3 ms·
This strikes me as a bit naïve. Hollywood can be seen as two different things: 1) An ecosystem of artists creating music, movies and TV shows. 2) A group of c
by diego 15y ago
This strikes me as a bit naïve. Hollywood can be seen as two different things:
1) An ecosystem of artists creating music, movies and TV shows.
2) A group of companies distributing and commercializing the output of the ecosystem.
It's hard to say where one ends and the other one begins. YC, you may want to kill #2 but not #1.
Or do you expect to fund "startups" that create TV shows, movies, or music? If so, start looking for the younger Louis CKs of the world.
- tincholio 15y agoExcept the money for #1 comes from studios and production houses, who incidentally are the ones distributing the content as well.
- Helianthus 15y ago1) is a naive description. Ecosystem implies some sort of balance, where in fact it is a cutthroat competition for the favors handed out by 2). Because 2) holds the keys, 2) controls the message. In other words, I would _gladly_ kill #1. #1 is dysfunctional: some sort of willing imprisonment for artists for the sole benefit of #2.
- eru 15y ago> Ecosystem implies some sort of balance, where in fact it is a cutthroat competition [...] You don't know much about biology, do you?
- Helianthus 15y agommm well of course there can be balance in competition, and there can be extinction events. my comment should be read to imply detrimental runaway effects in Hollywood's ecosystem.