This is the type of topic that only draws attantion when it affects someone directly.

I am surprised that no-one has started a discussion on the latest NPGMC commentary. So here goes.

http://www.npgmusicclub.c...ieves.html

As I read this it was very easy for me to think of this article as reflecting Prince's own views (I don't know how much input he has into these commentaries). It was also very easy to pick out points that seemingly contradict some of Prince's past actions and comments, especially as regards to P2P filesharing etc. I'd like to think that Prince is similar to most of us, in that we realise things are not always black and white. We can read new articles, watch the news, surf the web, listen to the state of "chart music", open our minds to new technologies and ideas, and then digest all this information and perhaps even change our minds and viewpoint to see the other side. Personally speaking I'll give Prince the benefit of the doubt and let him find his own way. I am not going to attack him for this latest commentary. It has been put up for debate so let's do that.

The passages that interested me were as follows.

So now we have a so-called magazine reporting on the latest new blockbuster movie with a 10-page, full-color spread as if the reporters weren’t aware that the same company that produced the movie also owns their magazine. Yes, this is still called a magazine. These are still called reporters. And this is still called journalism. And yet millions of people are gleefully letting themselves be had.

This reminded me of something. I am quite a video game fan and here in the UK we have Channel 4 that has a teletext page called Digitiser. It reports game (console and PC) news, reviews, readers letters, sales charts. It is reknowned for being a little anarchic, ironic and (i think) completely independent. A week or so ago they posted a review for a Microsoft published, X-Box game (can't remember the title but it was a generic first person shooter). They were less than impressed due to the lack of originality in the game. It merely regurgitated old ideas that had been seen hundred of times over from Doom through Goldeneye to Unreal and Halo, and they said so. They gave it a crappy score and basically told people not to bother buying it. One of their main concerns is that by buying sequels, and generic sports, shoot-em ups, and beat em ups, it stopped games development companies taking risks on truly original concepts and would ultimately lead to a decline on the games industry. A few days later Digitiser reported that they had recieved a letter from Microsoft's PR having a right old rant at them for the bad review. The letter said something like "If you don't give support to games like this, the X-Box won't be a success". It is this kind of attitude that stifles journalism. Games Publishers prefer to send their games to affiliated, so called "Official" magazines which give mediocre games 98% review scores. It's all about sales, not true entertainment.

The next passage, I think, demonstrates Prince's own view on file sharing. Profiting from tracks that were either not meant to be free, or even ones that were given free is wrong (Lewis (The Cloud9 Mission) may have somethng to say on this part!).

This does not mean, of course, that all forms of file sharing r equally innocuous. There is little doubt that, when people use the Internet as a substitute 4 radio, i.e. as a way to discover new music, it can help promote the work of artists. But when a young junior high school student downloads tracks off the Internet and makes CD-R copies of them that he then sells for $5 in the schoolyard, it hurts sales of the original CD and it’s disrespectful of the artist regardless of how small a cut of the actual CD price the artist actually gets. After all the executives and the middlemen in the recording industry have taken their piece of the pie.

And this last passage sums the whole thing up. We have to support ventures like the NPGMC. It can only be a good thing in the long run. Otherwise we will just be spoonfed, the blockbusters, the chart acts, the sequels, the unoriginal, until we become bored of the whole shebang and get no pleasure out of any of these modern art forms.

How long, however, before a critical mass of established artists realize that it is in their best interests, both artistically and commercially, to leave the system for good? How long before a critical mass of young aspiring artists become aware of the enslaving aspects of the system and are careful not to get involved in it without a maximum of precautions? And how long before a critical mass of art lovers get together to provide these artists with a real, valuable, legitimate, truthfully enthusiastic alternative audience that completes the process of rendering the existing system artistically irrelevant?

Any other thoughts?
[This message was edited Thu Aug 8 5:29:38 PDT 2002 by KeithyT]

I coulda swore IrishEcho wrote this not a month ago!!!

This is good tie it in with the recent CEO scandals and i think u get a solid picture.THAT WORKING AMERICA IS BEING RIPPED OFF.OVER 200 INDICTMENTS SINCE THE ENRON SCANDAL ADN NOT ONE PERSON FROM ENRON INDICTED.DOES ANYONE ELSE FIND THIS STRANGE???COULD IT BE THAT THEY HAVE BIG TIME CONNECTIONS WITH BUSH?There will come a time when u will realize that...U'VE BEEN BAMBOOZLED...HOODWINKED...TOOK