Music Streaming: Proof that no one wants Equality of Outcome

[s0me0nesmind1]

No matter how much lefties keep groaning and acting as if it we should have academic, job, and wealth-based equalities of outcome - for some reason they gleefully don't oblige to do that when it comes to them having a choice in life.

Bill Maher did an excellent piece on this - from a Rolling Stone article where it goes into an argument only a complete idiot would accept as it explains "In a perfect world the bottom 1% would get 1% of the activity" lol.



As Maher says

When you wine that streaming hasn't just upheld the gap between music haves and have notes and has widened it you're making my case for me. Because streaming allows the public to sample everyone. There are no more gate-keepers. You can't complain that no heard your song because no label would sign you. We tore that wall down and the result is the same. Some music are have-nots because yes they have a voice but we have ears

He goes on to outline why were infinitely screwed as our generation continues to have ridiculously hilarious beliefs as they have dreams of just simply making it big as a "online celebrity". I guess the porn industry can always use some new actresses....

 

[IronWing]

Streaming hurts all but the biggest names. As long as bandcamp exists, there is no rational basis for placing your music on a streaming service unless you already have marketing clout behind you. The payment model for streaming sucks. It's a zero sum game where every time someone listens a song by another musician, you lose money for plays of your songs.

 

[Sunburn74]

No matter how much lefties keep groaning and acting as if it we should have academic, job, and wealth-based equalities of outcome - for some reason they gleefully don't oblige to do that when it comes to them having a choice in life.

Bill Maher did an excellent piece on this - from a Rolling Stone article where it goes into an argument only a complete idiot would accept as it explains "In a perfect world the bottom 1% would get 1% of the activity" lol.



As Maher says




He goes on to outline why were infinitely screwed as our generation continues to have ridiculously hilarious beliefs as they have dreams of just simply making it big as a "online celebrity". I guess the porn industry can always use some new actresses....

I'm not really sure what you're arguing.

I don't think there is anything wrong with people making lots of money. However it doesn't make sense for a few people in a society to make all the money at the expense of the rest of society particularly if part of the things they use to make all that money are things society in general is funding.

 

[ivwshane]

Excellent straw man by the forums dumbest poster and a missed point by maher, who has increasingly been making more and more ignorant points.

First off, no Democrat in any sort of position of power or influence is calling for an equality of outcome. That's a bull shit talking point for people who can't argue/discuss the merits of the equality of opportunity argument. So it's not surprising the dumbest mother fucker on the forum repeats it.


As for maher, the point he missed was not that streaming only plays the good stuff, its that streaming, just like all the other music access entities before it, is still doing the same thing, familiarity is what gets played/streamed. Instead of streaming services offering up new and fresh music they offer up the songs people have heard before and already like.

If you stream your music, ask yourself when was the last time you heard something new from someone you've never heard of. It doesn't matter whether it was good or not, the fact that you rarely hear really new music music means you aren't even given the opportunity to like it or dislike it.

How do we know this is the case? Just look at physical sales and how sales are distributed, then compare it with something like radio where the listener has even less input than they get with streaming services.

The issue with streaming services isn't that crap artists aren't getting exposure, its that no one except established artists are getting exposure and it has nothing to do with the quality of music.

What streaming music promised was the ability to hear all sorts of music from all over the place and streaming services have failed to deliver that.

Bill and his hypocritical jab at younger generations (because he thinks old age jokes are wrong but making fun of younger people is ok) once again missed the point.

 

[nakedfrog]

If you stream your music, ask yourself when was the last time you heard something new from someone you've never heard of. It doesn't matter whether it was good or not, the fact that you rarely hear really new music music means you aren't even given the opportunity to like it or dislike it.

While I don't use any music streaming services anymore, but I did use Pandora a little bit between 2011-2014 and it did turn me onto a couple bands I hadn't heard of. No idea if that's still the case.

 

[MrSquished]

While I don't use any music streaming services anymore, but I did use Pandora a little bit between 2011-2014 and it did turn me onto a couple bands I hadn't heard of. No idea if that's still the case.

I've used tidal for the last few years and have discovered plenty of new music using the track radio and recommended playlist features.

That being said, to equate streaming music platform outcomes as a parallel to trying to have more equality in the world in general is wackadoo logic for stupid people.

 

[VW MAN]

No matter how much lefties keep groaning and acting as if it we should have academic, job, and wealth-based equalities of outcome - for some reason they gleefully don't oblige to do that when it comes to them having a choice in life.

You are foaming at the mouth again moron!

 

[cytg111]

Who here wants to champion equality of outcome?

Ding ding ding.... Anyone?

Oh. Someone. Screaming at his own reflection again.

Back on the meds dude.

 

[Amused]

"Equality of outcome" is the strawman argument of the small minded who are programmed to use it when actually arguing against equality of opportunity and equality under the law... using the fictitious "equality of outcome" literally NO ONE argues for.

 

[dainthomas]

Excellent straw man by the forums dumbest poster and a missed point by maher, who has increasingly been making more and more ignorant points.

First off, no Democrat in any sort of position of power or influence is calling for an equality of outcome. That's a bull shit talking point for people who can't argue/discuss the merits of the equality of opportunity argument. So it's not surprising the dumbest mother fucker on the forum repeats it.


As for maher, the point he missed was not that streaming only plays the good stuff, its that streaming, just like all the other music access entities before it, is still doing the same thing, familiarity is what gets played/streamed. Instead of streaming services offering up new and fresh music they offer up the songs people have heard before and already like.

If you stream your music, ask yourself when was the last time you heard something new from someone you've never heard of. It doesn't matter whether it was good or not, the fact that you rarely hear really new music music means you aren't even given the opportunity to like it or dislike it.

How do we know this is the case? Just look at physical sales and how sales are distributed, then compare it with something like radio where the listener has even less input than they get with streaming services.

The issue with streaming services isn't that crap artists aren't getting exposure, its that no one except established artists are getting exposure and it has nothing to do with the quality of music.

What streaming music promised was the ability to hear all sorts of music from all over the place and streaming services have failed to deliver that.

Bill and his hypocritical jab at younger generations (because he thinks old age jokes are wrong but making fun of younger people is ok) once again missed the point.

I listen to Pandora, and the main reason is that they have the best algorithm for playing songs it thinks you'll like. In my case at least, it's often songs I haven't heard before. Even Sirius (which now owns Pandora), lets you fine tune most of it's stations to play deeper cuts if you want.

But definitely agree that the payment model for streaming is total horseshit, and you have to reach well into the hundreds of thousands of streams at a minimum to make anything approaching a decent living.

And Maher has completely regressed into tired Boomer humor territory. "Kids these days, amirite?"

 

[ivwshane]

I listen to Pandora, and the main reason is that they have the best algorithm for playing songs it thinks you'll like. In my case at least, it's often songs I haven't heard before. Even Sirius (which now owns Pandora), lets you fine tune most of it's stations to play deeper cuts if you want.

But definitely agree that the payment model for streaming is total horseshit, and you have to reach well into the hundreds of thousands of streams at a minimum to make anything approaching a decent living.

And Maher has completely regressed into tired Boomer humor territory. "Kids these days, amirite?"

I use both pandora and Spotify, when they give me new music, it is new to me but it’s not new artist new or from artists I’ve never heard before.

I like bill Maher, I watch his show as well but you are right, he’s becoming your typical boomer. His entitlement, talking down to younger generations, and especially his outrage of whatever he’s been triggered by on social media is starting to get old. It’s like we are watching a person slowly turn into your typical Fox News viewer right before our eyes. He’s becoming less self aware as well. I noticed a change in him after he donated a million dollars to Obama’s re-election. It’s been gradual for sure.

It’ll be a shame if he continues down this path as he’s always been a good truth teller.

 

[Jaskalas]

@s0me0nesmind1 , can you demonstrate what "equality of outcome" is?
What exact policy are you railing against that you think people support?
It would help to have a target to respond to, rather than some nebulous !@#$ pile.

 

[Thump553]

I may be a bit slow on the uptake, but could OP please explain specifically why this "problem" is caused by so-called lefties.

Also, I think whoever transcribed that Maher quote does not have English as their primary language and/or never heard of the concept of proof-reading. "Wine" "have and have notes"?

 

[GoodRevrnd]

Streaming model is broken. Part of the issue is if in one month I play Taylor Swift 8 times and Ol Muggy's Dirt Time Band twice, TS gets 80% of the revenue. If I bought albums they both get $10. Then it's worse because it's effectively total revenue / total streams rather than apportioning individual user revenue to their plays. This is all over simplified but the point stands.

 

[IronWing]

Streaming model is broken. Part of the issue is if in one month I play Taylor Swift 8 times and Ol Muggy's Dirt Time Band twice, TS gets 80% of the revenue. If I bought albums they both get $10. Then it's worse because it's effectively total revenue / total streams rather than apportioning individual user revenue to their plays. This is all over simplified but the point stands.

Yep, the more plays a musician I don't care for gets, the less money a musician I like would get. One could release a new, really good album but get paid diddle squat because it's two weeks to Christmas and lots of folks are streaming their favorite seasonal moldly oldies. Buying the music from your favorite artists is a better deal for the artists.

 

[pmv]

Is it Bill Maher who can't spell "whine"? Seems to be the OP who can't sell "we're".

Aside from the bad spelling, I have no idea what point the OP thinks they are making. Said before that it's arrogant and rude to expect people to sit down and watch a youtube video promoting some political agenda. How about the OP explaining, in their own words, what they think the relationship is between streaming and equality-of-outcome?

The argument for equality-of-outcome I would say is largely that you can't get equality-of-opportunity without at least trying for equality-of-outcome. Not least because one generation's outcome is the next's opportunity.

 

[pmv]

Streaming model is broken. Part of the issue is if in one month I play Taylor Swift 8 times and Ol Muggy's Dirt Time Band twice, TS gets 80% of the revenue. If I bought albums they both get $10. Then it's worse because it's effectively total revenue / total streams rather than apportioning individual user revenue to their plays. This is all over simplified but the point stands.

I don't care for streaming because I'm a bit of a hoarder and feel I want to 'own' things. No more ideological reason than that. Though I could try and claim a practical reason, like 'what if I'm outside the reach of phone services' or 'a phone eats battery faster than my ipod'. But really it's just my psychological quirk. Put another way, streaming feels like a step towards becoming a Borg - permanently hooked into a collective network, where you can't function without your connection. And for that matter, a weirdly capitalist/corporate type of collective being at that - where the Borg overlord is a corporation rather than a socialist collective. It's corporate-communism!

But you have a point, from the artist's point-of-view - it doesn't measure how much utility I get from listening to a particular song, only how many times I do it.

 

[mikeymikec]

Streaming model is broken. Part of the issue is if in one month I play Taylor Swift 8 times and Ol Muggy's Dirt Time Band twice, TS gets 80% of the revenue. If I bought albums they both get $10.

No they don't. You've forgotten about their pimps, which are the reason why very little has changed aside from the delivery mechanism.

 

[TheVrolok]

OP arguing with himself in the mirror again? Seems so.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Wut?

 

[HomerJS]

Last time I watched a baseball or basketball game nobody was rooting for a tie.

The premise for this entire thread is bullshit.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Last time I watched a baseball or basketball game nobody was rooting for a tie.

The premise for this entire thread is bullshit.

Ugh like they can have in the worst sport ever....soccer.

 

[K1052]

And Maher has completely regressed into tired Boomer humor territory. "Kids these days, amirite?"

He was there at least 10 years ago if not more. Welcome to our hell, Zoomers.

As a Millennial rapidly approaching 40 my tolerance for sneering Boomers of any stripe is deeply in negative territory.

 

[1prophet]

@s0me0nesmind1 , can you demonstrate what "equality of outcome" is?
What exact policy are you railing against that you think people support?
It would help to have a target to respond to, rather than some nebulous !@#$ pile.

One example

Mayor de Blasio is fighting to reduce Asian representation in New York City’s elite schools.

Diversity Over Quality

At a state senate forum earlier this month on Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plan to end the admissions test for New York City’s top high schools, an African-American woman went on a harangue about how Asian-Americans come from “a culture that has no problem with cheating.” Waving a sheaf of...

www.city-journal.org

A black person can publically call Asians cheaters,

At a state senate forum earlier this month on Mayor Bill de Blasio’s plan to end the admissions test for New York City’s top high schools, an African-American woman went on a harangue about how Asian-Americans come from “a culture that has no problem with cheating.” Waving a sheaf of “documentation,” McCarthy-style, she railed against “some of the newer immigrants who have come here . . . with that cultural milieu of cheating.” She was not interrupted or challenged by any of the legislators.

but if a little girl who works hard and calls those that don't lazy she is automatically labeled a racist.

But when a 12-year-old, Asian-American middle school girl spoke in favor of retaining the test—asking “If I work hard, shouldn’t I have a higher advantage than those who . . . are just being lazy”—the senators were alert to potentially racially insensitive language. “Be very careful how you prepare them for this argument,” Senator Velmanette Montgomery of Brooklyn admonished Asian parents in the audience after the girl testified—taking the word “lazy” as a reference to blacks, though the girl had said nothing about race. “It is your responsibility and . . . obligation that . . . those children do not internalize those racist attitudes.”

 

[Greenman]

Streaming model is broken. Part of the issue is if in one month I play Taylor Swift 8 times and Ol Muggy's Dirt Time Band twice, TS gets 80% of the revenue. If I bought albums they both get $10. Then it's worse because it's effectively total revenue / total streams rather than apportioning individual user revenue to their plays. This is all over simplified but the point stands.

The bold part makes perfect sense to me. TS had eight sales, gets paid 8 times. OMDTB had two sales gets paid twice. How is this not a completely fair and proper system?