Free “content”

A popular thought these days is that paying for music, movies, and books is so 20th century.

Musicians don’t need to make any money on selling recordings because they are just promos for 

their live concerts. Besides, they are all rich, right?

Well, i don’t know any rich musicians, myself.  I suspect there are less than 200 worldwide that earn more than

the major leauge baseball minimum salary or even that of a firefighter.

Regardless, that argument only would apply to musicians that perform.

I may like a cd of a musician, but i cant go hear them if they are dead, or dont like to perform much, or are regional.

Some artists are recording artists only.

And what about songwriters and composers?

Cole porter, Irving Berlin, Billy Strayhorn, etc. Think about what they have given us. And they were not performers.

The Beatles stopped performing early on. Would they have spent the money and energy on making the bulk of their

 recordings if they were going to give them away?

Think of all the producers and arrangers that created all the magic on all the recordings you love. They are not performers.

It would be one thing if i was hearing this argument from impoverished people, but i usually hear  this from middle class

people with a sense of entitlement. 

I also hear ” the music industry” used as an excuse.

Sure the music industry is finally being exposed for the crooked parasitic empty suits they have always been.

But i dont see the kids downloading music paying anything to the musicians.

Recent attempts to release music on the web on a voluntary model have shown that very few could be bothered to click

and send a few bucks.

Look, Cd’s or downloads are CHEAP.  The same money you pay for a fast food meal, except you can listen again and again.

By the way, when you are there at the fast food restaurant, try and explain to  the minimum wage  immigrant mom  working behind the counter why you deserve all the free music you want.  Maybe she will give you your food for free.

Or course, if you need to have 10 million  songs on your ipod, i guess it does add up.

Here’s a thought; how about if you could only own a small amount of content? Wouldn’t you be more selective?

I think this easy access has caused the ” value” ( in every sense of the word) of content to plummet.

Even the word content is diminishing.

As for Movies, imagine all the people and money involved in producing a film. And no, i don’t  mean the crappy youtube video of your cat.

Thousands of highly skilled humans and really expensive equipment has to be  mobilized for the pleasure of your eyeballs.

But then, you deserve to get this all for free because, well just because.

And if you have spent a year or two of your life working on a book, i’m sure you should  just give it away because ” you are an artist”. 

I think americans have always been suspicious of artists. They are seen as shirking subversive weirdos.

except when they somehow win the lottery and make money  and / or get famous at which point they become  celebrated for having ” put one over” on the system. Even better if they self destruct shortly after.

Look, i realize the animals have left the barn, and i don’t  have any answers vis a vis drm or watermarking, creator taxes etc.

Just spare me the   self serving rationalizations.

Just because every one does it, doesn’t make it right.

Theft = Disrespect.

One Response to “Free “content””

  1. nick Says:

    right u r.amen

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: