> "Being a "content provider" is prostitution work that devalues our art and
> doesn't satisfy our spirits. Artistic expression has to be provocative. The
> problem with artists and the Internet: Once their art is reduced to
> content, they may never have the opportunity to retrieve their souls. "
Dale,
Thanks for posting this. Actually, this sums up my thoughts on a completely
seperate local (to me) phenomenon which in my opinion is screwing a lot of
upcoming artists...
Y'see, where I'm from (New Zealand) the "music industry" is tiny. Sure, we
have major label representation same as everyone else, but here it's purely
people who know jack about music shifting units for The Company (or is that
maybe a definition of major labels full stop). The chances for a good
electronic (or other) musician to get recognition, let alone a record out,
are pretty tiny, which has recently developed into straight up exploitation
of artists as "content providers" for free CD compilations with local
dance/other magazines. It would seem these days that a magazine just ain't a
magazine any more without one of these frisbees on the front, and while the
quality tends to vary from compete shite to actually quite good, the rule of
thumb is that the artist NEVER GETS PAID, because the mag is "doing them a
favour" by "exposing them to the public". My argument against this practise
has always been that no matter how much exposure you get, it ain't worth
shit unless you've got something (ie. a record) to promote, and these
artists are being suckered into pimping all of their best material for no
real gain. It's purely "content" for someone else's gain (after all, the
magazine takes a decent sized cover charge, which is often justified in the
first place by the free CD). Anyways, looks like the smarter artists are
starting to catch on and stop giving away their work, but I thought it
interesting that Courtney's words ("Being a "content provider" is
prostitution work that devalues our art and doesn't satisfy our spirits.
Once their art is reduced to content, they may never have the opportunity to
retrieve their souls.") summed up my opinion on a quite different matter. At
least I guess, she has the luxury of being able to make a living off her
art.
Anyone got any thoughts or insight on "promotion vs exploitation"?
Andy
