argue with you about this or that, but i truly do not have the time now. This is not a rhetorical trick, this is a fact. I wrote what I wrote to provide a link to information in an amusing way, you've interpreted it in a way that was not what I was getting at, dig?
Third:
I wrote "maybe I could write up a pretty cogent argument..." I qualified the statement so much because, hey, maybe it wouldn't be a great argument, and maybe it's not a position I hold. I don't think that what I wrote in any way implies that the cogent argument I could maybe write would be TRUE just 'cus. In fact, I don't know if it would be an argument I would even believe. You're brain is adding a lot to my words this morning.
Fourth:
I've always been ambivalent about file sharing. On one hand, people who make music need to make a living at it, they need to get paid for the fruits of their labor. On the other hand, to me the the article in this post can be interpreted like this:
Universal, EMI, BMG, Warner and Sony are in back in charge. HOO-RAY! Go back to bed America. And of course they weren't colluding to keep the cost of CDs up. Go back to bed.
Speaking of back to bed, lunch is over and the art director calls.
True, my perspective on music downloading lacks a sense of humor. I took umbrage not so much at your comments but at what I perceive as a prevailing attitude among people my age and younger.
The whole thing's not that humorless though. I was pokin fun at your dismissal of my opinion. Troll, maybe - but I do believe in what I'm saying, its nothing I wouldn't say to your face.
Anyways to expand my original point, its not only a moral issue, but a pragmatic one. If people start believing its pointless to pay for something, the marketplace as you know it will break down. Its not generally seen this way, but music record labels provide a service which most people benefit greatly from. Everyone loves music but how would they go about getting it otherwise? Not to say music would cease to exist, but your average person might be hard-pressed to find some suitable shit to put in their stereo's.
It doesn't matter anyways. The technology will adapt and soon illegal downloading will become restrictively difficult. It will become the domain of the geek and most other people will just do the easier thing and pay.
Hello, public.
As an anonymous high-level record executive, i feel compelled to offer our side of the story, which the biased press chooses to keep from you.
First of all, the little people. Musicians are little people. Very little people. And they deserve some sort of compensation for their work, whether that be in the form of cocaine filled suitcases or or the right connections for landing their song on a pepsi commercial. And let's not forget the time required to make a truly great and marketable album. Arists need time to brood, to imbibe various substances, to fight with their bandmates. How anyone could ever, ever make an album worth listening to while working at any kind of job is beyond me. I've heard some ok demos and even some releases from smaller labels that were almost alright, but no one can compare with the midas touch of a major label.
But there are many things that we at the major labels do besides just taking someone's unique personal vision and making it palatable for as many people as possible. Without us, your precious top 40 lists would fall apart. Just to make things easier, we've begun writing them up two months in advance, based on how much we plan to promote certain artists. Without this system in place, its we're really only one step away from complete and total sonic chaos.
But your hard-earned money goes to more than just the artists. Oh, the places it goes! I could go on forever about "promotional" costs as we say in the business. All those videos you love to watch on MTV? That's right, the money comes from cd's. And flying Jessica Simpson to Chicago to be on Oprah? That's right, cd sales. And what about if a real money-making artist has a strange demand, such as having only 25 watt bulbs in their dressing room? Well, we'd probably have an intern take care of that for free...but sometimes things aren't so easy.
And let's not forget the executives that make all these things work. Perhaps you've even met a few of us, or if you're really lucky, heard about us being at a show of yours or your friend's. Unless, of course, you don't live in one of the four cities we pay attention to.
Another place money is siphoned to from music sales is our funding of our ever present army of hangers-on. Many of the people connected with the music industry may not seem to be doing much, or even really care about music; this is true. But I can tell you what you'll see if they are stripped of their hair gel and leather jackets: cold, cruel, anarchy.
WORD!
Post a Comment