Where Record Labels Ran Into Trouble: Monoculture
from the farming-multiple-revenue-streams dept
It’s been said in the past that homogenization of computer operating systems to a single platform would be bad because of the security risks. The problem is a term referred to as monoculture, which is a farming term. I was struck by the common sense approach farmers worldwide take to ensure that they can withstand potentially detrimental natural occurrences and still make a living. Then I started wondering why music labels and movie studios allowed this to happen to them.
In summary, farming theory suggests that anytime you rely on a single crop (monoculture) over a long enough period of time, you can expect something really awful to come along that will ruin you. Why? Because of the common genetic code that results when you have a single crop in a single location for so long. What inevitably happens is that there is a change in the environment: disease, new wildlife, slight or great variances in the temperature or amount of sunlight, etc. And because your crops are all essentially the same, they’re all affected. So, instead, the theory suggests that you should always have multiple crops in production. That way, if something comes along that wipes out all of your rice crops, you still have your corn and wheat. Multiple streams of income, so that there is no single point of failure.
Relate that to record labels and movie studios. For a long, long time, they’ve relied principally on selling their recorded music crop or movie crop and almost nothing else. It was all going so well, until the environment changed. Cue the internet and its ability to copy and distribute, piracy, and the resulting change in thought of their customers about how music and movies should be consumed and how much it should cost. It’s been said repeatedly here that music labels don’t have to go away, but that they do have to adapt. They were hit by a change in the environment that affected their single crop. The RIAA had to lay off workers. They spent a great deal of time attacking an unstoppable problem, causing it to fragment further, rather than planting new crops and cultivating new revenue streams. And, while we hear stories over and over again about the labels and studios attacking piracy, too few are stories of them adapting and building new revenue sources.
It’s interesting to note another comparison between the farming and music industries. Earlier in this century, the advent of certain chemicals made monoculture appear to be doable. That went on until relatively recently (thank you Gretchen Heckmann for the details here). The problem became that the diseases and insects the chemicals were supposed to destroy adapted and have come back, often times stronger than in the past (sound familiar?). As a result, the farmers, particularly smaller farmers, have had to adapt back to crop rotation and away from monoculture. Nature has hit back and now they have to duck and weave and try something different. Perhaps there’s an Agricultural Science major that could apply for a job at the record labels?
Filed Under: diversity, monoculture
Comments on “Where Record Labels Ran Into Trouble: Monoculture”
Look Higher
Don’t just look at the music (or recording) industry and say they’re in a monoculture. Look higher and you’ll find they already have diversified.
Take Sony, for example. Under the umbrella of Sony comes Sony Music, Sony Pictures, Sony Television, etc. NBC Universal is similar.
Shifts in music shouldn’t affect the group as a whole because TV or movies would do well enough. Add game studios and other entertainment companies and you’ve got a diversified portfolio.
I guess they’ll all have to get into the bandwidth game a la Comcast/NBC and double dip that way: sell the content and the bandwidth to download it. Its their old business turned into the information age equivalent.
Re: Look Higher
Hmm, that’s true if you look at the parent companies. It’s been pretty well established that for print, music, and movies, you’ve got basically six companies that own most of what we consume.
I was looking at this more strictly from the record label’s perspective. The point wasn’t that if you’re having trouble in music, get out and do books or movies or popcorn or whatever. It’s that now that you’re having trouble living off of selling RECORDED music, diversify how you’re making money in the music business. Farmers don’t encounter disease and decide to be electricians. They farm in a way that helps mitigate natural detrimental occurrences.
I imagine that the label’s can do the same….
Re: Re: Look Higher
I shudder to think of the consequences if the music labels began farming…
Imagine the new farmers’ lobby getting new laws passed to increase the barriers to entry…
Laws passed over the ‘intellectual property’ of the containers your corn comes in.
Engineered viruses (rootkit, anyone?) which cause their customers to die if they ever switch to a rivals corn.
Please, let’s make sure this never happens.
Re: Re: Re: Look Higher
It’s called Monsanto
Re: Re: Re:2 Look Higher
“It’s called Monsanto”
Actually they’re basically going to war with the small farmer. Monsanto is the friend of huge agro-business, not the small farmer….
Re: Re: Re:3 Look Higher
“Actually they’re basically going to war with the small farmer. Monsanto is the friend of huge agro-business, not the small farmer….”
Kindo of like RIAA or EMI and any new online music start up.
Re: Re: Re:3 Look Higher
Hey DH,
The way one of my english teacher taught me to remember it was that you affect an effect
Re: Re: Re:4 Look Higher
Yeah, I’ve heard that too. Everyone seems to have one thing that they can never get straight, and it appears that affect/effect is mine….
Re: Re: Re: Look Higher
“Imagine the new farmers’ lobby getting new laws passed to increase the barriers to entry…”
Its called Monsanto and the record labels would get their asses handed to them in short order.
The second of the Google suggestions for Monsanto it “Mansanto Evil”. iIf that tells you anything.
Re: Look Higher
I disagree. They may have movies, music, and TV, but they’re all run the same way. The entire entertainment peace of Sony is a monoculture. Sony does have their electronics division (if anyone would understand finite goods, why isn’t it Sony?), but others like WB and EMI don’t.
Re: Re: Look Higher, why look higher ??
yes, the music industry ‘all run the same way’, they find talent, the sign them, they help them create popular content, and then they sell it.
Farms, do the same. They put in seeds, in the soil, they plow, they water their plans, they hope for good sun light, they spray for bugs and so on.
but they’re all run the same way
This is not something that is common with a farm monoculture and the music industry.
So the entertainment industry have movies, music and TV and they always do it in a similar way (the way you HAVE to do it).
The farming industries have rice, wheat, cows, carrots, tomatos, hydroponic systems, green house systems, and many many many many many different products.
Whats the difference ??? its just a silly comparison and its crazy to call the entertainment industry a monoculture..
Because no one with any reason can consider that be to even slightly accurate…
Re: Re: Re: Look Higher, why look higher ??
its just a silly comparison and its crazy to call the entertainment industry a monoculture..
No it isn’t
Re: Re: Re: Look Higher, why look higher ??
Look up monopolistic competition. Prepare to be amazed.
Re: Look Higher
“Take Sony, for example. Under the umbrella of Sony comes Sony Music, Sony Pictures, Sony Television, etc. NBC Universal is similar.”
To me they(Sony Music,Pictures,etc.) are all links on the same chain. Break one link and the others take a big hit. So its still monoculture.
{cough} affected “their single crop.”
Re: Re:
Gah! Damn it! Some writer I am.
Affect/effect usage has always eluded me, even though I’ve looked up how they’re supposed to be used several times. Was the following line at least correct, or did I muff that one too?
“And because your crops are all essentially the same, they’re all affected.”
Re: Re: Re:
effect is what things do. affect is what happens to things.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Effect is a noun. Affect is a verb. That’s the difference.
“That had quite an effect.” “That affected me terribly.”
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
> Effect is a noun. Affect is a verb. That’s the difference.
Both are verbs, and both are nouns. For instance, “to effect change”, not “to affect change”.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
No, that is the wrong usage. It is as I said.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Well, according to dictionary.com I am wrong about the noun/verb labels. Though, the rules apply as thus: “Effect” is used when it is a thing, such as “a flashing effect”. “Affect” is used when it is an action, such as “affecting change”
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Isn’t that what I said?? 🙂
“effect is what things do. affect is what happens to things.”
Re: Re: Re:6 Re:
I’m rather enjoying the fact that half the comments on this post have resulted in my being rather stupid….
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
I concur. I’m part of the problem.
Re: Re: Re:
Gah! Damn it! Some writer I am.
I just made a change, but for future reference, you’re still able to edit after it’s been posted…
Re: Re: but still be Affectionate
Hmmm.. Seems you were quite affected by the effect of not knowing the difference between how easy it is to be affected by some effect.
Yep. Generally affect is used as a verb meaning “to influence” while effect is a noun. If you feel like guessing go with affect.
Re: Re:
so… it’s A verb, or an EFffing noun? Well hell, that’s easy to remember.
Re: Re: Re:
Not always:
http://xkcd.com/326/
Here’s a better example: automobiles. Just a couple years ago, automakers were loath to even consider alternatives to their gas-guzzling SUVs. Then, when gas prices went up, the money train crashed, so these automakers started to seriously look into alternative-fuel vehicles and they also started to seriously invest in smaller cars and more efficient CUVs. Essentially, the market will always force diversification in some way or another (whether it’s forcing suppliers to diversify or putting suppliers out of business for not doing so). The problem with the music industry is that the record labels have twisted the law to put a stranglehold on the mechanics of the free market, so it’s been a lot slower to happen.
Re: Re:
“The problem with the music industry is that the record labels have twisted the law to put a stranglehold on the mechanics of the free market, so it’s been a lot slower to happen.”
Slower, but still inevitable. This kind of thing happens in ecology all the time. Laws are passed to try to address some inevitability, not unlike the Asian Carp situation occurring in the Chicago area right now, where they’re spreading into the Great Lakes.
Re: Re: Re:
“Slower, but still inevitable. This kind of thing happens in ecology all the time. Laws are passed to try to address some inevitability”
History shows that when laws are passed to prevent the inevitable the consequences to society are always great, and that the crash is much worse.
“not unlike the Asian Carp situation occurring in the Chicago area right now”
LOL … yeah lets pass a law to prevent the carp from breeding. What do you mean they are still breeding? I guess we need harsher penalties so we can make an example of a few of the carp …
Remember, The speed of light, its not just a good idea, its the law!!
I like my new camel …
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“LOL … yeah lets pass a law to prevent the carp from breeding. What do you mean they are still breeding? I guess we need harsher penalties so we can make an example of a few of the carp … “
What they’re actually doing is Michigan/Wisconsin are trying to take Illinois to court to force them to do some tricky technological blocks and flow reversal to prevent the Asian Carp from migrating north into greater Lake Michigan.
But it’s just as stupid. In the words of Ian Malcom, “Life finds a way.”
Boll Weevil
I wonder if the recording industry will erect a Napster statue sometime in the future to honor its contribution to the music industry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boll_Weevil_Monument
Is it really adaptation to recorded music?
For a long time I’ve been thinking that perhaps we are looking at the RIAA the wrong way and this article, in some ways, validates what I have been thinking.
Don’t think of their “monoculture” as being recorded music, but think of their “monoculture” as being the type/quality of recorded music. I, personally, stopped buying recorded music when my wallet hit me in the head and asked me to justify $20 for 2 good songs and 8 bad songs. As a result, I stopped buying. A lot of my friends stopped buying as well. Our tastes had changed and the music industry was slow to adapt. Their propensity to pump out an album, regardless of how bad it was, led to that decision. When they flooded the market with trash the market responded by saying “We’re not buying it.”
Quality music still sold. The bell curve shifted but the music companies did not respond. They still believed that the public wanted 20% quality and 80% crap.
The public showed them a thing or two. When 80% of what you sell is wanted by so few people, it’s amazing that your sales don’t fall 80%. Think about it: the greatest hits album is usually two or three songs from each album the group has made. If all of their music was so damn good, why isn’t every album a greatest hits compilation?
The music industry, or rather, a lot of the smaller players, the indie companies, the little guys out in Seattle with a steampunk band, those guys are giving the people what they want. Different music, quality music. Exposure is their problem and that is the one thing that the music industry can provide and that is, almost, their sole reason for survival.
The talk for so long has been about piracy and “theft” and people not buying music. People are still buying music, but the 80% trash isn’t selling and if your economic model is based on selling trash then you better be prepared for the worst.
Re: Is it really adaptation to recorded music?
So did you stop illegally downloading when iTunes allowed you to buy individual tracks?
No?
Epic fail.
Re: Re: Is it really adaptation to recorded music?
no it sounds like he when to indie music, streampunk music? hmmmm thought that word only worked as a settings? i’ll have to look into it
Re: Re: Is it really adaptation to recorded music?
Hmmmm… I don’t see the point where he claimed to have started downloading illegally – that was your assumption. Funny how the ACs on here don’t allow facts to get in the way of their assumptions.
Amusing but pointless. Since music was sold (and is sold) in different ways, from CDs to records, from background music to movie licensing and all forms in between, there really isn’t and monocropping.
However, there is some mono-mindedness by those who hate what they have accomplished. That’s okay.
Re: Re:
“Since music was sold (and is sold) in different ways, from CDs to records, from background music to movie licensing and all forms in between, there really isn’t and monocropping.”
Except the monoculture is recorded music. Licensing, in my opinion, is a good second crop. Now you’ve got two. But Duo-culture isn’t all that much better than monoculture, especially if they’re fairly similar. How about going further?
Get involved in some real marketing deals/packages for bands? Facilitate more of the tangible good side of things, and take a cut?
Re: Re: Re:
More than a duo culture, and you know it from reading TD.
Since all music is licensed, licensing covers a big space. The famous UK reports show that licensing is the fastest growing part of the music industry in the UK (percentage of revenues increase). That is everything from movie music to car commercials, from performance rights to sheet music, ring tones, and whatever else they come up with. It isn’t monocropping in any sense at all. Even “retail” splits, from CD and physical product sales to digital, and the physical products break from as anything CDs to the good old vinyl records.
It would be silly to suggest the music business suddenly start selling pencils or golf clubs (because mini-putt is very popular with music fans, it seems). By definition, they are in the music business, so everything starts with music. It is sort of like getting mad at the car business for only selling things with wheels. Damn, people, they need to adapt to skis and blades!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“It is sort of like getting mad at the car business for only selling things with wheels.”
Er…no. They need to also sell insurance packages (they do), service plans (they do), add ons to the cars (they do), make money from financing deals (they do).
BTW, way to work a car into YOUR analogy. Why couldn’t I think of that 😉
Re: Re:
“However, there is some mono-mindedness by those who hate what they have accomplished. That’s okay.”
I hate the product they have been pushing for the last decade or so, does that count?
They sure seem monoculture to me, they must have been rotating the same 6 “artists” for 15 years now. I may be mono-minded but I still like to hear something new or interesting every once in a while, so I abandoned listening to anything the major labels put out about 14 years ago.
Re: Re:
Hey, remember when that hot new artist Ke$ha seemed to be everywhere with that hot new song?
Monoculture.
Re: Re: Re:
Do you remember that time when all you could buy was Ke$ha and her hot new song ?
AND NOTHING ELSE !!!!!..
I dont, I’m quite sure at that same time, there was probably 100,000 or more songs that I could choose from, there were also ‘everywhere’.
polyculture..
Re: Re: Re: Re:
No there weren’t. There were not hundreds of thousands of songs all playing on the radio and on the television and in movie trailers and on commercials and on the internet around the same time.
There are a handful of songs that appear everywhere. Pop music requires a certain amount of repetition to survive.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
They have these things these days, called music shops.
When you go in one, there are THOUSANDS of song, and CD’s, and music to choose from..
If there are only a handful of songs that appear everywhere, then your everywhere sucks, because my everywhere there is music and content EVERYWHERE, far more than i can possibly listen to or view in my lifetime..
So I dont see your point, if you are trying to make a point..
Metaphor for more
I’ve always said this metaphor is a perfect example of why SO many things in the world are wrong – because there just isn’t enough diversity to really weed out bad stuff from good stuff. Hell, the founding fathers understood this, and that’s why they set up the US as a federation: to enable diversity in laws among the several states. They knew that each state would do things differently and that was good, because eventually the good ideas bubbled up, and the bad ones died.
Same thing is why capitalism works so well. Every firm is doing their (maybe even slightly) different version of how to get things done, and that eventually brings great diversity in business methods.
Though, we always have to be careful of forgetting survivorship bias. Just because something survives in the short-term doesn’t mean that’s the best way it should exist. Certain situations can enable bubbles (but even these have also been proven to be useful in pushing ideas further).
How is the entertainment industry a monoculture ? please explain, with examples
wow,that is a HUGE step Mike, to try to tie in monoculture farming, to the record industry.
When the two industries have basically nothing in common.
Sure if you consider the entertainment industry as a monoculture, you have have to think they were selling ONE SONG, or ONE MOVIE..
Thats bullshit, for a start, The entertainmnet industry has MASSIVE diversity, they do not sell or produce one single product..
the make, sell, and produce THOUSANDS of products,
If they just produced ONE song or movie, that would be a monoculture, in other words, if the music industry was a monoculture, you would be able to buy ONE RECORD, or ONE MOVIE..
Just like you can ONLY buy rice off a monoculture farm that grows rice, you can only buy wheat off a farm that only creates wheat.
But if you call it “FOOD” then it is not a monoculture, because you can go to different farms, and buy FOOD, and if there was only one type of food, you’re argument would make at least some logic..
But farms do no sell food, they sell specific produce (product), music/entertainment industry does not sell “music and movies” they sell a huge range of music and movies.
The music and entertainment is a polyculture, not a monoculture..
But really,,,, Mike it appears as usualy, you are somewhat confused about your own arguments.. but as usual you expect us to buy it.
Also the issues with farm monocultues are generally not due to genetic valiation of the crop over time.
As they use new seed, or outsourced seed for their next crop, very few farmers if any these days, keep their own seed stock for their next year crop.
specific plant requirement soil depliction is generally the problem with monoculture farms, and insect’s, desease’s, and weather all effect them, more than polyculture farms.
A well run monoculture farm system can and has been highly successful for very long periods of time, with no significant issues.
Like tea crops, coffee crops, the stuff they make choclate from.
RICE, they have been growning rice in Japan and China for thousands upon thousands of years, that is a monoculture, and it is booming.. so after thousands of years of growning just one thing, they are doing very well..
So how does that compare to the music industry, they do not just grow and sell rice, they grow thousands upon thousands of different products..
Yes, like a farm it is all food, but its not a monoculture, its not only achie breakie heart, it that and thousands of other products.. diversity..
the music industry and entertainment industry is alway a multicululture,, far more than most other industries.
For example, Microsoft could be considered a monoculture, they only sell software right, but they do not only sell ONE software package, they sell a range of products, they are all still software.
A farm can sell FOOD, they sell a range of products, but its still food.
Music industry can sell singles, albums, DVD’s, concerts, merchandise, TV content (MTV), tours.
They are not a monoculture, because apart from all that above, they can do that for EVERY artist they have on their books.
A monoculture would be if you have ONE artist, who created ONE song, and you had to rely on his to be successful for you to break even.
So mike, how can you say 1. the music industry is a monoculture, when it is clear it is not.
2. be so wrong about what monocultures are, how they work, all you did was look at some of the potential problems that can happen,, but rarly do.
From that you are able to draw all sorts of,, we’ll crazy conclusions.. the conclusions are wrong, and the ‘facts’ you supposidly know are also all wrong, incorred, misleading or just freaking made up.. I dont know..
why dont you take some time and explain to us how the music industry is a monoculture,, I would like to see that.
And if you say “because they produce MUSIC” I will officially call you a moron..
you try to take something specific, you then try to generalise it, then you try to twist those incorrect ‘facts’ into something I guess you hope one or two people here will swallow ?
Tell us how the music industry is a monoculture like wheat farming.. ????
what music industry company only sells one batch of one song once a year, after they have produced it, and after they sell that one batch of that particular song, they then go into production again to make another batch of THAT song, once they produce that song, the try to sell it, once they sell them all, they manufacture (grow) ANOTHER batch of THAT VERY SONG..
and over and over and over and over again..
Show me one music company that operaties like this, like a monoculture.
I can show you many successful farms that operate that way, and have done so for thousands of years.
But I cannot think of one entertainment industry company that operates like that, as a monoculture.
And if that is the case, this entire artice is based on a false assumption..
then again, that is not unusual for TD..
Re: How is the entertainment industry a monoculture ? please explain, with examples
It’s funny how often you cannot read.
Re: How is the entertainment industry a monoculture ? please explain, with examples
wow only read the first few lines, u write to much
since when do princables from one thing differ from everything else?
Re: How is the entertainment industry a monoculture ? please explain, with examples
“wow,that is a HUGE step Mike”
I could tear apart your entire comment if I wanted to spend the time, but I’ll just focus on the fact that you cannot even figure out who wrote this story and be done w/it….
Re: Re: Is it your education system that is at fault?
If not how else could you people draw such incorrect conclusions, or have such a warped concept of reality ?
So all you can complain about is how I got his name wrong, thats ok, at least I did not get the entire concept of the article wrong.
If you start with a false premise then expect what will follow to be equally false.
I actaully do not believe you could tear apart my comments, and im quite sure that if you could of you would of..
Saying you can do something, and actually being able to do something, are two different things.
Generally people who say they can do something, but then fail to do so, is usually an indication that in fact they are not capable of doing what they say.. but would rather make some idle threat, that you “can” do it..
That is supposed to make be back down on my claims.
SO DH, tell us in your words how the music industry is a monoculture ?. And if you can do that while displaying some concept of what a monoculture is, that would be interesting.
Someone babbled about the Auto industry not only selling things with wheels on it, but insurance, and accessories and finance..
NO, they do not do those other things, seperate companies perform those roles.
What level of education do they presently have in the US of A ?
It is really quite stupid to say the music or entertainment industry is a monoculture, as it clearly is not.
What about ‘printer paper manufacturers’, is that a monoculture like the music industry ?
Is that because they do not only sell white paper, but yellow, blue, pink ??
So the music industry is a monoculture because it only sells music, so when I go to a music shop I can only as for “Can I have some music please”, and the shop keeper will be able to sell be the music he is selling this week..
That’s bullshit to put in cruely.. and if you do not know that, or cannot understand that, then writing articles for a blog should not be a thing this person should ever do., (whoever he is, as if I care),
and as I said, the human race would not exist without mastering monocultures, for food production, and efficient production of good’s and services.
So is the paint industry a monoculture ? seeing all they sell is paint, sure they sell different colors, and they sell different types, but they sell paint..
The entertainment industry does not only sell paint (songs) they also sell movies, they sell concerts, they sell licenses, they sell promotions, merchandise.
they create video clips, they create music, they crate marketing, promotion, insurance, security, management and many many other things.
You can buy far more from the entertainment industry in terms of range of products, than you can buy paint from the paint industry that is far more a monoculture, than the entertainment industry could possibly be.
why cant you understand that ? (thats right US education)..
Re: Re: Re: Is it your education system that is at fault?
“SO DH, tell us in your words how the music industry is a monoculture?”
I…I mean…really!!?? I WROTE THE DAMN ARTICLE ALREADY! Just scroll up, wierdo….
But again, RECORD LABELS are largely monoculture because most/all of their business, for a long time, focused on selling recorded music, regardless of the form it took (CDs, tapes, 8tracks, MP3s, etc.). They could instead position themselves to assist in the other aspects of artists and make money in other ways by assiting there. THAT would be a new stream of revenue….
“Someone babbled about the Auto industry not only selling things with wheels on it, but insurance, and accessories and finance..NO, they do not do those other things, seperate companies perform those roles.”
Not where I live. Auto manufacturers make/sell accessories for their cars all the time. They offer roadside assistance plans (insurance). They have deals with local banks where they get a cut of financing deals (financing). Maybe Australia is different? Not sure, but that’s the way it works here, and it’s smart….
“What level of education do they presently have in the US of A ?”
B.A. Not sure why that’s that big a deal, but whatever….
“What about ‘printer paper manufacturers’, is that a monoculture like the music industry ?
Is that because they do not only sell white paper, but yellow, blue, pink ??”
Let’s see, brand results in a Google search for “paper manufacturers”: HP, Avery, Epson, Canon, Hammermill. GASP! They all make MANY other things besides printer paper! Everything from the printers themselves, to computers/servers/networking equipment, to office furniture! YAY! Another awesome point by Darryl!
“and as I said, the human race would not exist without mastering monocultures, for food production, and efficient production of good’s and services.”
We’ve employed monocultures at times in our existence. What’s funny, however, is that humankind NEVER would have flourished w/o farming advents like crop rotation, by definition NOT a monoculture. Wrong again!
“So is the paint industry a monoculture ? seeing all they sell is paint, sure they sell different colors, and they sell different types, but they sell paint.”
Ugh, another fail. Behr, for instance, sells paint. And floor coatings. And finishes. And cleaners. And strippers/removers. Same with Benjamin Moore, except add to that services in their retail stores and painting equipment as well. Come on, you’ve got to come a little bit stronger than that if you want to tangle with the comment destroyer….
“You can buy far more from the entertainment industry in terms of range of products”
From the record label (which is what I was discussing)? I don’t think so. I can get two things from BMG: recorded music and licensing. And that’s really it. If they offer anything else, it certainly isn’t with the same ease as the so-called paint industry.
Sir…you’ve just been helmeted….
*Awaits stupid fine from Roger Goodell
Re: How is the entertainment industry a monoculture ? please explain, with examples
Hah! Oh, you crack me up. Can’t even figure out who wrote the article…
Your comments on Techdirt only strengthen the arguments of the original articles.
Keep up the good work.
Of course, we would not be here except for monocultures, and farming.
its been shown quite clearly the human race stands as it is this day, and did not fall into extinction because of monoculture farming practices.
Monoculture farming has been around for far longer than ANY other industry, and has been critical in the production of food for our vast population.
It would not be possible for this many humans to survive on the planet using hunter gatherer or nomadic types of subsistance.
Monocultures are not inherently unstable, they CAN be unstabloe, but generally that is not the case. Monocultures have been successfull for millions of years. and we could not exist without it..
Re: Of course, we would not be here except for monocultures, and farming.
See, you keep doing crazy stuff and it’s bothering me.
You make posts like the one above, then you make this one, with some sort of sense.
Howeever, that time has passed.
Hmmm…
As Gizzi pointed out above many of these recording companies are just one of many under an umbrella.
But their thinking and plan is still the same for all of them. So maybe it is more like a farmer with several different types of crops but only one run down beat up truck and road which is the only way he knows how to get it to the market.
I read “monoculture” as being too many of the same kind of people working for the labels. Imo the beginning of the death spiral started when the labels and studios began relying too heavily on interns … the sort of people who could afford to work a full-time job without pay. Too many of my co-workers lack real-world experience. That also leads to “us vs them” thinking, where consumers are somehow different than the people whose job it is to distribute etc.
there is such a lot of sense and truth spoken in the stories here at TD. what a shame that none of ‘the powers that be’ take any notice. talk about being brain washed (bribed) into ignoring the truth. it’s so blatantly obvious, it almost hurts! nothing is going to change, even if/when the government does, regardless of how much ranting goes on!