6 ms·

We're on a forum that will celebrate independant companies getting bought by bigger entities. Going "major" is widely seen as positive. More generally artists

We're on a forum that will celebrate independant companies getting bought by bigger entities. Going "major" is widely seen as positive. More generally artists will openly talk about trying to get financing, be more transparent about advertisement spots being open, or request sponsorship. Patreons and direct support also comes here. The "if you're not paying for it you're the product" quip at least cemented the idea that how money is made is something that can be discussed in the open, instead of just shunning "sell outs"

EnKopVand 4y ago
I do think the “selling out” argument is still a thing in the modern world. Here in Denmark we’re going back and forth on how to regulate things like influencers, and I’m not sure there would be a push back against it if being forced to tell people that you’re advertising a company that pays you money to advertise them wasn’t still seen as negative. Even here on HN it’s not like the buy of Red Hat by IBM was revived with a lot of love. So I think user deng has a point about “selling out” still being a thing. That being said, I think there is a big difference between selling out and wanting to remain in control of your creation. I have no idea whether George Lucas likes what happens with Star Wars or not, and I hope I’m not going to start a debate over it either, but by selling it he lost the creative control in a way the Bill Watterson didn’t. My guess is that being “seen” as a “sell out” isn’t actually something that comes into play when people consider what to do with their creations very often. Because honestly, why would you ever care? So maybe there is less of it today, but to state that our public discourse has changed on the subject? I’m not convinced it has.
- zamfi 4y ago
  > I’m not sure there would be a push back against it if being forced to tell people that you’re advertising a company that pays you money to advertise them wasn’t still seen as negative Hmm, is this really about “selling out” though? Or is it about trust, and the deception inherent in taking money to say something that people could reasonably believe are your own words?
- mc32 4y ago
  Charles Schulz commercialized Charlie Brown. He’s the opposite of Bill Watterson but at the same time he wasn’t Mickey Mouse. The whole concept of selling out is both particular to a person or in group and also cultural. A related concept is ‘poser’ or ‘poseur’. I think it’s more about fans thinking they’re losing their importance vis a vis the performer or artist. The artist is no longer “exclusive” to them, so to speak as well as no longer an idealized representation of them, the fans.
  - ConceptJunkie 4y ago
    Schulz did protect his legacy, as can be demonstrated by what has been done with his creations since he passed away. For example, the Peanuts movie from a few years ago was wonderful, and every bit as much in the spirit of what Sparky did when he was working on those things directly. Yes, Peanuts was heavily merchandized, but I still feel that the property has its dignity. Unlike what happened with Dr. Seuss. Of course, no one can totally control what happens with his or her creations after he or she passes away. Look at how the vultures descended the moment Christopher Tolkien passed away.
  - egypturnash 4y ago
    I feel like Watterson’s stance about licensing was in no small part a direct response to the way Schulz never met a deal he didn’t like. At the time Calvin & Hobbes was becoming successful, there was Peanuts stuff everywhere. Snoopy was in commercials selling life insurance, and it really did feel like this was taking something important out of a small-scale, moody strip about disillusionment and failure.
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      Didn’t Schultz also criticize other illustrators (including Watterson) for taking sabbaticals as he thought it was unprofessional?
      - egypturnash 4y ago
        I don't remember that but I don't feel like it's something out of character for Ol' Sparky. Been a heck of a long time since I last read his bio.
ghaff 4y ago
More generally, there is certainly a subgroup that mostly celebrates monetization as opposed to just doing something because you like to, you're good at it, and don't really try to make any money off it.
bawolff 4y ago
People think selling out is bad when you're a punk rock band. I dont think anyone really ever thought selling your company, particularly a speculative tech start up type company, is the same type of bad.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  Yeah, art and enterprise are different. And no one begrudges the punk band for selling t-shirts, albums. It's when they sell soft drinks....
  - greedo 4y ago
    Yeah, the day I see RATM endorsing American Express I'll know things are wonky...
    - LBJsPNS 4y ago
      "Fuck you I won't leave home without it!"
      - brianrmurphy 4y ago
        Shopping in the name
    - tzs 4y ago
      I'm not sure if I've heard RATM but looking at the lyrics to a few of their songs there seems to be a lot of anger or rage in their music. If that's right, you could actually do a pretty funny American Express commercial with them. It could show a montage of them dealing with shoddy consumer goods failing shortly after their warranties expire, which keeps pissing them off and keeps them in a constant state of rage which is reflected in their songwriting. Then someone points out to them that they paid for all those things with their American Express card, and American Express provides extended warranties automatically. They lose their anger over poor consumer products, and with that their songwriting too loses its anger. Cut to them releasing a new album, and it is all slow acoustic ballads about true love and togetherness.
Folcon 4y ago
I personally think "selling out" is a bit more subtle than that, in my mind it's not about just making money, a tech company can sell out if it takes money from an entity and breaks promises that it made to it's early / current users, be they written or less spelled out. Maybe your initial userbase was a bunch of hard core privacy people and post funding you start selling user data, or performing other actions which makes your original users or the people that supported you go, "wait, that's not the company I championed to success" It's not exactly cut and dried when put like that, but there are a few companies that come to mind that effectively "sold out".

EnKopVand 4y ago

I do think the “selling out” argument is still a thing in the modern world. Here in Denmark we’re going back and forth on how to regulate things like influencers, and I’m not sure there would be a push back against it if being forced to tell people that you’re advertising a company that pays you money to advertise them wasn’t still seen as negative. Even here on HN it’s not like the buy of Red Hat by IBM was revived with a lot of love. So I think user deng has a point about “selling out” still being a thing. That being said, I think there is a big difference between selling out and wanting to remain in control of your creation. I have no idea whether George Lucas likes what happens with Star Wars or not, and I hope I’m not going to start a debate over it either, but by selling it he lost the creative control in a way the Bill Watterson didn’t. My guess is that being “seen” as a “sell out” isn’t actually something that comes into play when people consider what to do with their creations very often. Because honestly, why would you ever care? So maybe there is less of it today, but to state that our public discourse has changed on the subject? I’m not convinced it has.

zamfi 4y ago
> I’m not sure there would be a push back against it if being forced to tell people that you’re advertising a company that pays you money to advertise them wasn’t still seen as negative Hmm, is this really about “selling out” though? Or is it about trust, and the deception inherent in taking money to say something that people could reasonably believe are your own words?
mc32 4y ago
Charles Schulz commercialized Charlie Brown. He’s the opposite of Bill Watterson but at the same time he wasn’t Mickey Mouse. The whole concept of selling out is both particular to a person or in group and also cultural. A related concept is ‘poser’ or ‘poseur’. I think it’s more about fans thinking they’re losing their importance vis a vis the performer or artist. The artist is no longer “exclusive” to them, so to speak as well as no longer an idealized representation of them, the fans.
- ConceptJunkie 4y ago
  Schulz did protect his legacy, as can be demonstrated by what has been done with his creations since he passed away. For example, the Peanuts movie from a few years ago was wonderful, and every bit as much in the spirit of what Sparky did when he was working on those things directly. Yes, Peanuts was heavily merchandized, but I still feel that the property has its dignity. Unlike what happened with Dr. Seuss. Of course, no one can totally control what happens with his or her creations after he or she passes away. Look at how the vultures descended the moment Christopher Tolkien passed away.
- egypturnash 4y ago
  I feel like Watterson’s stance about licensing was in no small part a direct response to the way Schulz never met a deal he didn’t like. At the time Calvin & Hobbes was becoming successful, there was Peanuts stuff everywhere. Snoopy was in commercials selling life insurance, and it really did feel like this was taking something important out of a small-scale, moody strip about disillusionment and failure.
  - selimthegrim 4y ago
    Didn’t Schultz also criticize other illustrators (including Watterson) for taking sabbaticals as he thought it was unprofessional?
    - egypturnash 4y ago
      I don't remember that but I don't feel like it's something out of character for Ol' Sparky. Been a heck of a long time since I last read his bio.

ghaff 4y ago

More generally, there is certainly a subgroup that mostly celebrates monetization as opposed to just doing something because you like to, you're good at it, and don't really try to make any money off it.

bawolff 4y ago

People think selling out is bad when you're a punk rock band. I dont think anyone really ever thought selling your company, particularly a speculative tech start up type company, is the same type of bad.

JKCalhoun 4y ago
Yeah, art and enterprise are different. And no one begrudges the punk band for selling t-shirts, albums. It's when they sell soft drinks....
- greedo 4y ago
  Yeah, the day I see RATM endorsing American Express I'll know things are wonky...
  - LBJsPNS 4y ago
    "Fuck you I won't leave home without it!"
    - brianrmurphy 4y ago
      Shopping in the name
  - tzs 4y ago
    I'm not sure if I've heard RATM but looking at the lyrics to a few of their songs there seems to be a lot of anger or rage in their music. If that's right, you could actually do a pretty funny American Express commercial with them. It could show a montage of them dealing with shoddy consumer goods failing shortly after their warranties expire, which keeps pissing them off and keeps them in a constant state of rage which is reflected in their songwriting. Then someone points out to them that they paid for all those things with their American Express card, and American Express provides extended warranties automatically. They lose their anger over poor consumer products, and with that their songwriting too loses its anger. Cut to them releasing a new album, and it is all slow acoustic ballads about true love and togetherness.

Folcon 4y ago

I personally think "selling out" is a bit more subtle than that, in my mind it's not about just making money, a tech company can sell out if it takes money from an entity and breaks promises that it made to it's early / current users, be they written or less spelled out. Maybe your initial userbase was a bunch of hard core privacy people and post funding you start selling user data, or performing other actions which makes your original users or the people that supported you go, "wait, that's not the company I championed to success" It's not exactly cut and dried when put like that, but there are a few companies that come to mind that effectively "sold out".