12-19-2005, 06:46 PM
Hi,
First, is it the media's fault that the bulk of the population thrives on trash? Is it, or even should it be, the function of the supplier to ensure that the customer gets what he needs and not what he wants? No one, as far as I know, is forced to buy trash food, trash entertainment, trash art. So, if so much of it is being sold, it is because of the lack of taste or the weakness of will of the buyer, not the rapacity of the seller. Health food stores are in the minority not because McDonalds outdoes them in advertising, but because McDonalds gives the people what they want. And, based on my last browse through Best-Buy, classical music, old rock, R&B, jazz, etc. are all still alive and well. Your grip sounds puerile to me. You have the right to dislike the MTV crap (as do I). You have the right not to support it with your hard earned money (or even your easily acquired money). But to blame the suppliers for meeting the demands of their audience is foolish, it is backward, and it smacks of a sophomoric outlook on life.
But, second, supporting the theft of intellectual material because it doesn't meet your standard of excellence is illogical. I find modern automobile design boring, tasteless, derived, and repetitive. Does that, then, give me the right to break into a dealership some night and give their cars away? Admittedly, the auto companies give a little bit more value for the money, but I don't think any recoding company is in the Fortune 500 while at least one auto company is. So, your justification of theft as revenge for ripping off the public applies more to GM then X Label Studios.
But, even more puzzling, is the question: If the material is crap and selling it should be a crime, then why would you want to spread it, for free or otherwise? It seems like you'd want to suppress it. And one way to do that would be to, not only sell it, but to sell it for such an exorbitant sum that even a star struck teeny-booper will refuse to buy it.
--Pete
eppie,Dec 19 2005, 03:13 AM Wrote:Singers see that with their well-oiled media machine can make millions of dollars with selling crap, will never be triggered to make something good.Two things strike me as odd here.
[right][snapback]97481[/snapback][/right]
First, is it the media's fault that the bulk of the population thrives on trash? Is it, or even should it be, the function of the supplier to ensure that the customer gets what he needs and not what he wants? No one, as far as I know, is forced to buy trash food, trash entertainment, trash art. So, if so much of it is being sold, it is because of the lack of taste or the weakness of will of the buyer, not the rapacity of the seller. Health food stores are in the minority not because McDonalds outdoes them in advertising, but because McDonalds gives the people what they want. And, based on my last browse through Best-Buy, classical music, old rock, R&B, jazz, etc. are all still alive and well. Your grip sounds puerile to me. You have the right to dislike the MTV crap (as do I). You have the right not to support it with your hard earned money (or even your easily acquired money). But to blame the suppliers for meeting the demands of their audience is foolish, it is backward, and it smacks of a sophomoric outlook on life.
But, second, supporting the theft of intellectual material because it doesn't meet your standard of excellence is illogical. I find modern automobile design boring, tasteless, derived, and repetitive. Does that, then, give me the right to break into a dealership some night and give their cars away? Admittedly, the auto companies give a little bit more value for the money, but I don't think any recoding company is in the Fortune 500 while at least one auto company is. So, your justification of theft as revenge for ripping off the public applies more to GM then X Label Studios.
But, even more puzzling, is the question: If the material is crap and selling it should be a crime, then why would you want to spread it, for free or otherwise? It seems like you'd want to suppress it. And one way to do that would be to, not only sell it, but to sell it for such an exorbitant sum that even a star struck teeny-booper will refuse to buy it.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?