3 ms·

The author is defining "culture" as megacorp-owned content, which is absurdly reductive. It's an ivory-tower view, that he's seemingly railing against, but can

by klyrs 4y ago

The author is defining "culture" as megacorp-owned content, which is absurdly reductive. It's an ivory-tower view, that he's seemingly railing against, but can't put his finger on because he's strictly of the tower. On the other hand, there is so much derivative CRAP out there, good word. Problem is, good entertainment is still happening locally, but (hey author,) you need to get off your ass to find it. Bands, comedians, actors, etc. who you haven't heard of unless you're actively attending -- with tens to hundreds of audience members. Statistically, it isn't even a blip. But it's the "culture" the author finds missing. The revolution will not be televised.

l33tbro 4y ago
The author makes your point that there are plenty of smaller voices out there. However the commissioners and platform owners are no longer so incentivised to find and promote those voices. While it's great to go out and see interesting local stuff - we also need mainstream entertainment for when we are not at those spaces during the other 99 percent of our time. This is the author's point: the revolution was previously televised. Original films, 'alternative' music, street press, small publishers, etc have all but vanished from the cultural landscape. This has lead to a kind of stagflation of shite. A cultural blight where the sameness of cultural product grows and becomes harder to break out of.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
billjings 4y ago
IIRC from his recent interview with Rick Beato, Ted Gioia listens to something like 1000 albums of new music a year. His point is the same as yours: it is impossible to find this music without putting in a lot of effort. This was not the case in the 90s: your local music store was promoting new music up and down the charts, even in the middle of the country. This economy has completely disappeared in recent years as a result of streaming economics.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

by klyrs 4y ago

l33tbro 4y ago

The author makes your point that there are plenty of smaller voices out there. However the commissioners and platform owners are no longer so incentivised to find and promote those voices. While it's great to go out and see interesting local stuff - we also need mainstream entertainment for when we are not at those spaces during the other 99 percent of our time. This is the author's point: the revolution was previously televised. Original films, 'alternative' music, street press, small publishers, etc have all but vanished from the cultural landscape. This has lead to a kind of stagflation of shite. A cultural blight where the sameness of cultural product grows and becomes harder to break out of.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

billjings 4y ago

IIRC from his recent interview with Rick Beato, Ted Gioia listens to something like 1000 albums of new music a year. His point is the same as yours: it is impossible to find this music without putting in a lot of effort. This was not the case in the 90s: your local music store was promoting new music up and down the charts, even in the middle of the country. This economy has completely disappeared in recent years as a result of streaming economics.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]