[HN Gopher] Pop culture has become an oligopoly
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Pop culture has become an oligopoly
        
       Author : kevin_hu
       Score  : 128 points
       Date   : 2022-05-02 18:54 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (experimentalhistory.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (experimentalhistory.substack.com)
        
       | marginalia_nu wrote:
       | Some of these graphs are more convincing than others, this in
       | particular seems to be fairly creative use of statistics.
       | 
       | https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_p...
        
         | t1nytim wrote:
        
         | derbOac wrote:
         | I think their paper they linked in the blog post is a bit like
         | that too, maybe even more so, although I found both
         | interesting.
         | 
         | I do agree some of the trends are more convincing than others,
         | although they're generally consistent with the overall
         | direction the author is suggesting.
        
       | seydor wrote:
       | What do we know about winner take all phenomena from biology? How
       | do they work in a petri dish?
        
         | davemp wrote:
         | In forests it's usually when an invasive species is introduced
         | and results in a less efficient use of energy in the ecosystem.
        
       | iostream24 wrote:
       | This puts its finger on something I've had a vague feeling about
       | for awhile now.
       | 
       | Something I noticed was that being "underground" and
       | "alternative" was considered "cool" when I was a youngster. Now,
       | it seems all transgressive elements have been stripped from the
       | mix and it's all about "please like me, like my product, I'm
       | desperate for your approval"
       | 
       | I'd had my own notions of this being fueled by the suit-vs-rocker
       | dichotomy turning into the self-promoting-artist lonesome
       | internet point of light thing.
       | 
       | But this article describes a bigger pattern, and I think it's
       | largely about commercial conquest and has little to do with the
       | ideas inside.
       | 
       | There's also the theme of nostalgia and "good old" style
       | marketing. How much junk food is marketed as "grandmas good olde
       | traditional natural authentic junk food"?
       | 
       | What is extremely frustrating is watching mediocre output be
       | considered best in class merely due to the rubber stamp effect of
       | popularity, popularity due to marketing power and branding.
       | 
       | Clearly xyz charttopper is the best singer in the world if they
       | are the most popular, right?
       | 
       | The entertainment oligopoly falsifying the appearance of
       | democracy and choice while limiting the range of presentable
       | choices is actually symbolic of how many authoritarian systems
       | fake democratic parliamentary procedures and such.
       | 
       | Clearly the people have spoken, approving the pre approved
       | choice. Lol.
       | 
       | Everyone must obviously love autotune if 9/10 top ten songs use
       | it.
        
         | cactus2093 wrote:
         | > Now, it seems all transgressive elements have been stripped
         | from the mix and it's all about "please like me, like my
         | product, I'm desperate for your approval"
         | 
         | It's all a matter of perspective, I don't see this trend as
         | necessarily good or bad. There were some positives to the
         | "underground" and "alternative" aesthetic, like being
         | independent-minded and an emphasis on doing things that were
         | new and original. There were some downsides too, like being
         | jaded about everything, being too cool to show enthusiasm, and
         | ultimately sometimes just blindly conforming to the
         | "alternative" view for the sake of opposing the mainstream
         | view.
         | 
         | Similarly I think there are positives to how I see young people
         | behaving today, the flip-side to the negatives you mentioned.
         | Being genuine and showing emotion is cool again, and, perhaps
         | ironically, since there is less cultural pressure to be
         | "alternative" people are arguably being more honest with
         | themselves by openly seeking approval. We're all humans after
         | all and we all seek approval from others, maybe it's good that
         | there is no longer any stigma around that in the influencer
         | age.
        
         | insickness wrote:
         | The commodification of dissent. In the 50's, counter-culture
         | was far more delineated from corporate squareness, which is why
         | those old 50's ads are so funny to us now. Business evolved to
         | where now it has the ability to coopt any emerging dissent and
         | counter-culture almost immediately.
        
           | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
           | It's still corporate but it's much less visible. Now many
           | things look cool and transgressive - including elements of
           | startup culture - but the _goals_ are still corporate.
           | 
           | In a real counter culture the goals are aggressively anti-
           | corporate.
           | 
           | The most impressive part is the way that individualism has
           | become almost entirely a corporate creation. You "express
           | yourself" by choosing and displaying products, all of which
           | are either corporate or sold through a corporate monopoly
           | (Amazon, Ebay, Etsy). The middle classes are allowed some
           | artisanal choices, but only because they signal a more
           | refined and informed kind of consumerism.
           | 
           | There really isn't much evidence of individualism which isn't
           | assembled from some combination of corporate-friendly
           | competitive ambition, Veblen signalling, standardised
           | rebellion/outsider tropes, and political and religious
           | tribalism.
        
             | WalterBright wrote:
             | What are your thoughts on government art? (Art funded by
             | the government.)
        
               | onemoresoop wrote:
               | > What are your thoughts on government art? (Art funded
               | by the government.) Sometimes it could be good. Artists
               | need funding too, and generally that funding is lacking.
               | Being an artists is associated with poverty.
        
             | markvdb wrote:
             | There _is_ a lot of genuine expression. It's just not very
             | visible and/or you might not recognise it as such. The
             | sausage machine might be involved in some way , but that
             | doesn't necessarily make it a product of the sausage
             | machine!
        
               | Teever wrote:
               | Can you provide some examples of what you feel is genuine
               | expression in this context?
        
               | kirsebaer wrote:
               | Like here we are expressing ourselves.
        
             | vkou wrote:
             | > The most impressive part is the way that individualism
             | has become almost entirely a corporate creation. You
             | "express yourself" by choosing and displaying products, all
             | of which are either corporate or sold through a corporate
             | monopoly (Amazon, Ebay, Etsy). The middle classes are
             | allowed some artisanal choices, but only because they
             | signal a more refined and informed kind of consumerism.
             | 
             | I think you are confusing the deluge of internet ads that
             | tell me to 'express myself' and 'unleash my potential' by
             | <buying their crap>, with how people actually express
             | themselves. Maybe I hang out with the wrong people, but
             | I've never heard any of my friends 'expressing themselves'
             | in those ways.
             | 
             | They obviously make statements about their take on fashion
             | through their purchasing habits (as do I), but I don't
             | confuse what I wear with what I am.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | > I don't confuse what I wear with what I am.
               | 
               | How people signal to others what they are is by what
               | they're wearing. Asking people not to - good luck with
               | that.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | > I think you are confusing the deluge of internet ads
               | that tell me to 'express myself' and 'unleash my
               | potential' by <buying their crap>, with how people
               | actually express themselves.
               | 
               | Well, if they're "expressing themselves" on mainstream
               | social media, that's "corporate" and oligopolistic in a
               | very real sense. It's puzzling to see so much knee-jerk
               | anti-corporatism on sites like Twitter and even here at
               | News.YC.
        
           | screye wrote:
           | > to co-opt any emerging dissent and counter-culture almost
           | immediately
           | 
           | It has to do with the nature of the dissenters themselves.
           | Nowadays they are politics / social media wannabees. When
           | corporates coopot your movement, they make you rich and
           | famous. Nothing makes a 'ladder climber' more happy.
           | 
           | The nature of dissent in the 50s was more about the problems
           | than the status assigned to the people. You couldn't easily
           | lure them away with sneaky gifts.
           | 
           | Worst of all, the 50s-esque true believers do exist. But they
           | get cannibalized and spit out by the exact cabal of milque-
           | toast corporate activism. The ones that don't are so radical
           | that they only serve as red-flags on the danger of true
           | belief, because all the reasonable ones got squash under
           | corporate America's feet.
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | The people who genuinely care about problems don't fit the
             | "dissenter" stereotype, by and large. They speak with
             | authority about the limited domain they're familiar with,
             | and don't try to have an opinion about everything in
             | pursuit of shallow popularity. Overall, their attitude
             | might register as "fringe" and "unusual" to most but it's
             | not going to be seen as unambiguously "dissenting" or
             | oppositional.
        
         | silicon2401 wrote:
         | Watch "Century of the Self" (and "Hypernormalization") by Adam
         | Curtis. Pop culture, marketing, and advertisement are in many
         | ways the products of wartime propaganda techniques being
         | applied to civilians by corporations during peacetime. Also
         | watch Zizek for his thoughts on how corporations like Starbucks
         | get people to try and practice their morals through
         | consumerism. And since you mentioned falsified democracy, might
         | as well look into Chomsky and his thoughts on Manufacturing
         | Consent. These are legitimate, calculated phenomena that it's
         | worth being aware of.
        
           | oicU00 wrote:
           | True that; there's a government paper trail detailing the
           | transfer of military propaganda research to university
           | marketing and advertising programs.
           | 
           | Check out Hyman Rickover, a proponent of a nuclear Navy that
           | pushed members of Congress to vote mothball 10 years of
           | thorium reactor research for uranium reactors so they had
           | weapons material.
           | 
           | I laugh at the notion we have a free market since the basis
           | of our system is 50-70 year old back room deals that boosted
           | families like Gates, Musk, Andreesen, Bezos.
           | 
           | There's zero science that explains how they're ahead of
           | anyone else in skill and intelligence. Plenty to suggest
           | typical old fashion political propaganda and corruption.
        
         | throwaway6734 wrote:
         | >Something I noticed was that being "underground" and
         | "alternative" was considered "cool" when I was a youngster.
         | Now, it seems all transgressive elements have been stripped
         | from the mix and it's all about "please like me, like my
         | product, I'm desperate for your approval"
         | 
         | I think it's because anti-institutional cynicism has become the
         | new norm with the rise of gen-x and the "ironic" hipsterdom of
         | the early 2000s.
         | 
         | So much of modern culture is about operating in the negative
         | space of the "normal" which takes significantly less effort
         | than actively defining what you value and who you are.
        
         | matthewmacleod wrote:
         | Honestly it just sounds like you're no longer a youngster.
        
           | coldtea wrote:
           | That's probably the most facile cliche answer, amounting to
           | "it has always been this way". TFA, for one, shows tons of
           | ways it isn't so...
        
         | smokey_circles wrote:
         | The word you are looking for is "contemporary" and nobody is
         | spending money to make contemporary things appealing to you
         | anymore.
         | 
         | The collorary is your "counter culture" was bought and sold
         | too. That one stung to find out, but alternative lifestyles
         | have been manufactured for a long, long time
        
         | tonguez wrote:
         | most of it is the result of wealth inequality. no one can
         | afford to be cancelled. if you want a vision of the future
         | watch chinese youtube iq.com where everything is hollow and
         | empty. every show just becomes a tool of the state, all
         | entertainment is an arm of the MCI. we're heading there slowly.
         | every single creator today faces a black box known as "the
         | algorithm", on tiktok, instagram reels and youtube shorts.
         | those are the only platforms you can get any views today.
         | vertical videos. the things we all collectively said Rotate
         | your phone and film in landscape mode, about. your videos
         | didn't get popular? they must've just been bad, now watch this
         | 15 year old girl twerk in spandex. francis ford Coppola never
         | had to compete with girls in spandex, but today's entertainment
         | does.
        
       | iostream24 wrote:
       | Or maybe music executives are the only ones who read Fukuyama?
        
       | walrus01 wrote:
       | > remake
       | 
       | and then you have things like the book series of The Expanse and
       | the follow on TV/streaming series, which are an entirely new
       | thing.
       | 
       | or a movie like "ex machina".
       | 
       | nothing mandates watching endless remakes...
        
       | bumper_crop wrote:
       | Copyright lasting 1XX years probably has a substantial amount to
       | do with it. If you are a media company, and you already spent the
       | marketing budget building up the idea of Avengers, or Mario, or
       | whatever pop culture icon you are selling, making a sequel means
       | you get to lean on it. Should your company spend lots of extra
       | money advertising your new video game, or just a little reminding
       | people the next Call of Duty is coming out in a month?
       | 
       | Alternatively, flip this around. Would Disney spend so much on
       | Marvel movies if other studios could make movies about the same
       | super heroes? No way! Why should Disney let the other studios
       | ride on their coat tails? They would need to make all new stories
       | and heroes.
        
       | pbuzbee wrote:
       | To me this reflects the large variety and volume of content out
       | there today. As the amount of content grows, people with less
       | mainstream tastes spread out their consumption, but people with
       | more mainstream tastes stick with popular choices.
       | 
       | For example, music. Let's say 50% of people like mainstream music
       | and the rest have more obscure preferences. In the past, when
       | music was harder to access, you might be exposed to 100 artists.
       | Now, you might be exposed to over 1,000. The 50% who like more
       | obscure music used to spread their listening out over 100, but
       | now it's spread out over 1,000. Those who like mainstream music
       | still mostly listen to the top 100 or so. The end result is that
       | the top 100 is more solid than before, even though music is
       | diversifying.
       | 
       | For multiplicities, I see a snowball effect: each subsequent
       | release in a multiplicity adds more people to the snowball. As
       | long as the quality is good enough -- and people who enjoy
       | mainstream content arguably have a lower bar -- the audience
       | grows with each release. I think this effect, combined with the
       | author's "proliferation" theory and major producers wanting to
       | make safe investments, explains the dominance of multiplicities.
        
       | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
       | I wish some of these charts weren't normalized. Instead of
       | percent of the market, I want to see the overall volume. Because
       | my hunch is that these markets are just expanding unevenly. If it
       | use to be 10 novel movies and 1 superhero movie, and now it's 15
       | novel movies and 10 superhero movies, it's a decrease in market
       | share, but it's still an increase.
        
       | spicyusername wrote:
       | A very well written essay.
       | 
       | I very much agree with one of the conclusions:
       | 
       | > Fortunately, there's a cure for our cultural anemia. While the
       | top of the charts has been oligopolized, the bottom remains a
       | vibrant anarchy. There are weird books and funky movies and
       | bangers from across the sea. Two of the most interesting video
       | games of the past decade put you in the role of an immigration
       | officer and an insurance claims adjuster. Every strange thing,
       | wonderful and terrible, is available to you, but they'll die out
       | if you don't nourish them with your attention.
        
         | blueboo wrote:
         | This is the romantic view of the hundred (million) flowers
         | blooming of a gatekeeper-liberated internet. I don't think it's
         | a realistic "cure" given human nature.
         | 
         | Rather, I think David Foster Wallace's prediction has been
         | proven out:
         | 
         | > ...this idea that the internet's gonna become incredibly
         | democratic? I mean if you've spent any time on the web, you
         | know that it's not gonna be, because that's completely
         | overwhelming. There are four trillion bits coming at you, 99%
         | of them are shit, and it's too much work to do triage to
         | decide...We're going to beg for [curation]. We are literally
         | gonna pay for it.
         | 
         | After all...here we are on HN, hoping someone has curated the
         | seething froth of new content into something manageable.
        
           | iostream24 wrote:
           | I don't tend to consume curated art, other than the odd
           | friend passing me musical recommendations.
           | 
           | Reviews and playlists are suspect to me. I also enjoy
           | discovering and combing and deciding.
           | 
           | I'm extremely picky about music and cinema and books. Curated
           | media rarely works out.
           | 
           | I never use Spotify and consider that sort of thing to be bad
           | for music as an art for many reasons I won't get into in this
           | comment.
           | 
           | I'm a lifelong musician, multi instrumentalist etc... I have
           | my tastes and preferences and desired directions of expansion
           | of both (all, lol)
           | 
           | To me, as a former DJ, I drop the needle 3-4 times, skip
           | around in the song, if I like some harmonic scenarios I am
           | hearing I may stick around to hear how it develops and
           | progresses. Given the harmonic constraints of an instrument
           | etc, is there any variety of tone, harmonic structure,
           | technique , texture, or is it just skulking away in a corner
           | looking at its own navel... etc...
           | 
           | I realize that I'm atypical, but I'm also precisely a "music
           | power user". We don't matter. The industry doesn't care about
           | progrock, jazz fusion, afrobeat, bebop, acid jazz, classical
           | (except the Messiah on Christmas) samba, salsa, cumbia, or
           | music in general, it cares about tracking armies of fan
           | consumers across the internet, tabloid entertainment news,
           | clothing, photos, videos, good looking people posing. Forget
           | the music, these days it's all image...
           | 
           | Only in art are experts thrown on the garbage heap while
           | moneyed interests court the brains of those more easily duped
           | simply due to less experience. I think this is where the
           | competitive thing in music comes crashing hard into the
           | reality that a good song and a really bad song can share the
           | charts, but the bad song often remains longer...
           | 
           | Objectively bad, low effort, poorly structured, lacking a
           | hook, etc, but marketing can keep it there as number one...
           | unlike in UFC where your actual ability to fight matters.
           | 
           | This clearly illustrates that we went from a competency and
           | competition of musical skill to one of marketing skill. Fair
           | enough, but call a spade a spade
           | 
           | Does this mean I am old? Only if one disrespects the human
           | race and human intellect so much that you would cheer the
           | death of a sonic world from the warlike hand of visual
           | glamour and stylized imagery.
           | 
           | A musician is just a kind of fashion photography model
           | capable of making erudite hand gestures and choosing sponsors
        
           | iostream24 wrote:
           | Do you know, I think you are right about one thing: we
           | basically still need a search engine, but in many realms
           | beyond textual content
        
         | citruscomputing wrote:
         | So, question to all -- how have you found success at locating
         | the fruits of this "vibrant anarchy?"
         | 
         | Here's an interesting, related link, that's very obviously
         | coming from a certain perspective but still has things you can
         | take [0].
         | 
         | Here are some strategies I use for books:
         | 
         | Go to the library and walk down a random shelf until a book
         | calls to you. You can run your fingers down the spines and feel
         | for the energy of the right book.
         | 
         | The opposite (however, somewhat sideways, rather than top-down)
         | is pulling books from the "someone just returned this" section.
         | And the books suggested by librarians.
         | 
         | I will also do full-text searches of my somewhat large library
         | of ebooks, which gives equal weight to popular and unknown
         | authors.
         | 
         | Randomness, with uncommon items weighted somewhat equal to
         | common ones, and direct recommendations that bypass algorithmic
         | feeds seem to work somewhat well for me as general strategies.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.epsilontheory.com/25-anti-mimetic-tactics-for-
         | li...
        
           | screye wrote:
           | I have resorted to find individual curators of vibrant
           | anarchy. Reddit and Youtube are the most common sources.
           | 
           | RedLetterMedia helps me find weird movies without any
           | mainstream appeal. r/NearProg, r/ListenToThis and r/progmetal
           | are how I find weird experimental rock artists.
           | 
           | For books, some subreddits has a 'I have finished book X,
           | what should I read next?' thread. That's a good way to do
           | Markov-Chain-esque random walk. Another is to simply rely on
           | my favorite podcasters and bloggers. Books are a long
           | commitment and hard to 'figure out' in a minute or an hour.
           | So, I rarely resort to low quality and high coverage
           | searchers like I do with music or TV media.
        
           | jstgord wrote:
           | Your ideas could potentially be encoded in a better
           | ranking/recommender _algorithm_ ..
           | 
           | ie. recommenders using something akin to page-rank
           | could/should inject some random items so as to allow new
           | content to bubble up and good new content to be voted up.
           | 
           | It seems nature does something similar - copying DNA pretty
           | accurately, yet allowing for some mutations to advance things
           | and adapt to a changing environment.
        
         | frankbreetz wrote:
         | I found it funny that in an article pushing for variation, used
         | two video games examples(https://papersplea.se/ &
         | https://obradinn.com/) from the same author
        
       | cafard wrote:
       | Sixty years ago, the TVs in most American households got three
       | channels, and each channel spent eight or ten hours broadcasting
       | its test pattern. There weren't that many radio stations. The
       | entertainment/distraction available was vastly less than today.
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related:
       | https://twitter.com/a_m_mastroianni/status/15211330751991439...
       | 
       | (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31245559, but we merged
       | that thread hither)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | omar_alt wrote:
       | Growing up in the 80s it seemed like there was a whole host of
       | serious music and films made for my parents whether it was Phil
       | Collins, Luther Vandross, Out of Africa or MASH. There was a
       | market back then whether it was considered less than high brow
       | however that is no longer the case. I would go so far as to say
       | if Steve Jobs was alive things might be slightly different but
       | not much.
        
       | gregoriol wrote:
       | Isn't it somehow related to series being more and more popular in
       | the last 20 years? Maybe people just like being in a comfortable
       | place, seing the same stuff?
        
       | SyzygistSix wrote:
       | While there may be a smaller number of musicians dominating the
       | Top 100 or Top 40, less people listen to that music than ever
       | because there are tons of other artists putting out good music.
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | Youtube, Spotify, TikTok, Soundcloud, etc. are far more
         | relevant to pop culture, even if they don't bring in as much
         | revenue.
        
         | coldtea wrote:
         | > _less people listen to that music than ever because there are
         | tons of other artists putting out good music._
         | 
         | You'd be surprised. Most people only listen to what's popular,
         | same as always. It's just that what is popular is much more
         | constrained.
        
       | shannifin wrote:
       | In his article [1] he mentions the Internet as part of a possible
       | explanation in terms of it being easier for amateurs to create
       | and distribute material.
       | 
       | But I think the Internet also plays a huge part in the
       | consolidation of fandom. Before the internet, the majority of us
       | could really only share our opinions with those physically
       | nearby, so there were less connections per each node. Enter the
       | internet, now each node has 1000000x more connections, naturally
       | pooling together the ranges of an opinion's influence. The
       | spheres of influence expand while the overall number of spheres
       | shrinks. Just a thought, anyway.
       | 
       | [1] https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/pop-culture-
       | has-b...
        
         | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
         | It's easier to distribute material. But it is not - at all -
         | easier to _market and promote_ material. Especially not in a
         | persistent and effective way.
         | 
         | That's the real difference now. People can make near-
         | professional movies on iPhones, musicians can make
         | professional-quality music at home, but no amateur has access
         | to the huge industrial PR, social, and trad ad networks that
         | the major labels/studios can roll out to promote their
         | projects.
        
       | jstgord wrote:
       | Could this effect also explain why a lot of seemingly truly
       | original music came out in the 80s .. roughly coincident with a
       | peak in wealth distribution in the middle class ?
       | 
       | My reasoning : a post-war relatively wealthy middle class and
       | free University education meant more time for things like
       | attending political protests, tinkering with emerging
       | electronics/computers, engineering projects and garage bands.
       | 
       | We have wonderful flat screens now, much better comms .. and yet
       | nothing seems fixable, were killing the planet with our carbon
       | emissions and not many people seem concerned, and our best most
       | energetic young minds are slaves to servicing their student debt.
        
       | shaunxcode wrote:
       | In situationist terminology - the spectacle is compounding upon
       | itself towards oblivion. This is good! It makes it easier for
       | people to see it for what it is.
        
       | McLaren_Ferrari wrote:
       | The population is getting older too.
       | 
       | Music is the most age dependant business. It's literally
       | impossible to discover your favorite song at age 35+ and it's
       | most likely already buried in your brain forever between 14 and
       | 20.
       | 
       | Same things for movies, franchises sell because there is a
       | familiarity to it. Stuff that isn't franchise just doesn't sell.
       | A possible exception would be biopics.
       | 
       | I predict a huuuge amount of high budget biopic to integrate
       | revenues from franchises.
       | 
       | JFK, MLK, Reagan, Hendrix, the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, The Eagles,
       | Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan...they will all get a biopic with
       | a budget of no less than 175M a pop.
        
         | paganel wrote:
         | I'm in my early 40s, I've just discovered Kino [1], I think
         | they're really damn great. I "discovered" Ornella Vanoni and
         | Mina when I was in my mid 30s, me and my SO have formed a habit
         | of listening to this Mina song [2] each New Year's Eve, at
         | exactly midnight (it also helps our dog and cat focus on us and
         | on the music inside the house, and not on the fireworks
         | outside).
         | 
         | Between 14 and 20 years of age I was listening to some cool
         | music, too (it was that interesting period just after grunge
         | and as brit-pop was taking off), but, to be honest, the lyrics
         | from those songs and even the music itself don't speak to me
         | that much anymore.
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kino_(band)
         | 
         | [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGcX5wopq3M
        
         | redwall_hp wrote:
         | > Music is the most age dependant business. It's literally
         | impossible to discover your favorite song at age 35+ and it's
         | most likely already buried in your brain forever between 14 and
         | 20.
         | 
         | Nah. When I was a teenager, I was listening to classic rock and
         | folk music. When I was in my mid 20s, I got into metal. Now I'm
         | 30 and would absolutely give you a list of J-Pop songs
         | competing for the title of "favorite song."
        
         | photojosh wrote:
         | > It's literally impossible to discover your favorite song at
         | age 35+ and it's most likely already buried in your brain
         | forever between 14 and 20.
         | 
         | With all due respect, this sounds like a comment from someone
         | who's not really into music.
         | 
         | I did a quick check with a musical friend to see if he shared
         | my initial reaction... "what's your favourite song?" resulted
         | in "I have no idea how to answer that question. Maybe ask me my
         | top 100 favourites?"
         | 
         | I'm well over that age now, and I have a new "favourite song"
         | every week or two. Easing into more free time as the kids get
         | older and am using some of that to go see more live music from
         | local bands.
        
           | the_only_law wrote:
           | I hope when I'm in my 30s and 40s and decades after I'm still
           | finding and enjoying new music from times before I was born
           | to times after my youth.
        
           | brimble wrote:
           | Approaching age 40. Most of my favorite songs are probably
           | from the 60s and 70s (5-20 years before I was born), but I
           | only heard most of them (the ones that are my favorites)
           | after age 35. I like plenty of newer music, too. I discover
           | great new-to-me stuff from many decades, including the
           | current one, all the time. This seems pretty normal in my
           | social circle, though few of us are _super_ into music.
           | 
           | There aren't a ton of albums that I liked between the ages of
           | 14 and 20 that I'd still defend as "good", though a handful
           | are still nostalgia-listens for me. I had pretty shit taste
           | in music then, really.
        
           | redwall_hp wrote:
           | It's a very "consumes music as a mass market product" vibe.
           | My preferred genres have changed over and over, and since
           | I've had a Spotify account since they came to the US, I can
           | easily scroll back over playlists and see that. Hell, I
           | started practicing _making_ music as a hobby at the age of
           | 29.
           | 
           | In the last decade alone (I'm 30), I went from primarily
           | classic rock and folk music mixed with some movie soundtracks
           | to metal to Eurobeat to J-Pop. My favorite song when I was 14
           | was probably something by Feist or the Beatles, maybe
           | something by Queen. Now it's definitely something from a
           | J-Pop or Vocaloid artist. Somewhere between that I'd have
           | said something by Franz Ferdinand or White Stripes (and to be
           | fair, I do listen to them quite a bit).
        
           | sssilver wrote:
           | Exactly how I feel at 37.
        
         | teg4n_ wrote:
         | No it's not literally impossible to discover your favorite song
         | when you are 35 or older. You just have to continue to seek out
         | new music.
        
         | mdoms wrote:
         | What nonsense. I'm 37 and my favourite song changes all the
         | time.
        
         | syntheweave wrote:
         | There is something I saw on YT a year or so ago from a guitar
         | teacher who said that his students have changed over the past
         | 15 years: they used to come in and say "I want to learn this
         | song from my favorite band" - and now, overwhelmingly, when
         | asked what they want to learn, they shrug and start scrolling
         | through their phone to try to find an answer. They want to
         | learn, _but not anything specifically._ And often when they
         | have something, it could be the most random old thing, from any
         | era.
         | 
         | That is, the song catalogue has stopped being something that
         | has turnover, it just keeps accumulating into a library of
         | dusty shelves, and that makes it hard for young people to
         | assert norms as in days past and tell everyone "this band that
         | was marketed to my demographic is totally the best and nothing
         | will ever beat them" - which is where a concept of "best song"
         | is going to come from, because hardly anyone is trying to
         | assign letter grades to their listening.
         | 
         | Instead you'll see a more apocalyptic Fall-of-Rome tone in the
         | comments of old hits: "I'm only 13 but I wish I were in the
         | 80's, best decade for music nothing like today's crap". It's so
         | common a sentiment as to be memetic and widely riffed upon.
         | 
         | Something has definitely changed in the music business.
        
         | rnd0 wrote:
         | >It's literally impossible to discover your favorite song at
         | age 35+ and it's most likely already buried in your brain
         | forever between 14 and 20.
         | 
         | I don't have a single favorite song, but the band Ghost is high
         | in my personal rotation -and they didn't even make a record
         | until I was 44.
         | 
         | And I didn't discover most of my favorite bands until I was in
         | my 20's.
        
         | cue_the_strings wrote:
         | I'm an avid music listener (in my 30s), and it'd be hard for me
         | to name just 1 (or 10 or even 30) of my favorite songs. A
         | couple of albums I keep in high regard came out in the last
         | several years. Also, I seem to wear out music over time: you
         | can only listen to Loveless or SAW 89-92 or Astral Weeks or
         | Velvet Underground and Nico so many times. I know, yes, those
         | albums are some of the best music made, but I don't find
         | pleasure in re-listening them for the 100th time - I'd rather
         | listen to something new.
         | 
         | I probably took after my dad when it comes to music listening.
         | He's in his 60s and still actively searching for and finding
         | new favorites.
        
           | anfilt wrote:
           | Sounds very much like me. I like to keep listening too new
           | music.
        
       | oneoff786 wrote:
       | Ok devil's advocate. What's more original? Thor 3: Ragnarok? Or
       | Jojo Rabbit? Both great films imo; both by Taika Waititi.
       | 
       | The former features marvel's Thor, who's commercial af. But it
       | goes to a new world, has a markedly different tone, humor,
       | themes, and plot. The plot hits themes of humility and identity
       | and the specifics of the ending were, imo, not very predictable.
       | 
       | Jojo rabbit is set in WWII with all original characters with some
       | great bits, but an overall plot that's fairly predictable.
       | 
       | You could easily argue it's still Jojo rabbit, but is there
       | anything obviously bad about how original Thor 3 is? I think no.
       | 
       | And there have been lots of great movies in the past year even.
       | Everything everywhere, Last Night in Soho, massive talent, etc.
       | 
       | Edit: the formulaic rom coms and action movies and comedies were
       | the bigger issue to me. A mildly novel setting, or perhaps, novel
       | buddy cop duo, added far less interesting material than things
       | complained about here.
        
         | theshrike79 wrote:
         | Romcoms are the romantic equivalent of B-budget action movies.
         | 
         | You know exactly how it goes, but that's the reason you enjoy
         | it =)
        
       | mr_tristan wrote:
       | This sure seems to be what happens when the long tail runs into
       | the paradox of choice.
       | 
       | One thing I've noticed, it is now way easier to create content
       | over this time period as well.
       | 
       | I now have a camera that can record beautiful 8K video, I can
       | produce high-quality music records, and I don't have to rent or
       | hire anyone. I've got a CNC that can crank out perfect templates
       | for my woodworking. But there are now millions of others who can
       | (and are) doing the same thing.
       | 
       | And thus, it's stupidly easy to find something new, but it's hard
       | to find something new and consistently good. So we just gravitate
       | to the proven because, ugh, our free time is valuable.
       | 
       | My only sense is that the oligopoly will persist, and probably
       | become even more focused. But the "1000 true fans" approach for
       | small-time producers is still the best way forward. Don't even
       | bother trying to compete with big-time media, just try to build
       | strong connections, thus being a "trusted" choice.
        
       | mjfl wrote:
       | the consumer is to blame
        
       | rurban wrote:
       | As counterpoint we just experienced one of the most original
       | movies ever, which made it to the top 3:
       | 
       | https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl3861218049/ (Everything
       | Everywhere All at Once)
       | 
       | On minimal budget and marketing
        
         | insickness wrote:
         | Not for nothing, Everything Everywhere All at Once was produced
         | by the Russo brothers who directed Avengers Infinity Wars,
         | Endgame and Captain America movies. Also Michelle Yeoh is a
         | pretty huge star both here and in China. Just saying it's not
         | exactly an indie film. But it was original, for sure.
        
       | theshrike79 wrote:
       | Mid-price movies are the ones that have mostly gone extinct.
       | 
       | We have the Disney-level Mega Movies with ONE BILLION DOLLAR
       | budgets. These are the ones that are made by a committee of
       | producers and executive producers and shareholders. They're too
       | big to fail, so they'll be tested and re-tested and re-shot until
       | they WILL make a profit. Currently they will also include a
       | Chinese movie star and won't touch any subjects too sensitive for
       | China, because multiple tens of percents of profit will be made
       | in there.
       | 
       | Then we have the Blumhouse[0] type 5-20 million dollar movies.
       | They give a hard budget limit and won't pay the actors much -
       | they'll get a share of the profits instead. They're cheap enough
       | to not bankrupt the production company if it flops, but will make
       | immense profits if they succeed. The Company won't usually affect
       | the production much, giving the director free reign to do what
       | they want.
       | 
       | What's missing in today's world are the $10-$100M, movies. These
       | have a big enough budget to not have to cut corners much, but
       | still small enough to not draw the attention of The Executives
       | who want their favourite things in the movie - letting the
       | director enact their vision. The only mid-budget movie I can
       | think of in the recent years is Michael Bay's Ambulance[1], shot
       | with $40M.
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blumhouse_Productions [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambulance_(film)
        
         | cableshaft wrote:
         | Everything Everywhere All At Once, currently in theaters, had a
         | $25 million budget, and has made a respectable $38 million in
         | the theater so far, enough that some articles are calling it a
         | box office hit.
         | 
         | Also in 2019 there was Knives Out, which had a budget of $40
         | million and made $311 million in the box office.
         | 
         | I agree with your overall point, just giving a couple more
         | examples.
        
           | throw0101a wrote:
           | Until recently, Denis Villeneuve's movies were in this range
           | as well:
           | 
           | * Prisoners: US$ 46M
           | 
           | * Sicario: US$ 30M
           | 
           | * Arrival: US$ 47M
           | 
           | See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Villeneuve#Reception
           | 
           | His first three movies were <$7M. He went up market (>$160M)
           | with _BR2049_ and _Dune_.
        
       | hirundo wrote:
       | These are natural examples of ecosystems evolving toward a pareto
       | distribution after a punctuated equalibrium. Think of it as
       | another example of the great winnowing of variations that
       | followed the Cambrian explosion. The cultural explosions were the
       | invention of books, radio, television, internet, etc. Those
       | disrupted the prior pareto distributions, and it took time to
       | reestablish them.
       | 
       | It's a general feature of complex ecologies rather than a
       | specialty of cultural or economic ecologies.
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | Sure if you look at box office numbers and the billboard hot 100
       | you will see this picture, but that is really just telling you
       | about older millennials and above. What about artists who post
       | their music to SoundCloud or Bandcamp? What about all the short-
       | form content on YouTube? What about true crime podcasts? What
       | about big name production houses who skip theaters and go direct
       | to streaming on Netflix or Apple TV? What about all the people
       | whose primary form of content consumption isn't any of these but
       | rather TikTok and Snapchat?
       | 
       | The real conclusion IMO is that the methods of distributing "pop
       | culture" have been turned on their head, and traditional media is
       | now playing catch up. Nielsen numbers and Billboard charts and
       | all similar metrics are now irrelevant to the conversation.
        
         | paulryanrogers wrote:
         | Actually Neilsen uses ultrasonic signals which many platforms,
         | big and small, rush to support to satisfy their creators. At
         | least that was my experience as a Neilsen household then SWE at
         | a SAAS serving radio stations (including white-labeled
         | streaming apps).
        
       | kderbyma wrote:
       | this to me is a symptom of greed. It's people not wanting to pay
       | for others efforts (possibly because they are not promoted or
       | showcased or hidden) but they expect it for their efforts.
        
       | spideymans wrote:
       | Chart-topping original music has also gone "extinct"[0]
       | 
       | 0: https://www.billboard.com/music/chart-beat/no-2022-hits-
       | harr...
        
       | rm_-rf_slash wrote:
       | >How much does it dull our ambitions to watch 2021's The Matrix:
       | Resurrections, where the most interesting scene is just Neo
       | watching the original Matrix from 1999?
       | 
       | Perceptions are subjective, but I don't know how anyone wouldn't
       | consider the most interesting scene to be the one where Neo (and
       | therefore the audience) is told point blank: "our beloved parent
       | company Warner Bros. has decided to make a sequel to the
       | trilogy."
       | 
       | I'm surprised it wasn't quoted in TFA because it's an unusual
       | fourth wall break that aligns with exactly the points the author
       | is making about the inherent emptiness of endless franchises.
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | Perhaps we should introduce a "purge" that happens every 10 years
       | or so, and replaces all the popular figures by new ones.
        
         | danrocks wrote:
         | Isn't that what the music industry does, already?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-03 23:00 UTC)