blog
"Music Uprising" - Frame 7
Archives
171 entries
Back to Latest Entries
Back to Latest Entries
On DIY II or "Cottage Industries Revisited" and a case study of the music industry.
There is a clear and troubling socio-economic split between (i) those who benefit from the existing dominant model of capital formation which is the modern corporation and (ii) the multitude who have no access to the corporate form of wealth creation or the growing number of "post-modernists" who are rejecting the basic premise of the corporation as the best vehicle to improve the economic well-being of world. The growing economic disparity between the former and latter is clear. What's really troubling is the growing schism between stakeholders in the status quo and the dispossessed [or disaffected] and its social implications.
We have suggested elsewhere that the solution to the growing problem is to disaggregate what's already broken in a hierarchical system and reconfigure it with a flat structure that minimizes intermediaries. However, the notion of the "traditional" cottage industry as an alternative model of reform is non-responsive because it connotes a return to primitive levels of subsistance that neither appeals to one's aspirations nor reflects the power and potential of the web-enabled world we now live in. A better model of "The Cottage Industry Revisited" is encapsulated in the notion of a "DIY II" economic and social transformation or, indeed, revolution. To consider this, we turn to a case study of the music industry and the Fuzz platform.
The creation of both economic and social values in music lends itself particularly to process analysis of the needful transition from a hierarchical corporate form to a flat DIY II business model as the way forward. Suffice it to start, the proposed model only needs three elements to make a robust economic and compelling social case - artists, fans, and a platform [that we discuss briefly below]: 1. ARTISTS [initiating node]: The value initiator at this level provides input into the system which is creative "sweat equity". Little or no other capital [equity] is needed. The value created for oneself is a direct function of the EFFORT [rather than tangible capital] invested. While there are no free lunches in any system, artists can substitute their sweat equity for corporate capital. 2. FANS [receiving node]: The value interaction between artists and fans is direct without intervention of conflicted, and therefore compromised, gatekeepers or arbiters of taste or perceived values. What constitutes noise to one person may be a signal to another. This is a matter to be arbitrated between direct participants [artists and fans at the local level]and values assigned ex post rather than pre-screened by intermediaries. 3. PLATFORM [the network provider]: The value facilitator is the network enabler optimizing communication between diverse nodes. [The power discourse between artist and fans occurs at multiple levels and energizes rather than destabilizes the network, if the platform is properly designed [open, decentralized, etc.]
Importantly, the DIY energy has to be initiated and sustained by the artist and fans themselves. The future belongs to those who invest the time and energy to create their own intangible "truth-values" that can become tangible ones for those who "get it" and, alas, work hard at sustaining the value process. Again, there are no free lunches here.
In sum, Fuzz = DIY Revisited in music [and TCC argues the prospects for a DIY II movement in broader context]. For those who care about the troubling dislocations that surround us, the music uprising has begun.
There is a clear and troubling socio-economic split between (i) those who benefit from the existing dominant model of capital formation which is the modern corporation and (ii) the multitude who have no access to the corporate form of wealth creation or the growing number of "post-modernists" who are rejecting the basic premise of the corporation as the best vehicle to improve the economic well-being of world. The growing economic disparity between the former and latter is clear. What's really troubling is the growing schism between stakeholders in the status quo and the dispossessed [or disaffected] and its social implications.
We have suggested elsewhere that the solution to the growing problem is to disaggregate what's already broken in a hierarchical system and reconfigure it with a flat structure that minimizes intermediaries. However, the notion of the "traditional" cottage industry as an alternative model of reform is non-responsive because it connotes a return to primitive levels of subsistance that neither appeals to one's aspirations nor reflects the power and potential of the web-enabled world we now live in. A better model of "The Cottage Industry Revisited" is encapsulated in the notion of a "DIY II" economic and social transformation or, indeed, revolution. To consider this, we turn to a case study of the music industry and the Fuzz platform.
The creation of both economic and social values in music lends itself particularly to process analysis of the needful transition from a hierarchical corporate form to a flat DIY II business model as the way forward. Suffice it to start, the proposed model only needs three elements to make a robust economic and compelling social case - artists, fans, and a platform [that we discuss briefly below]: 1. ARTISTS [initiating node]: The value initiator at this level provides input into the system which is creative "sweat equity". Little or no other capital [equity] is needed. The value created for oneself is a direct function of the EFFORT [rather than tangible capital] invested. While there are no free lunches in any system, artists can substitute their sweat equity for corporate capital. 2. FANS [receiving node]: The value interaction between artists and fans is direct without intervention of conflicted, and therefore compromised, gatekeepers or arbiters of taste or perceived values. What constitutes noise to one person may be a signal to another. This is a matter to be arbitrated between direct participants [artists and fans at the local level]and values assigned ex post rather than pre-screened by intermediaries. 3. PLATFORM [the network provider]: The value facilitator is the network enabler optimizing communication between diverse nodes. [The power discourse between artist and fans occurs at multiple levels and energizes rather than destabilizes the network, if the platform is properly designed [open, decentralized, etc.]
Importantly, the DIY energy has to be initiated and sustained by the artist and fans themselves. The future belongs to those who invest the time and energy to create their own intangible "truth-values" that can become tangible ones for those who "get it" and, alas, work hard at sustaining the value process. Again, there are no free lunches here.
In sum, Fuzz = DIY Revisited in music [and TCC argues the prospects for a DIY II movement in broader context]. For those who care about the troubling dislocations that surround us, the music uprising has begun.
Comments
We have seen this in many other revolutions - ranging from the various improvements in transportation that enabled buyers and sellers to connect more efficiently and thus increase gains to both sides, to the creation of stock markets that gave people access to investment opportunities that were previously only held by a select few.
However the success of this system will depend on the ability of people to become aware of two simple things: 1. The benefits they can gain and 2. HOW they can take advantage or use the new system. As stock trading has become simpler for people to understand, so has it grown. The same is true for Fuzz. It took me a few moments to understand the Fuzz model and so I wonder if the "directions" for Artists and, perhaps more importantly, Fans, could be clearer. I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on this. - T.S.U.