| innerspaceboy |
01-09-2018 09:13 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by OccultHawk
(Post 1912462)
What’s your take ISB?
As a person who hates Facebook my initial reaction is negative. Forgetting about how invasive Facebook is, it’s also very unpleasant (to me at least) aesthetically. When I tried it, I hated how it functions and how the programmers are so comfortable boxing users into a design that feels like a prison. I also dislike the way Zuckerberg markets it as this incredible bridge building platform; especially since to me it felt very isolating. I resent the way how not even using Facebook is seen by some as suspicious. And nothing seems to satiate their desire to monopolize how we spend our free time. So the thought of them seriously getting their claws into the way people listen to music definitely doesn’t appeal to me. I already hate what they’ve done to how people share and connect.
|
I hear you 100%, OH. Particularly how non-FB users are viewed as pariahs or suspicious. I do use FB, and have met some critically-important people in my life there, (ironically through groups of introverted antisocialites), and I believe you get out of it what you put in, (to a degree). Still, it's terribly difficult to find inspiring content and conversation in a feed of sensationalist headlines, drama posts, and clickbait, so actively filtering one's feed is critical to the usefulness of the site. When I resolved to shed my materialism and vinyl-collecting fetishims I turned all my record collector groups off of my feed to eliminate the temptation of additional purchases, and it worked.
But there is undoubtedly a negative and isolating impact of FB. The hours one spends pouring over an infinite feed of other people parading their lives as better-than-reality reinforces feelings of inadequacy, loneliness, and depression. Instead, I'm working to build rewarding real-life relationships and to find happiness through new experiences rather than trying to fill that void with FB.
As far as the Universal Music deal, I imagine the impact will be equally negative. Major artists on the label may see some residual monetization from social sharing of their content, but most of that benefit will go to the label. I really enjoyed Scott Galloway’s The Four and Cathy O’Neil’s Weapons of Math Destruction, which describe how unchecked black-box algorithms determine the success or failure of the content creators whose material FB distributes. In a world of FB music, payola and major label backing could completely determine what music its user base is exposed to, and there would be absolutely zero incentive for FB to promote independent artists who lack the deep pockets required for their attention.
Market neutrality is essential to artists and listeners alike - to the artists so that there is a level playing field for exposure and to listeners so that there is a rich and varied pool of accessible content rather than 40 tracks that the broadcaster has pre-determined that they will enjoy. Based on the mutli-year agreement, FB believes they can monetize the sharability of Universal Music’s artists on their network. Whether or not that improves the user experience and anyone participates remains to be seen. There are plenty of other ways to share music online, and if FB only permits sharing of mega-hits, I'm confident its users will find other ways to share. |
