You may notice that this weekend I have posted a number of new articles that some might say take a fresh approach to thinking about political music and the digital environment. I hope you enjoy them.
I am, however, preparing for a conference and for the next two weeks will be off the grid unless something major happens on the internet. I apologise for leaving this space for the moment. Please take a look at my other site OpenContentAustralia http://www.ocaustralia.blogspot.com/ at the end of the month to catch up on other developments in this area.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Capitalism and the Alcoholism of the Music Industry.
UPDATED: Imagine, if you will, the digital music environment as a person. The body, by analogy, is the music industry. The brain is controlled by the directors of the four major record labels with a small space for independents. The speech and actions of this person are therefore predominantly made and influenced by those in the majority who themselves are ‘under the influence’ of capitalism. Indeed this greed is an illness which well equates to alcoholism.
Reflect a little on what this person says and does. The expression is predominantly of one type – it talks about love, it talks about pain, personal struggle, and it entertains. It is often repetitive, reminiscing about times past and sometimes abusive. Much like a real person heavily intoxicated by alcohol it cannot rationalise the world’s events, it focuses on things that are subjective and is incapable of holding a sustained conversation about critical issues that face society.
It is unstable, it is obsessed with getting more of the substance which keeps it feeling this way. It is constantly reaching for the bottle – drinking every last drop of musician’s talent and then discarding them for another over and over again. Its behaviour fractures communities and it offers itself as a poor example to the young people around it who, through ongoing exposure, see this as the normal, as the acceptable and as the example by which others should live.
But it cannot see itself in the mirror. It is blind drunk and beyond being able to help itself. It has a poor memory of the events that have taken place in the past and has not learnt from its mistakes.
Capitalism is the music industry’s alcohol. Its dependency drives the need for it to get more all the time – so why does it act in such a destructive way? The answer lies within the structure of the brain.
The directors of the four major record labels owe a fiduciary duty to their corporations. This duty compels them to act in a way that ensures the greatest profits are produced. In the process of securing more and more money they seek to influence others to create freer (liquor licensing) conditions. Public choice theory describes the cycle by which major corporations threaten and pressure governments to enact new laws which work in their favour and this person, this drunk, exerts its irrationality on those that should be more concerned with helping society.
Indeed it stands on the precipice of self destruction. Despite its addiction, despite its nonsensical speech, despite its influence over governments, it is failing at an ever increasing rate to get enough money into its system. Each year the revenue of the major labels drops. Some of this money is channelled into independent artists who are now able to take more control over the body to create new expression. But on the whole, the industry is getting sicker and sicker.
Furthermore, while the industry explores the new veins and arteries of its recently evolved limb - the digital environment - network neutrality and the contamination of this new part of the body by capitalist priorities threatens its adaptation forever.
So what can we do to help stop this illness?
One approach would be to take this person aside and speak to them about their problems. Explain to them that what they are doing and why it is so destructive. This has already been tried. Academics such as Professor Lawrence Lessig, Professor Terry Fisher and Professor Neil Netanel and many others in the mainstream media and on the internet have tried to ‘intervene’ by writing about these issues. There have been open arguments with representatives of the record labels. They are aware of our concerns and yet they still do nothing.
Another approach is to cut of its supply altogether. File sharing networks are, in essence, the means by which others try to ‘steal’ the alcohol away from this person. But the illegality of these actions only enrage it more and help to perpetuate the discord between the industry and the world leading it to demand more protection and support for its habit. Indeed, the music industry needs some money to function otherwise it will suffer from withdrawal symptoms and be incapable of functioning at all.
Another approach is to wait for capitalism to take its course. The Corporations law and the fiduciary responsibilities of the directors should, at some point, create a tipping point – an acquired brain injury. They should arrive at an equilibrium whereby these companies have lost so much money and are so desperate that they eventually help themselves by introducing a collective licensing regime. But I do not trust them to do this in a way that will be inclusive.
What we actually need is for the government to step in.
This body needs a new brain – there needs to be a shift in control of the industry itself to ensure a democratic governance structure is in place with the capacity to think and act rationally. This will enable the industry to be healthy with enough money to support a professional sector of creators that are free to express themselves to the best of their ability. We need the internal controls to be in place to ensure that in the future, adaptation to new technologies is quick and effective.
More Information
Wikipedia, Alcoholism (17 May 2009)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism> at 17 May 2009
Reflect a little on what this person says and does. The expression is predominantly of one type – it talks about love, it talks about pain, personal struggle, and it entertains. It is often repetitive, reminiscing about times past and sometimes abusive. Much like a real person heavily intoxicated by alcohol it cannot rationalise the world’s events, it focuses on things that are subjective and is incapable of holding a sustained conversation about critical issues that face society.
It is unstable, it is obsessed with getting more of the substance which keeps it feeling this way. It is constantly reaching for the bottle – drinking every last drop of musician’s talent and then discarding them for another over and over again. Its behaviour fractures communities and it offers itself as a poor example to the young people around it who, through ongoing exposure, see this as the normal, as the acceptable and as the example by which others should live.
But it cannot see itself in the mirror. It is blind drunk and beyond being able to help itself. It has a poor memory of the events that have taken place in the past and has not learnt from its mistakes.
Capitalism is the music industry’s alcohol. Its dependency drives the need for it to get more all the time – so why does it act in such a destructive way? The answer lies within the structure of the brain.
The directors of the four major record labels owe a fiduciary duty to their corporations. This duty compels them to act in a way that ensures the greatest profits are produced. In the process of securing more and more money they seek to influence others to create freer (liquor licensing) conditions. Public choice theory describes the cycle by which major corporations threaten and pressure governments to enact new laws which work in their favour and this person, this drunk, exerts its irrationality on those that should be more concerned with helping society.
Indeed it stands on the precipice of self destruction. Despite its addiction, despite its nonsensical speech, despite its influence over governments, it is failing at an ever increasing rate to get enough money into its system. Each year the revenue of the major labels drops. Some of this money is channelled into independent artists who are now able to take more control over the body to create new expression. But on the whole, the industry is getting sicker and sicker.
Furthermore, while the industry explores the new veins and arteries of its recently evolved limb - the digital environment - network neutrality and the contamination of this new part of the body by capitalist priorities threatens its adaptation forever.
So what can we do to help stop this illness?
One approach would be to take this person aside and speak to them about their problems. Explain to them that what they are doing and why it is so destructive. This has already been tried. Academics such as Professor Lawrence Lessig, Professor Terry Fisher and Professor Neil Netanel and many others in the mainstream media and on the internet have tried to ‘intervene’ by writing about these issues. There have been open arguments with representatives of the record labels. They are aware of our concerns and yet they still do nothing.
Another approach is to cut of its supply altogether. File sharing networks are, in essence, the means by which others try to ‘steal’ the alcohol away from this person. But the illegality of these actions only enrage it more and help to perpetuate the discord between the industry and the world leading it to demand more protection and support for its habit. Indeed, the music industry needs some money to function otherwise it will suffer from withdrawal symptoms and be incapable of functioning at all.
Another approach is to wait for capitalism to take its course. The Corporations law and the fiduciary responsibilities of the directors should, at some point, create a tipping point – an acquired brain injury. They should arrive at an equilibrium whereby these companies have lost so much money and are so desperate that they eventually help themselves by introducing a collective licensing regime. But I do not trust them to do this in a way that will be inclusive.
What we actually need is for the government to step in.
This body needs a new brain – there needs to be a shift in control of the industry itself to ensure a democratic governance structure is in place with the capacity to think and act rationally. This will enable the industry to be healthy with enough money to support a professional sector of creators that are free to express themselves to the best of their ability. We need the internal controls to be in place to ensure that in the future, adaptation to new technologies is quick and effective.
More Information
Wikipedia, Alcoholism (17 May 2009)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism> at 17 May 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
MashUps and the Reuse of Music
Mashups are a form of culture which take small pieces of pre-existing songs and blend them together to make something new. Perhaps the most well known artists in this field are Girl Talk and DJ Danger Mouse.
This form of culture has developed from rap and hip hop music which has traditionally used repetitive samples as additional parts in new songs. Samples themselves have long been part of our oral tradition. Indeed in everyday language we sample speech from each other through the use of catch phrases. The more recent composition method of mashups, have a tendency to include no new parts to the composition rather bleeding together material from a range of other sources.
The first time I ever experienced a mashup was in an interview with Professor Lawrence Lessig (formerly of Stanford University and now with Harvard University) in the film Good Copy Bad Copy that featured Bush and Blair footage cut to sit with the song Endless Love. This was a film clip about the close relationship between the USA and the UK on foreign policy. But to Lessig the clip also demonstrated the malleability of digital culture and the ability of old material to be used in a way that comments on new situations or events.
But what of music?
There has always been some resuse of music – most typically bands have played songs that others have already composed and released – those that do only this are commonly referred to as cover bands. These bands often offer a new interpretation of the song and sometimes play it in a new style. In other examples of the resuse of music, slightly more adaption takes place – one recent example are the artists Santagold and Diblo who adapted the Clash’s Guns of Brixton and released a version titled ‘The Guns of Brooklyn’. The original song reflected on the socio economic and social conditions of African immigrants in the UK and the intention of the derivative released by Santagold and Diblo was to further comment on the socio economic and social conditions of African Americans.
The cultural benefits of reusing music are profound. Culture allows us to see the world, to express the demands and events that take place in it and allows us to imagine and create a better future. Music that has a pre-existing association with social events and conditions that is then relocated from the past into new circumstances, allows audiences to make an immediate connection between the two spaces in time. The public are able to relive old sentiments, memories are triggered, feelings and emotions of an era past return and the perspective they had at that time can be used to view the contemporary world. The music is re-contextualised.
One example of this is DJ Danger Mouse’s The Grey Album, a remix of Jay-Z’s Black album and The Beatle’s White album which was distributed over file sharing networks. Whilst not sued, the artist, DJ Dangermouse, was threatened and sites hosting the file were subjected to take down notices under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Despite the efforts of the copyright holders, the tracks were quickly spread by internet users and a civil disobedience campaign launched to protest the inability of artists to remix music. The mashup itself was a form of political expression reflecting the need for racial harmony.
The institutional mechanisms of society, particularly law which is supported by capitalism, have not readily adapted to new forms of culture. While most forms of copyright legislation provide compulsory licensing mechanisms for cover songs, there are varying degrees and certainty to which samples can be used without a license under the protection of fair use/fair dealing. Typically licensing agreements are required which are expensive and take long periods of time to secure. In protest of the current state of the law a German Avant Guarde musician, Johannes Kriedler mashed 70,200 songs in 33 seconds, completed the necessary paper work and delivered it to the German Music Rights Organisation, GEMA.
In his text Remix Lessig notes that digital technologies have seen a move away from a Read Only culture to a Read Write culture where anyone is able to use cultural expression and mash it into new forms. Lessig suggests that there is a generational difference in the way in which culture is viewed with the older ‘couch potato’ generation unable to appreciate the need or desire of the younger generations to access and recreate existing works. We must be active in ensuring that the law catches up to technology, embraces new, transformative, cultural forms and does not inhibit their growth.
More Information
MySpace, Girl Talk (2009) <http://www.myspace.com/girltalk>at 17 May 2009
YouTube, Bush Blair Endless Love (12 April 2006) <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nupdcGwIG-g> at 17 May 2009
Imeem, The Grey Video by DJ Danger Mouse vs. Jay-Z vs. The Beatles (2009) <http://www.imeem.com/systim/video/Z0ejz5RQ/dj-danger-mouse-vs-jay-z-vs-the-beatles-the-grey-video-mus/> at 17 May 2009
You Tube, Santogold - Guns Of Brooklyn <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duhGjGuzpSA> at 17 May 2009
Wikipedia, The Grey Album (20 February 2008)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grey_Album> at 22 April 2008
P2p Blog, Musician mashes up 70,200 songs, delivers lists to rights holders by the truck load (21 August 2008) <http://www.p2p-blog.com/item-826.html> at 17 May 2009
Good Copy Bad Copy <http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/> at 22 April 2008
Wikipedia, Good Copy Bad Copy (30 March 2008) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Copy_Bad_Copy> at 22 April 2008
OCA Research Review, Remix (27 October 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/10/remix-lessig.html> at 17 May 2009
OCA Research Review, In the Matter of Mashups (2 September 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/09/in-matter-of-mashups.html> at 17 May 2009
This form of culture has developed from rap and hip hop music which has traditionally used repetitive samples as additional parts in new songs. Samples themselves have long been part of our oral tradition. Indeed in everyday language we sample speech from each other through the use of catch phrases. The more recent composition method of mashups, have a tendency to include no new parts to the composition rather bleeding together material from a range of other sources.
The first time I ever experienced a mashup was in an interview with Professor Lawrence Lessig (formerly of Stanford University and now with Harvard University) in the film Good Copy Bad Copy that featured Bush and Blair footage cut to sit with the song Endless Love. This was a film clip about the close relationship between the USA and the UK on foreign policy. But to Lessig the clip also demonstrated the malleability of digital culture and the ability of old material to be used in a way that comments on new situations or events.
But what of music?
There has always been some resuse of music – most typically bands have played songs that others have already composed and released – those that do only this are commonly referred to as cover bands. These bands often offer a new interpretation of the song and sometimes play it in a new style. In other examples of the resuse of music, slightly more adaption takes place – one recent example are the artists Santagold and Diblo who adapted the Clash’s Guns of Brixton and released a version titled ‘The Guns of Brooklyn’. The original song reflected on the socio economic and social conditions of African immigrants in the UK and the intention of the derivative released by Santagold and Diblo was to further comment on the socio economic and social conditions of African Americans.
The cultural benefits of reusing music are profound. Culture allows us to see the world, to express the demands and events that take place in it and allows us to imagine and create a better future. Music that has a pre-existing association with social events and conditions that is then relocated from the past into new circumstances, allows audiences to make an immediate connection between the two spaces in time. The public are able to relive old sentiments, memories are triggered, feelings and emotions of an era past return and the perspective they had at that time can be used to view the contemporary world. The music is re-contextualised.
One example of this is DJ Danger Mouse’s The Grey Album, a remix of Jay-Z’s Black album and The Beatle’s White album which was distributed over file sharing networks. Whilst not sued, the artist, DJ Dangermouse, was threatened and sites hosting the file were subjected to take down notices under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Despite the efforts of the copyright holders, the tracks were quickly spread by internet users and a civil disobedience campaign launched to protest the inability of artists to remix music. The mashup itself was a form of political expression reflecting the need for racial harmony.
The institutional mechanisms of society, particularly law which is supported by capitalism, have not readily adapted to new forms of culture. While most forms of copyright legislation provide compulsory licensing mechanisms for cover songs, there are varying degrees and certainty to which samples can be used without a license under the protection of fair use/fair dealing. Typically licensing agreements are required which are expensive and take long periods of time to secure. In protest of the current state of the law a German Avant Guarde musician, Johannes Kriedler mashed 70,200 songs in 33 seconds, completed the necessary paper work and delivered it to the German Music Rights Organisation, GEMA.
In his text Remix Lessig notes that digital technologies have seen a move away from a Read Only culture to a Read Write culture where anyone is able to use cultural expression and mash it into new forms. Lessig suggests that there is a generational difference in the way in which culture is viewed with the older ‘couch potato’ generation unable to appreciate the need or desire of the younger generations to access and recreate existing works. We must be active in ensuring that the law catches up to technology, embraces new, transformative, cultural forms and does not inhibit their growth.
More Information
MySpace, Girl Talk (2009) <http://www.myspace.com/girltalk>at 17 May 2009
YouTube, Bush Blair Endless Love (12 April 2006) <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nupdcGwIG-g> at 17 May 2009
Imeem, The Grey Video by DJ Danger Mouse vs. Jay-Z vs. The Beatles (2009) <http://www.imeem.com/systim/video/Z0ejz5RQ/dj-danger-mouse-vs-jay-z-vs-the-beatles-the-grey-video-mus/> at 17 May 2009
You Tube, Santogold - Guns Of Brooklyn <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duhGjGuzpSA> at 17 May 2009
Wikipedia, The Grey Album (20 February 2008)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grey_Album> at 22 April 2008
P2p Blog, Musician mashes up 70,200 songs, delivers lists to rights holders by the truck load (21 August 2008) <http://www.p2p-blog.com/item-826.html> at 17 May 2009
Good Copy Bad Copy <http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/> at 22 April 2008
Wikipedia, Good Copy Bad Copy (30 March 2008) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Copy_Bad_Copy> at 22 April 2008
OCA Research Review, Remix (27 October 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/10/remix-lessig.html> at 17 May 2009
OCA Research Review, In the Matter of Mashups (2 September 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/09/in-matter-of-mashups.html> at 17 May 2009
Spaces and Places.
Last night I had a very enjoyable dinner with friends at the 20,000 Cows Restaurant in Lismore, NSW and thought to write a little about the analogy between this place and the current space for political music.
20,000 Cows is a quaint little restaurant outside of the CBD. It is housed in an old petrol station with an odd, triangular shaped, small building and a small court yard. Inside the walls are decorated with a range of unique and hand made art works, the curtains are all different colours, there are lanterns, candles on the table and a collection of odd pieces of furniture. There is a potbelly stove made out of an old beer keg, panels of melted glass and a book on Ghandi on the wall.
The food which is absolutely beautiful is Middle Eastern and Indian vegan/vegetarian and the philosophy of the proprietor, Murray Vilkelis, is based on animal rights and respect for other living beings. Some people eat around coffee tables while sitting on lounges, others at tables with mismatching chairs.
The atmosphere is fantastic – there are people from all backgrounds including those from non mainstream and mainstream cultures. It serves as a meeting place for many that appreciate the ideological basis of the ‘business’ and it serves as a place where people from outside that culture can be comfortable and become accustom to alternative approaches.
I say ideological basis of the ‘business’ because while there are recommended prices, these are optional –the menu states that these are suggested prices.
It was a great evening and I will be certain to return many more times however it was not without its hiccups. It was very busy with a Gem Festival nearby attracting a large number of people, this led to some cramping with people squashed together in small spaces and the high demand on the staff led to some delays in service and some confusion about meals.
This was really of a secondary concern to my friends and I, and I only raise it because I was thinking at the time what a great analogy this place was for the current space of political music in the digital environment.
Political music is unique and at present it suffers from a small area in which to thrive. The artists congregate in what little architecture is available to them which is beneficial because of its intimacy and concentration, however the spaces have not grown to accommodate new creators, they have not expanded enough to house everyone comfortably and in a way that provides the greatest level of service. The distribution system (serving staff) are limited in effectiveness because of the lack of expansion and money to do more.
The business appears to be worthwhile from an economic perspective however I was not the one to pay the bill so I cannot say from personal experience whether social norms are enough to ensure that the costs are covered. At a guess I would say that most people that go there are ethically motivated enough to pay the recommended price but am sure that on occasion those that can’t don’t, and sometimes those that can, do not either. The generosity of the proprietor is both what attracts people to try new experiences but at the same time does not of itself ensure or guarantee that the business will continue without financial concerns. As I have noted recently, Trent Reznor estimates that only around 18% of consumers paid to access his bands music when a similar business model was used.
The ideological basis of the restaurant is both an attraction to those that appreciate alternative perspectives, catering (pun intended) to their desire for integtrity and respect. For others, perhaps it is something that does the opposite. It is the same for political music - not everyone who is exposed to it goes on to appreciate its true value.
I didn’t get to eat all that I ordered and some friends ate another person’s meal because of the lack of resources (serving staff per customer) – this is a direct parallel to those of us that want more political music but cannot find it.
There were delays in getting our meals (lack of cooks = lack of artists) but the uniqueness of the food was worth waiting for – it takes time to prepare something that is not generic and mass produced.
And there were things that were not welcome, such as the consumption of meat from other sources on the premises and smoking – this relates to the notion that non dedicated spaces for political expression dilute its potency and ability to get its message across.
As I said, it was a wonderful and very enjoyable evening – we all had a great time and please don’t take this as a criticism of the restaurant. This is merely me being observational and using a real space example as an illustration of what is taking place on the internet.
I had been to this restaurant some 10 or more years ago and never saw it in this way. If you ever have the chance, go, and see for yourself how special cultures express themselves and think a little of how much better the world would be if there were more chances for it to do so.
More Information
Wolf & Lamb, Wolf and Lamb: Animal Free Cooking (7th ed, 2002) <http://lis.net.au/marijonas/WOLF01.html#F200> at 17 May 2009
Your Restaurant, 20,000 Cows (2009)
<http://www.yourrestaurants.com.au/guide/20000_cows/> at 17 May 2009
20,000 Cows is a quaint little restaurant outside of the CBD. It is housed in an old petrol station with an odd, triangular shaped, small building and a small court yard. Inside the walls are decorated with a range of unique and hand made art works, the curtains are all different colours, there are lanterns, candles on the table and a collection of odd pieces of furniture. There is a potbelly stove made out of an old beer keg, panels of melted glass and a book on Ghandi on the wall.
The food which is absolutely beautiful is Middle Eastern and Indian vegan/vegetarian and the philosophy of the proprietor, Murray Vilkelis, is based on animal rights and respect for other living beings. Some people eat around coffee tables while sitting on lounges, others at tables with mismatching chairs.
The atmosphere is fantastic – there are people from all backgrounds including those from non mainstream and mainstream cultures. It serves as a meeting place for many that appreciate the ideological basis of the ‘business’ and it serves as a place where people from outside that culture can be comfortable and become accustom to alternative approaches.
I say ideological basis of the ‘business’ because while there are recommended prices, these are optional –the menu states that these are suggested prices.
It was a great evening and I will be certain to return many more times however it was not without its hiccups. It was very busy with a Gem Festival nearby attracting a large number of people, this led to some cramping with people squashed together in small spaces and the high demand on the staff led to some delays in service and some confusion about meals.
This was really of a secondary concern to my friends and I, and I only raise it because I was thinking at the time what a great analogy this place was for the current space of political music in the digital environment.
Political music is unique and at present it suffers from a small area in which to thrive. The artists congregate in what little architecture is available to them which is beneficial because of its intimacy and concentration, however the spaces have not grown to accommodate new creators, they have not expanded enough to house everyone comfortably and in a way that provides the greatest level of service. The distribution system (serving staff) are limited in effectiveness because of the lack of expansion and money to do more.
The business appears to be worthwhile from an economic perspective however I was not the one to pay the bill so I cannot say from personal experience whether social norms are enough to ensure that the costs are covered. At a guess I would say that most people that go there are ethically motivated enough to pay the recommended price but am sure that on occasion those that can’t don’t, and sometimes those that can, do not either. The generosity of the proprietor is both what attracts people to try new experiences but at the same time does not of itself ensure or guarantee that the business will continue without financial concerns. As I have noted recently, Trent Reznor estimates that only around 18% of consumers paid to access his bands music when a similar business model was used.
The ideological basis of the restaurant is both an attraction to those that appreciate alternative perspectives, catering (pun intended) to their desire for integtrity and respect. For others, perhaps it is something that does the opposite. It is the same for political music - not everyone who is exposed to it goes on to appreciate its true value.
I didn’t get to eat all that I ordered and some friends ate another person’s meal because of the lack of resources (serving staff per customer) – this is a direct parallel to those of us that want more political music but cannot find it.
There were delays in getting our meals (lack of cooks = lack of artists) but the uniqueness of the food was worth waiting for – it takes time to prepare something that is not generic and mass produced.
And there were things that were not welcome, such as the consumption of meat from other sources on the premises and smoking – this relates to the notion that non dedicated spaces for political expression dilute its potency and ability to get its message across.
As I said, it was a wonderful and very enjoyable evening – we all had a great time and please don’t take this as a criticism of the restaurant. This is merely me being observational and using a real space example as an illustration of what is taking place on the internet.
I had been to this restaurant some 10 or more years ago and never saw it in this way. If you ever have the chance, go, and see for yourself how special cultures express themselves and think a little of how much better the world would be if there were more chances for it to do so.
More Information
Wolf & Lamb, Wolf and Lamb: Animal Free Cooking (7th ed, 2002) <http://lis.net.au/marijonas/WOLF01.html#F200> at 17 May 2009
Your Restaurant, 20,000 Cows (2009)
<http://www.yourrestaurants.com.au/guide/20000_cows/> at 17 May 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
The Icing
I haven't been able to verify it from another source yet but I was just reading an article on Digital Music News which I found hysterical. Apparently DJ Dangermouse (of The Grey Album fame) and Sparklehorse have released a new album titled 'Dark Night of the Soul'. The trick is that the CD (R) is blank - they are having a dispute with their record label (EMI) and cannot release the music. The music however is available on the net, so all consumers are getting are the liner notes with a 100 page booklet of photos and the instructions to 'Use It As You Will'.
Too funny - when will these labels learn?
More Information
Digital Music News, Danger Mouse + Sparklehorse: The Art of Releasing a Blank CD... (15 May 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051409danger> at 15 May 2009
Wikipedia, The Grey Album (6 May 2009) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grey_Album> at 15 May 2009
Too funny - when will these labels learn?
More Information
Digital Music News, Danger Mouse + Sparklehorse: The Art of Releasing a Blank CD... (15 May 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051409danger> at 15 May 2009
Wikipedia, The Grey Album (6 May 2009) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grey_Album> at 15 May 2009
The Importance of Political Music.
As I start to condense some 8,500 words into four pages for my IASPM presentation I have been thinking a lot about the relative importance of political music. As you should know by now, my doctorate concerns the conditions that will ensure it’s production and reception in the digital environment and maximising the opportunities for it to act as an agent of social change. However in recent times it has become apparent that while this is a noble and valuable pursuit, it takes place in a world that in fact needs many forms of culture including those that I have tended to refer to as ‘superficial’ or ‘distracting’.
Someone asked me recently what music has had the most impact on my life and in answering, I, without hesitating, said that the most obvious music has been that with a strong message about personal strength and courage. Even last week, in the process of confronting some personal challenges, I walked around with a Britney Spears song in my head with the lyrics ‘I’m stronger than yesterday’. Yet in my intellectual pursuits I have typically distanced myself from this form of culture. Indeed there are many moments in my life when I have turned to non political music for comfort, support and fun. Just today I tried to purchase the new Hilltop Hoods CD. It has not been released yet, but the intention was to use it as a new form of escapism – to listen to something that I could enjoy but not on a purely intellectual level. [I will not download it but am cursing the fact that I can hear it on the radio but not purchase it for another month! Damn those release dates.]
As a politically aware person it can be hard for me to actually indentify the impact this form of culture has had on me – since becoming heavily immersed in the study of these types of songs I have made some changes to my personal behaviour including taking greater responsibility for the environment (buying carbon credits when I could, being more diligent about recycling, walking rather than driving when I can), being more aware of and more compassionate for the disadvantaged and marginalised and more in tune with the political events that are taking place in the world. But when the impact is micro not macro, it can be more subtle and difficult to see. Aside from the internet censorship campaign in Australia I cannot claim to have become more overtly involved in politics. Nonetheless the changes are there and the music has certainly been part of making that happen.
But political music is just one form of culture that has produced changes in my personal behaviour and approach to life. When I want to dance (much to the world’s regret) I listen to dance music, techno and hip hop. When I am feeling down I listen to music that has an uplifting message – one of my favourites is Bob Marley’s ‘Three Little Birds’. When I want to relax I listen to classical music or instrumental works (I would not be here today without Deep Forest). And so it becomes clear to me that in my enthusiasm for advocating the conditions for protest music that perhaps I am guilty of being dogmatic. There is a time and a place for all forms of culture – just so long as I am not the only one that remembers that.
Some are aware of my lack of appreciation for organised sports, indeed I commonly refer to football as a form of distraction. Having grown up in a city that stops for sport I became very frustrated by what I considered to be the distraction of the masses. Why, I would ask, do people devote so much time and energy to watching a group of men run around, often in the rain, after a piece of stuffed leather when so much of the world is in a state of crisis? And as a parallel I become frustrated with people that listen only to superficial and distracting music (not that those terms are appropriate). Indeed it is not the football game or the culture of football that I disagree with; it is not the love songs and the dance songs themselves that I don’t appreciate; it is a world which does not allow space for more that bothers me.
One perspective is that people devote themselves to football or listen to music that ‘entertains’ rather than ‘educates’ because they need to. The world is in a state of crisis, but so are many people in their day to day lives. Even if they are not in crisis as such, then they are under pressure from other places whether that be in the workplace, economic, from society itself, from their friends or family or a number of other sources, and they need an outlet. They need to express their feelings and be part of something that does not place demands on them and provides them with a sense of community and security. Political music can do this to a certain extent but it has another motive as well. Popular music which speaks of emotions and which creates a sense of fun and enjoyment does not place people under these demands; it simply allows people to feel.
I was asked recently what I would do to address some of the issues with disadvantaged youth and my answer was immerse them in music and I was clear that it did not matter what type of music or what involvement they had – whether that be to learn an instrument, play in a band, be a radio presenter, go to concerts or just download and share with their friends as much music as they could. The reason for this is two fold. Firstly much of the problems associated with kids stems from their use of time. If they are busy they are far less likely to get into trouble. The second part to this is that music is an outlet – it is a form of expression that is universal (second perhaps only to the smile) it is something that they can share with others and have fun with in the process. It can help them to overcome their personal difficulties, help them to rationalise the world and help them to stay on track.
And so I need to change my approach – political music is important but it is not more important, it is just as important. Without the emotional, without the physical, we are not capable of the intellectual.
One of the sentences in my IASPM paper that I may need to reword to be more diplomatic suggests that emotive and dance music will be produced under almost any conditions because the social function is so well engrained and so well established. Perhaps this is true but only to a certain degree. Just like political music, there remains conditions under which better emotive and dance music will be created. A professional sector of creators needs to be sustained not just to challenge the status quo on a macro level but to ensure that individuals on a micro level have the peace of mind and strength to get over their personal challenges, to enjoy life and can be in a position to contribute to the wider social issues of our time.
I accept that we cannot have one unless we have the other. They are interconnected and not separate. What happens to one effects/affects the other.
Forgive me for just focussing on the political. From now on I will do so in a less dismissive way.
In the digital environment, just as in real space, we suffer from noise. Life is a constant process of clustering and filtering. Trying to group things together and sort them from others. Unlike popular music which already has many architectures and spaces in which this can occur, much more needs to be done to ensure that political music too has a space. It has not gone unnoticed to me that my local club has started to play a lot more political music. As someone who has already been exposed to this, consumes it and uses it, the reception is welcome. But it is partly ineffective for others. While they might hear it and sometimes even recognise it, they cannot connect with it on a level that converts that exposure all the way through to use. There needs to be a forum. There needs to be space and it needs to be appropriate to be effective.
In the digital environment we have the space for the popular, now it is time to create the space for the political.
__________________
I have three phrases I use to describe my learning process. There are the ‘book ends’ where I find the start and the end that hold the middle together. There is the perfect circle, where I can trace something to find its holistic presence. This is what I would call a ‘corner’ because it changes my direction. I have turned it. Thank you.
Someone asked me recently what music has had the most impact on my life and in answering, I, without hesitating, said that the most obvious music has been that with a strong message about personal strength and courage. Even last week, in the process of confronting some personal challenges, I walked around with a Britney Spears song in my head with the lyrics ‘I’m stronger than yesterday’. Yet in my intellectual pursuits I have typically distanced myself from this form of culture. Indeed there are many moments in my life when I have turned to non political music for comfort, support and fun. Just today I tried to purchase the new Hilltop Hoods CD. It has not been released yet, but the intention was to use it as a new form of escapism – to listen to something that I could enjoy but not on a purely intellectual level. [I will not download it but am cursing the fact that I can hear it on the radio but not purchase it for another month! Damn those release dates.]
As a politically aware person it can be hard for me to actually indentify the impact this form of culture has had on me – since becoming heavily immersed in the study of these types of songs I have made some changes to my personal behaviour including taking greater responsibility for the environment (buying carbon credits when I could, being more diligent about recycling, walking rather than driving when I can), being more aware of and more compassionate for the disadvantaged and marginalised and more in tune with the political events that are taking place in the world. But when the impact is micro not macro, it can be more subtle and difficult to see. Aside from the internet censorship campaign in Australia I cannot claim to have become more overtly involved in politics. Nonetheless the changes are there and the music has certainly been part of making that happen.
But political music is just one form of culture that has produced changes in my personal behaviour and approach to life. When I want to dance (much to the world’s regret) I listen to dance music, techno and hip hop. When I am feeling down I listen to music that has an uplifting message – one of my favourites is Bob Marley’s ‘Three Little Birds’. When I want to relax I listen to classical music or instrumental works (I would not be here today without Deep Forest). And so it becomes clear to me that in my enthusiasm for advocating the conditions for protest music that perhaps I am guilty of being dogmatic. There is a time and a place for all forms of culture – just so long as I am not the only one that remembers that.
Some are aware of my lack of appreciation for organised sports, indeed I commonly refer to football as a form of distraction. Having grown up in a city that stops for sport I became very frustrated by what I considered to be the distraction of the masses. Why, I would ask, do people devote so much time and energy to watching a group of men run around, often in the rain, after a piece of stuffed leather when so much of the world is in a state of crisis? And as a parallel I become frustrated with people that listen only to superficial and distracting music (not that those terms are appropriate). Indeed it is not the football game or the culture of football that I disagree with; it is not the love songs and the dance songs themselves that I don’t appreciate; it is a world which does not allow space for more that bothers me.
One perspective is that people devote themselves to football or listen to music that ‘entertains’ rather than ‘educates’ because they need to. The world is in a state of crisis, but so are many people in their day to day lives. Even if they are not in crisis as such, then they are under pressure from other places whether that be in the workplace, economic, from society itself, from their friends or family or a number of other sources, and they need an outlet. They need to express their feelings and be part of something that does not place demands on them and provides them with a sense of community and security. Political music can do this to a certain extent but it has another motive as well. Popular music which speaks of emotions and which creates a sense of fun and enjoyment does not place people under these demands; it simply allows people to feel.
I was asked recently what I would do to address some of the issues with disadvantaged youth and my answer was immerse them in music and I was clear that it did not matter what type of music or what involvement they had – whether that be to learn an instrument, play in a band, be a radio presenter, go to concerts or just download and share with their friends as much music as they could. The reason for this is two fold. Firstly much of the problems associated with kids stems from their use of time. If they are busy they are far less likely to get into trouble. The second part to this is that music is an outlet – it is a form of expression that is universal (second perhaps only to the smile) it is something that they can share with others and have fun with in the process. It can help them to overcome their personal difficulties, help them to rationalise the world and help them to stay on track.
And so I need to change my approach – political music is important but it is not more important, it is just as important. Without the emotional, without the physical, we are not capable of the intellectual.
One of the sentences in my IASPM paper that I may need to reword to be more diplomatic suggests that emotive and dance music will be produced under almost any conditions because the social function is so well engrained and so well established. Perhaps this is true but only to a certain degree. Just like political music, there remains conditions under which better emotive and dance music will be created. A professional sector of creators needs to be sustained not just to challenge the status quo on a macro level but to ensure that individuals on a micro level have the peace of mind and strength to get over their personal challenges, to enjoy life and can be in a position to contribute to the wider social issues of our time.
I accept that we cannot have one unless we have the other. They are interconnected and not separate. What happens to one effects/affects the other.
Forgive me for just focussing on the political. From now on I will do so in a less dismissive way.
In the digital environment, just as in real space, we suffer from noise. Life is a constant process of clustering and filtering. Trying to group things together and sort them from others. Unlike popular music which already has many architectures and spaces in which this can occur, much more needs to be done to ensure that political music too has a space. It has not gone unnoticed to me that my local club has started to play a lot more political music. As someone who has already been exposed to this, consumes it and uses it, the reception is welcome. But it is partly ineffective for others. While they might hear it and sometimes even recognise it, they cannot connect with it on a level that converts that exposure all the way through to use. There needs to be a forum. There needs to be space and it needs to be appropriate to be effective.
In the digital environment we have the space for the popular, now it is time to create the space for the political.
__________________
I have three phrases I use to describe my learning process. There are the ‘book ends’ where I find the start and the end that hold the middle together. There is the perfect circle, where I can trace something to find its holistic presence. This is what I would call a ‘corner’ because it changes my direction. I have turned it. Thank you.
Friday, May 8, 2009
New Business Models
Here are a couple of great clips that complement each other.
Digg Dialogg Series: Trent Reznor
In the first, Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails discusses their adoption of alternative compensation schemes for the monetizing of their music. He states that as music is already free their approach is to try to harness goodwill by making money off associated products such as concert tickets and tee shirts. He notes that the band has not done a lot to make money from online advertising, largely because they have not needed to and because he considers consumers to already have sufficient advertising exposure from other sources.
In the process of their recent experiement with new business structures, he states only 18% of consumers appeared to consider the direct payment of money to the artist (as opposed to a record label) as a factor compelling them to pay. He expresses some disappointment, suggesting that he had expected this to be higher. In the end however they did sell more records and make more money than they would have had they used the traditional model that major record labels use. He concludes that while there are a lot of opportunities to make money, that it should not always be about this.
In discussing emerging artists he suggests that new, unique artists that have a desire to 'change the world' should avoid major record labels. Reznor notes that major record labels are primarly interested in making money and that those outside the mainstream will be forced to constantly question their vision and make compromises. In the alternative he recommeds the use of websites, social networking sites such as MySpace, having great video clips and using stunts to attract attention. He notes that the landscape for music has changed dramatically since the late 1990's - instead of concentrated media sources such as radio and MTV, consumers now have access to music through an enourmous range of sources - the trick for new musicians is to overcome the cluter of the internet and one approach is to think strategically about how people find out about music now.
See the clip here on ZeroPaid.
Mike Masniick, TechDirt
In the second clip. Mike Masnick of TechDirt presents a speech on 'How Trent Reznor and NIN Represent the Future of the Music Industry'. Here Mike discusses in detail the gimmicks and strategies NIN have used to attract the attention and sustain the interest of fans.
Whilst signed to a major label in 2007 the band launched the album Year Zero with an internet scavenger hunt. They also left flash drives with music loaded on them in the bathrooms of concerts for fans to find - this music was uploaded to the internet for others to share however the RIAA issued take down notices to sites that hosted it. They also sold the album on a CD that changed colour when it got warm in the CD player.
Since that time the band has taken control over its own business activites and no longer being singed to a major label has meant far greater freedom in using alternative strategies to make money and distribute their music.
When releasing Ghosts I-IV they added value to the music by licensing 36 tracks under a creative commons license, by giving fans the first 9 tracks for free from their website and asking for a $5 donation for the remaining songs and other similar strategies.
This presentation is well worth watching (it is a little Lessig like in style).
Leadership Music Digital Summit 2009 - Mike Masnick keynote address, 3/25/09 from Leadership Music Digital Summit on Vimeo.
Digg Dialogg Series: Trent Reznor
In the first, Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails discusses their adoption of alternative compensation schemes for the monetizing of their music. He states that as music is already free their approach is to try to harness goodwill by making money off associated products such as concert tickets and tee shirts. He notes that the band has not done a lot to make money from online advertising, largely because they have not needed to and because he considers consumers to already have sufficient advertising exposure from other sources.
In the process of their recent experiement with new business structures, he states only 18% of consumers appeared to consider the direct payment of money to the artist (as opposed to a record label) as a factor compelling them to pay. He expresses some disappointment, suggesting that he had expected this to be higher. In the end however they did sell more records and make more money than they would have had they used the traditional model that major record labels use. He concludes that while there are a lot of opportunities to make money, that it should not always be about this.
In discussing emerging artists he suggests that new, unique artists that have a desire to 'change the world' should avoid major record labels. Reznor notes that major record labels are primarly interested in making money and that those outside the mainstream will be forced to constantly question their vision and make compromises. In the alternative he recommeds the use of websites, social networking sites such as MySpace, having great video clips and using stunts to attract attention. He notes that the landscape for music has changed dramatically since the late 1990's - instead of concentrated media sources such as radio and MTV, consumers now have access to music through an enourmous range of sources - the trick for new musicians is to overcome the cluter of the internet and one approach is to think strategically about how people find out about music now.
See the clip here on ZeroPaid.
Mike Masniick, TechDirt
In the second clip. Mike Masnick of TechDirt presents a speech on 'How Trent Reznor and NIN Represent the Future of the Music Industry'. Here Mike discusses in detail the gimmicks and strategies NIN have used to attract the attention and sustain the interest of fans.
Whilst signed to a major label in 2007 the band launched the album Year Zero with an internet scavenger hunt. They also left flash drives with music loaded on them in the bathrooms of concerts for fans to find - this music was uploaded to the internet for others to share however the RIAA issued take down notices to sites that hosted it. They also sold the album on a CD that changed colour when it got warm in the CD player.
Since that time the band has taken control over its own business activites and no longer being singed to a major label has meant far greater freedom in using alternative strategies to make money and distribute their music.
When releasing Ghosts I-IV they added value to the music by licensing 36 tracks under a creative commons license, by giving fans the first 9 tracks for free from their website and asking for a $5 donation for the remaining songs and other similar strategies.
This presentation is well worth watching (it is a little Lessig like in style).
Leadership Music Digital Summit 2009 - Mike Masnick keynote address, 3/25/09 from Leadership Music Digital Summit on Vimeo.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
National Human Rights Consultation
The Australian Government is in the process of undertaking a consultation process on the protection of human rights in this country and the need to introduce a Bill of Rights. I urge all Australians to take the time to make a submission on the areas they think need greater protection - for me in particular this includes freedom of expression. Community round-table discussions are being held around the country and submissions can be made until 15 June 2009 - read more here.Here is the submission I made today:
National Human Rights Consultation Secretariat
Attorney-General's Department
Central Office
Robert Garran OfficesNational Circuit
BARTON ACT 2600
2 May 2009
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: National Human Rights Consultation – Freedom of Expression
My name is Sally Hawkins, I am a PhD student and casual academic with the School of Law and Justice at Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW. I write further to the terms of reference for the National Human Rights Consultation with respect to Freedom of Expression.
As you are aware, at present Australia has an implied, limited right to freedom of expression by virtue of the High Court decisions in R v Levy [1997] HCA 31; Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Willis [1992] HCA 48; Australian Capital Television Ltd and Ord v The Commonwealth [1992] HCA 45.
Implied Nature
Indeed with respect to the implied nature of freedom of expression in this country, in ACT v The Commonwealth Dawson J at 16 stated:
...[T]he Australian Constitution, unlike the Constitution of the United States, does little to confer upon individuals by way of positive rights those basic freedoms which exist in a free and democratic society. They exist, not because they are provided for, but in the absence of any curtailment of them. Freedom of speech, for example, which is guaranteed in the United States by the First Amendment to the Constitution, is a concept which finds no expression in our Constitution, not withstanding that it is as much the foundation of a free society here as it is there. The right of freedom of speech exists here because there is nothing to prevent its exercise and because governments recognize that if they attempt to limit it, save in accepted areas such as defamation or sedition, they must do so at their peril. Not only that, but courts recognize the importance of the basic immunities and require the clearest expression of intention before construing legislation in such a way as to interfere with them... The fact, however, remains that in this country the guarantee of fundamental freedoms does not lie in any constitutional mandate but in the capacity of a democratic society to preserve for itself its own shared values.
I submit that the implied nature of freedom of expression is insufficient. An express or positive right is fundamental to having certainty with respect to the law and to upholding human rights. It was the perspective of our forefathers that the system of representative government as established at the Federal level through the House of Representatives and the Senate would be adequate to protect the basic rights of citizens and to ensure accountability of the legislature. Since this time however there has been a dramatic increase in the complexity of Australian society, the emergence of a number of minorities and the recognition that the representative system of government largely works in favour of the majority and more commonly in the favour of those with large financial resources including corporations. It is my position that Australia should have an express right to freedom of expression contained in a Bill of Rights.
Scope
The limited scope of the current law with respect to freedom of expression, in contrast to other countries that have a positive right to such expression, is also problematic. At present the Australian Constitution only affords protection to speech and acts undertaken which have a connection to the election and operation of the government.
To date the only case in Australia to expand the implied right to freedom of speech to acts other than speech is R v Levy [1997] HCA 31 which concerned the actions of a protestor in relation to duck shooting. While this case has developed the law in this regard, it also serves as an example of the limited opportunities the High Court has had to consider the application of the implied right and the difficulties everyday citizens have with accessing the courts to ensure that the law is applied and developed to new circumstances.
Other countries such as the United States do not have the same limitations with respect to the scope of the Constitutional protections for freedom of expression. A broad right to freedom of expression is necessary, particularly as this country and the majority of the world move into the communication age where much of the speech that occurs is separate from the election and operation of the government.
One recent example of this is the intention of the Australian Government to enact compulsory censorship of the internet through filtering at an Internet Service Provider level. While all Australians concur that prohibition of child pornography is warranted, there remains ongoing concern about the extent to which this filtering may develop both now and into the future. Communication such as that relating to abortion, homosexuality or other more topical issues is a fundamental part of the nature of free society and yet Australia enters the information age without any Constitutional protection to ensure that this information and communication remains available. Simply put, it is not the place of the government to regulate or restrict communication on the internet particularly given that voluntary measures which can be employed in the home at the request of the account holder are available. This is but one example of the need for a Bill of Rights in Australia and the need to expressly protect a broad right to freedom of expression.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my submission. I urge both the committee and the Federal Government to show strong leadership, diligence and commitment to the preservation of our fundamental rights.
Yours sincerely
Sally J Hawkins
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
