Highbrow Magazine - streaming https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/streaming en Digital Rights Management and the Modern-Day Pirate https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/21627-digital-rights-management-and-modern-day-pirate <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/news-features" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">News &amp; Features</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Mon, 09/12/2022 - 12:12</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1piracy_toobydoo-creative_commons.jpg?itok=CfctNdTu"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1piracy_toobydoo-creative_commons.jpg?itok=CfctNdTu" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">To state an obvious truth, digital media has completely changed the way audiences purchase and consume content. Film, television, music and games can be compactly stored and streamed anywhere in the world without the need for a physical storage device. While many of us are content to pay our monthly tithe to Netflix or Hulu for access to their media libraries, the digital transition poses a question to those who would like to “own” their content. The main question being: Do you really “own” digitally stored content?</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">It's easy to understand how someone owns a book or a Blu-Ray Disc, but when it comes to a digital file, just because it’s stored on your hard drive doesn’t mean you have unrestricted access to it. Digital Rights Management or DRM is the blanket term for the technologies developed and used as anti-piracy measures in digital media.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The methods for DRM protection vary, but the general principle is to combat consumers from sharing files they have stored on their computer. Disney wouldn’t be very happy if people could buy <em>Spider-Man: No Way Home</em>, download it to their device, and then send it to all their friends, without paying that $20 fee.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">While it is understandable that companies and artists want to protect their creations, these sorts of protections do restrict access to content consumers purchase in a way that traditional physical media would not. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">There is no computer program trying to verify that the physical copy of <em>Dune</em> I have sitting on my bookshelf is a legitimately sold and manufactured product. However, that might be the case if I tried to open an ebook copy of it placed on my desktop. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/3piracy_m_lange_b_-_flickr.jpg" style="height:434px; width:651px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">While some methods of DRM allow users to download and store files on their hard drive to be accessed any time, other methods require devices that intend to access DRM-protected content to be connected to the internet.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The best example of this comes from PC gaming. The largest digital game retailer on PC is Steam. Steam sells digital games and manages DRM for videogame publishers. The simple explanation of this process is that your local device crosschecks Steam’s servers to verify that your account actually owns the game it is trying to run. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Even though a person locally owns and has a piece of software downloaded and installed to their hard drive, that storage space is useless without an internet connection to verify it is legitimate. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">This greatly restricts the use of the media you allegedly “own.” Playing games or using software that use this sort of DRM protection is no longer possible on laptops in places without connection, such as airplanes.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/1spiderman.jpg" style="height:317px; width:602px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">While the Kindle ebook on my computer (which uses a form of DRM that does not require internet access) may still be readable offline, digital copies like this often restrict users to proprietary software.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">I can only read a Kindle ebook through the Kindle app, even if the book I'm reading could easily be put into a file type that can be read by other programs. While this might not seem like a major issue, software and technology is ever-changing.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The software, webpages, and companies that are here today may not be here forever. What happens to the digital files I “own” when that happens? If items consumers own are locked behind proprietary software, that may or may not be supported in the distant future. Are we really doing any more than renting this content for the foreseeable future?</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">People who want to own content and media may fall back on physical media as a means of maintaining true “ownership” of said media.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">However, even your use and ownership of physical media is restricted by DRM. Most Blu-Ray Discs you buy carry a form of protection to prevent people from copying the discs to their computers. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/5piracy_kalhh-pixabay.jpg" style="height:460px; width:651px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Being able to copy a disc to a digital format is a great reassurance for media lovers. Even if their physical media gets lost, or damaged, they will always have a backup of the content. However, these copy protections make that a lot harder to do.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">However, DRM and copy protection still do not prevent piracy. Right now, I and anyone else with a search engine could go to one of the many dens of ill repute on the internet and download any number of games, movies, TV shows, and albums. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">DRM protections are at best a deterrent. Those who truly want to get content for free can do so fairly simply and with minimal risk of legal repercussions. DRM does more to hinder the freedoms and accessibility to content consumers “own” than it does to protect intellectual property. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">What DRM really prevents is people casually sharing content they have purchased, the less motivated or tech-savvy consumer sending a file to a friend. However, the exact impact casual sharing or even piracy has on media publishers is unclear. It hasn’t been, and is, difficult to track. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Publishers tend to argue that the vulnerabilities of consumers being able to share content can impact how many people will actually end up buying their product. If a friend can shoot them over the file, why bother? By the same token, if a quick Google search enables me to find the same content, is it really filtering out that many additional people from accessing it?</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/6videogames.jpg" style="height:651px; width:471px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The big question is whether more people will have files casually shared to them versus people who will seek out content on pirate websites. These types of questions are why DRM remains a large topic of debate. An interesting article by <a href="https://www.idealog.com/blog/drm-may-not-prevent-piracy-but-it-might-still-protect-sales/" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline">Mike Shatzkin</a>, as well as a <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221135033_If_piracy_is_the_problem_is_DRM_the_answer" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">research paper examining DRM</a> from its technical side, highlight this debate.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">There are some storefronts that sell DRM-free content, one of the largest names being Good Old Games (GOG.com). GOG specializes in selling videogames, as per its name, older games, without DRM protections. Unlike most DRM-free retailers, GOG also has a significant selection of newer, in-demand titles from popular game publishers. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">However, there are no major equivalent storefronts for video, ebook, and audio content. You simply won’t find DRM-free copies of major motion pictures, albums from popular bands, or books from famous authors. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Retailers and websites that offer DRM-free content do exist; the <a href="https://archive.org/" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline" target="_blank">Internet Archive</a> has massive libraries of public domain and publicly accessible content that is free to download, but none contains much of the newer content people are looking to access.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Unless retailers decide to start selling content without DRM protections, consumers who truly want to “own” a particular media will be stuck collecting and maintaining their disc collections. With the popularity of streaming and digital media as a medium for content, maybe even the physical product won’t be much to rely on. After all, when's the last time you walked into a store and saw a CD? </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Given the rate of technological advancements, there is reasonable concern about the longevity of digital content. While digital files don't degrade and for all intents and purposes last forever, the software and hardware they run on is constantly being updated and changed. DRM stands in the way as one additional obstacle in the management and curation of our digital libraries.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>Author Bio:</strong></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong><em>Garrett Hartman is a contributing writer at</em> Highbrow Magazine.</strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>For Highbrow Magazine</strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>Image Sources:</strong></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--ToobyDoo (</em><a href="https://wordpress.org/openverse/image/df8a4db9-e999-4f2c-a348-0c4d69ee0687" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline"><em>Creative Commons</em></a><em>)</em></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--goXunu Reviews (</em><a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/43602175@N06/4069260433" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline"><em>Flickr</em></a><em>, Creative Commons)                                                </em></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--MLange B (</em><a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mlange_b/15782749050" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline"><em>Flickr</em></a><em>, Creative Commons)</em></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--Kalhh (<a href="https://pixabay.com/illustrations/castle-chain-security-979597/" style="color:blue; text-decoration:underline">Pixabay</a>, Creative Commons)</em></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p> </p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/digital-rights-management" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">digital rights management</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/drm" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">drm</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/piracy" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">piracy</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/pirates" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">pirates</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/owning-content" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">owning content</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/music" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Music</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/films" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">films</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/cds" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">cds</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/downloading-content" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">downloading content</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/steam" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">steam</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/video-games" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">video games</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/media" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Media</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/media-files" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">media files</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/data-protection" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">data protection</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Garrett Hartman</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">In Slider</div></div></div> Mon, 12 Sep 2022 16:12:15 +0000 tara 11319 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/21627-digital-rights-management-and-modern-day-pirate#comments Fascinating Characters, Plots Make ‘The Boys’ a Must-Watch Show, Despite Gratuitous Gore https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/20056-fascinating-characters-plots-make-boys-must-watch-show-despite-gratuitous-gore <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/film-tv" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Film &amp; TV</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Thu, 06/30/2022 - 13:35</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1theboys.jpg?itok=_6vbogge"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1theboys.jpg?itok=_6vbogge" width="480" height="320" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>The Boys</em> breathed fresh air into the surging superhero genre when it debuted on Amazon Prime in 2019. Thankfully, it feels just as fresh and dynamic in 2022. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Six episodes into the third season, the show continues to forge its path as an adventure-drama that is equal parts action, social commentary and over-the-top gore. That’s an odd combination of ingredients, but it works, and it does so while forcing audiences to look at superhero stories in a new light. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Fans already know that the show’s concept is to portray superheroes as regular people with hopes, fears and – mainly – flaws. We aren’t talking minor issues, like Bruce Wayne working too much or Peter Parker having the occasional identity crisis. We’re talking the vanity that leaves a hero more worried about social media followings and endorsement deals than natural disasters. In short, many of the super-powered characters in <em>The Boys</em> are heroes in name and image only. That makes their abilities more frightening than inspiring, and it leaves the real heroes – characters without special abilities – in a state of fearful coexistence.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/2theboys.jpg" style="height:281px; width:500px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">At the outset of Season 3, things seem to be looking up for the most sympathetic characters. Long-suffering Hughie Campbell (Jack Quaid) has become a top player at the Bureau of Superhero Affairs, charged with policing dangerous supes, and his relationship with the good-hearted superheroine Starlight (Erin Moriarity) is heating up. Even Hughie’s ne’er-do-well mentor Billy Butcher (Karl Urban) seems like he might be ready to do things by the book rather than policing supes however he sees fit. If that sort of plotting seems too tame for <em>The Boys</em>, don’t worry. Within a few episodes, Hughie, Billy and the rest of the crew are in as much trouble as ever, and viewers are likely to find themselves laughing, cringing and binging their way through all the drama. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">If <em>The Boys</em> has a flaw, it’s the franchise’s much-celebrated violence and gore. Because the show prides itself on the sort of hyperrealism that is generally avoided in superhero flicks (how, after all, can Flash punch someone at super speed without dismembering them) a few characters meet a tremendously bloody end in every show. Obviously, some fans relish this. I find the gore self-indulgent and believe it distracts from the generally fantastic plotting that punctuates each season, but there’s zero chance this trademark is going away. That’s a minor problem, though, because the storytelling is first rate. </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/3theboys.jpg" style="height:340px; width:604px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Whether focused on Hughie’s determination to bring dangerous superheroes to justice or the super-powered narcissist The Deep’s (Chace Crawford) efforts to restore his image, <em>The Boys</em> is enthralling. Plenty of screen time is also dedicated to the most powerful hero in the franchise’s universe, “The Homelander” (Anthony Starr), and his arc becomes increasingly dark and involving throughout the third season. Showrunner Eric Kripke (<em>Supernatural, Revolution</em>) has a gift for creating clever storylines highlighting complex characters, and he collected all the right pieces with <em>The Boys</em>.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The cast is outstanding from top to bottom and – since there is such great material to work with – it’s difficult to stop watching. That’s not a particular problem since it’s an Amazon Prime vehicle and binging is part of the deal. Just be warned, the final episode of Season 3 isn’t due until July 8 -- and it will be an even longer wait for Season 4.  </span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>Author Bio:</strong></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong><em>Forrest Hartman is</em> Highbrow Magazine’s <em>chief film critic.</em></strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>For Highbrow Magazine</strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/boys" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">the boys</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/amazon" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">amazon</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/super-heroes" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">super heroes</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/shows-amazon" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">shows on amazon</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tv-shows" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">tv shows</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/gory-shows" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">gory shows</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/violent-shows" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">violent shows</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Forrest Hartman</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">In Slider</div></div></div> Thu, 30 Jun 2022 17:35:07 +0000 tara 11182 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/20056-fascinating-characters-plots-make-boys-must-watch-show-despite-gratuitous-gore#comments Patreon: Portrait of the Artist in a Digital Economy https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/5209-patreon-portrait-artist-digital-economy <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/music" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Music</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Wed, 08/26/2015 - 18:28</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1patreon.jpg?itok=-yMiWv7W"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1patreon.jpg?itok=-yMiWv7W" width="480" height="227" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p> </p> <p>In its own words, the crowdfunding platform website <a href="https://www.patreon.com/">Patreon</a> “is empowering a new generation of creators to make a living from their passion and hard work.” The “living” part is what’s key here: Unlike other popular Internet crowdfunding sites – KickStarter, Indiegogo, GoFundMe, etc. – which aim to draw support for one-time projects or business launches, Patreon, founded in 2013, wants to find a way for independent artists (which, in this case, run the gamut from painters to video game critics to musicians) to garner a continuous stream of revenue – what others of us might call a stable income.</p> <p>It goes without saying that the Internet and digital software have radically changed the ways we consume, create, and interact with art, not least of all music. It’s no wonder then that Patreon was co-founded by a financially-frustrated musician: Jack Conte, one-half of the duo Pomplamoose, themselves early pioneers in the viral-video potential of YouTube. But ad-based revenue, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5Zaf0NKXvQ">Conte</a> explains, wasn’t earning the band nearly enough money to cover the costs of their production, let alone basic living expenses.</p> <p>Though digital and Web technologies allowed Pomplamoose and other DIY (“Do-It-Yourself”) artists like them to bypass the rigmarole of the record-label-industrial-complex, distributing their work directly to their fans, a crucial step in the exchange of commodities goes missing in free and open content platforms like YouTube: The fans have no way to give back to the artists, no way to pay for the goods they’ve received, even if they want to.</p> <p>Part of the issue in negotiating digital content is its intangibility. Unlike a record, a CD, a book, or an oil painting, we can’t fork over our cash and receive a physical item in return; it’s difficult to ascribe value to something that, on the one hand, has no tangible essence and, on the other hand, is infinitely replicable. This has proven particularly problematic in the music industry, where, Conte explains in an <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyVmhDaaijk">interview</a>, the old model was “built around putting your art on a ‘thing’ and sending that ‘thing’ to consumers around the world. […] Now that we have the option of sending ‘things’ out for free, we have to decide how artists are going to get paid if we can’t actually sell the ‘thing’ anymore.”</p> <p> Streaming services like Spotify, Rhapsody, and Tidal have tried to move in where record sales have slipped off, but nearly any report shows just how dismally artists get paid per play with these platforms. Moreover, revenue in this way is only generated from royalty payments – meaning artists can only hope to recoup the money spent making, recording, mixing, distributing, and promoting an album or single well after the investments have already been made. Traditionally – at least throughout most of 20<sup>th</sup> century popular music-making – this is where record labels come in, providing artists with an advance to cover their costs of production.</p> <p>Working with a label, however, often comes with its own set of limitations, requiring artists to relinquish a certain amount of control over the creative, aesthetic, and financial decisions regarding their work. The beauty of the Internet – indeed, part of its basic founding promises and principles – is that it allows creators of all stripes to bypass that messy middleman, to deliver content and exchange information directly with other people all across the globe, unfettered and more or less uncensored.</p> <p> </p> <p><br /> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/2patreon.jpg" style="height:159px; width:625px" /></p> <p> </p> <p>Navigating intellectual property rights in digital waters hasn’t been easy. The loss of the ‘thing’ is an ongoing struggle in the exchange of cultural commodities, but it isn’t an unprecedented one. Patreon, in Conte’s words, borrows from a model of support used “before the ‘thing’ existed”: the patronage system. But you’ll not likely find any members of the Medici family on its site; unlike patronage of old, a one-way stream of funds from wealthy individuals to struggling artists, Patreon combines patronage with the ethos of crowdfunding (or, in perhaps more musically relevant terms, busking). Anyone can pledge $1 or more to creators of their choice, and the amount is paid automatically either every month or every time a new work is released. Small streams in this way can add up to a sizable flow: Pomplamoose’s own Patreon page, for instance, now pulls in $6,730 every time they release a new music video.</p> <p>The democratization of the fundraising process offers greater creative autonomy to artists because they aren’t directly responsible to any one money-wielding boss. They are, however, accountable to each and every one of their patrons, who, at the same time, are provided with ways to become significantly involved in the creative process. Some artists even offer perks – video conferences, personalized work, special packages – to fans who contribute donations at $5, $10, or $50 tiers.</p> <p>This kind of network appears to be a real boon for niche-level artists, those who have a loyal following of fans but whose appeal isn’t mainstream enough for major labels. Perhaps the shining exemplar of this is musician <a href="https://www.patreon.com/amandapalmer?ty=h">Amanda Palmer</a>, whose “punk cabaret” genre and work as one-half of the Dresden Dolls isn’t exactly for everybody – but for some people, it’s their everything. After struggles with multiple labels both major and indie, Palmer joined Patreon in March 2015 and quickly became the site’s most highly-funded creator, with nearly 5,500 patrons contributing a combined $34,500 for every ‘thing’ she releases. As she explains on her own page:</p> <p>i don’t find it as inspiring to work for two years on a bunch of songs, knowing that [i'm] going to              have to spend TONS of time raising funds for a record, a few more months (or years, in some   cases) going through the record-biz “album cycle”…..dude, it’s boring. i mean, all respect to the       artists who do it, and i may choose to do it with one project or another, but mostly, f**k it, i just       want to MAKE STUFF AND PUT IT OUT. and get paid, and then keep going. […] i like fast, now,            bam. getting paid for doing things Fast Now Bam is usually impossible. now, patreon.</p> <p>Palmer puts faith in what she calls an “honor system” between herself and her fans: If they like what she does, they will give her money to keep doing it. It’s not necessarily about circumventing downloads or putting a stop to pirating; as Conte <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyVmhDaaijk">explains</a>, “You’re not saying ‘Hey, you can’t see my stuff unless you pay me.’ You’re saying, ‘Hey, I’m making stuff anyway – […] will you pay me a buck every time I make something?”</p> <p>It might all sound utopian, even naively idealistic. And in many ways, it is: it goes against the entire hit-making record industry model. With most major labels, only the huge megastars – the Beyoncés and Taylor Swifts – really earn the company any revenue, which in turn helps cover the costs of trying to find and fund new talent (most of whom end up commercial failures) in hopes of finding the next superstar and continue the process.</p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/1amandapalmer.jpg" style="height:446px; width:670px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p>Patreon doesn’t cater to major celebrities, nor should it. It’s not a means of replacing the old record industry model; it’s a parallel alternative. It’s a means of sustainability, and not necessarily a trajectory toward fame and fortune. As Conte <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5Zaf0NKXvQ">states</a> explicitly, “The point of all this is that we don’t need to be stars. It’s not about the fame or the massive appeal. It’s about the small business class.”</p> <p>Mixing art and commerce might sound unsavory to purists who still believe in “art for art’s sake,” but it’s increasingly a stark reality creators must face in pursuit of the kinds of truth and beauty we as consumers expect to derive from art itself. The emphasis on creative autonomy in Patreon’s model is valuable for allowing the various arts represented on its pages room for growth and exploration, but we must also be careful that such independence doesn’t begin to stray too far down the path of hyper-individualism. The stress on the “self” in the DIY ethos risks losing sight of the fact that the power of crowdfunding and of the digital artistic economy can only be as strong as its community.</p> <p>The artists who succeed with Patreon will be the ones who open wide the lines of communication in both directions. As Amanda Palmer writes to her fans:</p> <p>                here's the key: THIS IS A HUGE EXPERIMENT.<br />                 we can keep tweaking this as we go. […]<br />                 this is a platform where we can be in constant communication.</p> <p>It’s the “we” that has kept Palmer afloat over the decades of her career, and it’s the “we” that will continue to determine the value and position of the artist in society, especially as that society grows increasingly composed of ones and zeros.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Author Bio:</strong></p> <p><strong><em>Sandra Canosa is</em> Highbrow Magazine’s <em>chief music critic.</em></strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>For Highbrow Magazine</strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong><em>Photo Credit: DeSha Metschke (<a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AmandaPalmer_live.jpg">Wikipedia.org</a>, Creative Commons)</em></strong></p> <p> </p> <p> </p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/patreon" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">patreon</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/spotify" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">spotify</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/digital-music" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">digital music</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/music" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Music</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/amanda-palmer" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">amanda palmer</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/kickstarter" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">kickstarter</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/crowdfunding" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">crowdfunding</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Sandra Canosa</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Out Slider</div></div></div> Wed, 26 Aug 2015 22:28:18 +0000 tara 6294 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/5209-patreon-portrait-artist-digital-economy#comments How the War Over Streaming Services Changed the Music Industry https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/4606-how-war-over-streaming-services-changed-music-industry <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/music" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Music</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Fri, 01/30/2015 - 13:09</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1streaming.jpg?itok=kBlKvL3s"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1streaming.jpg?itok=kBlKvL3s" width="480" height="270" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p> </p> <p>When Taylor Swift’s <em>1989</em> album became the only record of the year to reach platinum level, that was the second biggest news in music of 2014.  The most important news of the year in the industry came when Swift pulled her entire catalogue from the popular streaming service Spotify one week after the release of her album.  The move, more so than spark a heated though admittedly civil battle between Swift and Spotify, has opened the gates to a debate about the future of the music industry. Swift’s decision was met with mixed feelings by fans, fellow artists, and industry professionals, triggering a conversation about how artists deliver their product to listeners and how these, on their end, are consuming music. </p> <p> </p> <p>As the catalyst of her decision to yank her catalogue from the streaming service, Swift cites devaluation and depreciation for her music when audiences can listen to it for free. She also believes that artists receive unfair monetary profit in return when their works are available on services like Spotify.  In an op-ed she <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/for-taylor-swift-the-future-of-music-is-a-love-story-1404763219">wrote</a> for the <em>Wall Street Journal</em> last summer, she comments on the drastic drop of album sales in recent years, singling out piracy, file sharing, and streaming as notable culprits.  More <a href="http://pagesix.com/2014/12/12/taylor-swift-blasts-spotify-at-industry-luncheon/">recently</a>, she has said that this is a way to teach a younger generation about investing in music, echoing her remarks about music being an art form and should thus be valued and compensated.  This is also not the first time that Swift has been apprehensive about releasing her work on streaming services, especially Spotify.  After the release of her album <em>Red</em>, she refused to make it available on that platform and allowed it only months later. </p> <p> </p> <p>On its part, Spotify has issued a number of figures and statements to counter Swift’s decision.  Most notably, it has reiterated its mission statement that Spotify was created precisely to combat piracy and file sharing, which it too affirms are the cause for declining music sales.  In 2013, after mounting pressure and curiosity, Spotify released figures on their payout rates, which range from $0.006 to $0.0086 per stream.  <a href="https://news.spotify.com/us/2014/11/11/2-billion-and-counting/">According</a> to Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek, going by this payout model, it had paid Swift’s publisher and label over half a million dollars for streams during the one month that her first single “Shake It Off” was available on the platform, adding to $2 million worth of all of her last year’s streams. Apparently, she was on track to make close to $6 million dollars this year.  Rebutting this figure, Scott Borchetta, the CEO of Swift’s label Big Machine Records, stated that she had only received $500,000 from Spotify for streams of her music for the entirety of 2014.  </p> <p> </p> <p>It is these bold moves and statements that have spurred the discussion, bringing into question just how much power artists have over their work, how it is marketed, and how they are compensated for it.   There are many other big name artists who have also taken a stand against streaming services, including Jason Aldean, Prince, Garth Brooks, and even the Beatles.  Brooks does not even allow his music to be sold or streamed at other music services including YouTube and iTunes, two enormously influential music platforms.  Instead, Brooks offers his albums exclusively as physical compact discs (and vinyl) or through his own online music store, Ghostunes.  He mentions the need to have complete ownership of his creative property as the reason to limit the venues where his works can be found.  Other approaches, such as Prince’s, seem a little more eclectic.  He has chosen to post concert footage on YouTube while making almost his entire catalogue unavailable on the site. Conversely, most of his classic catalogue is on Spotify, as are his two well-received 2014 albums, but his self-released works such as <em>Emancipation</em> are not on the platform. </p> <p> </p> <p><br /> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/2streaming.jpg" style="height:313px; width:625px" /></p> <p> </p> <p>Prince owns the record label that releases his music, and some mention that known artists such as Taylor Swift and Garth Brooks are able to exude this kind of power over their creative property because they are signed on indie labels, while other lesser musicians who are signed on larger labels, such as Universal or Emi for example, and <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2014/11/19/taylor-swift-garth-brooks-artists-lead-fight-against-spotify/">independent</a> artists have no say as to how their work is distributed.  </p> <p> </p> <p>For many self-produced, independent musicians, services like Spotify and YouTube serve as powerful marketing tools to be recognized in a saturated market, allowing them to enter the industry by discovery rather than listening choices of any one consumer.  This, of course, is not always the case.   Aloe Blacc, who co-wrote and sings on Avicii’s top-charting single “Wake Me Up!” <a href="http://www.wired.com/2014/11/aloe-blacc-pay-songwriters/">received</a> less than a $4,000 domestic payout from streaming services.  This is an exceptionally low figure considering that the single was the most streamed song in Spotify’s history and the 13<sup>th</sup> most played song on Pandora since its release in 2013.  The payout for the single from Pandora as of November of last year amounted to approximately $12,350, which was then divided between three songwriters and the publisher of the song.</p> <p> </p> <p>But it is perhaps this precise model that puts into perspective the complexity of the music business.  Spotify falls under one of three legally streaming models: an interactive platform.  This differs from online music stores such as iTunes, who have set prices for each song or album downloaded and then pay a percentage of that to the label that owns the rights to that work.  Pandora, a non-interactive platform, functions much like a radio and is therefore <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/114">covered</a> by the Copyrights Act, which means, essentially, that the service offers a payout each time it plays a song.</p> <p> </p> <p>Therefore, it may be easier to track sales from iTunes because of set monetary gain, especially if a listener purchases an entire album.  For a service like Pandora, on the other hand, financial profit may be more difficult to foresee and exploit because if a listener picks a “radio station” based on a particular artist, they may hear a few songs from that same artist only every now and then, and it is extremely unlikely they will hear an entire album.      </p> <p> </p> <p><br /> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/3streaming.jpg" style="height:306px; width:625px" /></p> <p> </p> <p>Then there is the actual flow of cash.  For every song produced, there are at least two copyrights.  These include sound recording, which typically includes the artists, his or her label, and the company trying to play that song, such as Rdio, Spotify or Pandora.  The other is the musical composition, which includes the songwriters, publishers, the people who recorded the song, etc. There is also a different payout to each of these copyrights depending on which platform a song is played.  AM/FM radio, for instance, is not obligated to pay the recording artists for broadcasts of any given song; they do, however, pay songwriters for use of their creative property.  Pandora, on the other hand, <a href="http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/1083455/business-matters-the-truth-about-pandoras-payments-to-artists">allegedly</a> pays recording artists approximately half of its revenue, but only about 6 percent of that trickles down to songwriters.  In the case of Spotify or Rdio, their payout goes to the entity that owns the right to a song.  For Taylor Swift, this would be Universal Music Group, which is why it may prove difficult to track how much profit she actually made from streams on Spotify as the performing artist. </p> <p> </p> <p>In the figure that Borchetta cited, for instance, global streaming is not accounted for.  <em>Time</em> Magazine, which featured Taylor Swift as the cover story of its November issue, <a href="http://time.com/3590670/spotify-calculator/">posted</a> that her single “Shake It Off” was indeed the highest earning song on Spotify for the month of October (the one month during which the single was available on the platform), garnering a payout between $230K - $390K. However, even after Universal received the payout as the first beneficiary, Big Machine then gets a cut out of that same figure. Before any monetary gain reaches Swift as the performing artist, the labels also compensate the license for musical composition.  And even though Swift’s family owns Big Machine and may thus offer a bigger payout to its most lucrative artist, and she is credited as the author or co-author of many of her songs, it remains unclear how much cash Swift eventually received from Spotify streams. </p> <p> </p> <p>The changing landscape of how music is consumed plays a big part in this debate.  There are even two different records that can claim to be the best selling of 2014, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/business/media/how-1989-edged-out-frozen-as-the-no-1-album-of-2014-and-vice-versa.html?_r=0">depending</a> on which sales metric is reporting.  According to Nielsen SoundScan, Swift’s <em>1989</em> album narrowly defeated Disney’s <em>Frozen </em>soundtrack with the most records sold at 3.66 millions in the United States – the latter sold 3.53 million copies.  But in a new metric model introduced last year by SoundScan and Billbaord, which takes units and converts them into equivalent album sales by accounting for streams and downloads, Disney’s <em>Frozen </em>came in first over Swift’s album.  This may be due to the fact that <em>1989 </em>was largely unavailable in streaming services.</p> <p> </p> <p>Taylor Swift has kept her catalogue on YouTube which, many argue, offers the same basic streaming options as Spotify, though it may be admittedly more cumbersome to navigate for the purpose of listening to music.  The number of views of her music videos on YouTube nearly doubled in the days immediately after her catalogue was pulled from Spotify, which falls under the time frame that her second single “Blank Space” was released.  Her catalogue is also available on Rhapsody and Beats Radio—the latter of which is owned by Apple—but only to listeners with a premium package. </p> <p><br /> <img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/1aloeblacc.jpg" style="height:672px; width:446px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p>This, in essence, is what Taylor Swift is battling for.  As one of the most successful musicians in the industry today, she just made history by becoming the first female artist to <a href="http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/6320061/taylor-swift-blank-space-hot-100">unseat</a> herself from the top spot on Billboard’s coveted Top 100 list.  Her decisions and opinions matter.  But how this will affect the music industry at large in terms of reaching audiences remains to be seen. </p> <p> </p> <p>Album sales dropped 11.2 percent from last year, while streaming through services like Spotify and Rhapsody are up by as much as 54 percent from last year. In the aftermath of this decision to pull her music from Spotify, with Swift’s yearning to boost physical albums sales and Spotify maintaining that its model is the best way to combat piracy, the long-term repercussions are vague.  Spotify seems to be a far from perfect business model for performing artists, and Swift, a powerhouse in the industry, may not be able to revive album sales on her own.  This may eventually lead to a bipartisan discussion between the platforms and the artists, including their music labels, to build a music model that will be fair to artists and consumers alike.     </p> <p> </p> <p><strong><em>Author Bio:</em></strong></p> <p><strong><em>Angelo Franco is a contributing writer at</em> Highbrow Magazine.</strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Photo credits: Wikipedia Commons; Chris Hakkens (<a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aloe_Blacc_2011.jpg">Wikipedia.or</a>g, Creative Commons)</strong></p> <p> </p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/taylor-swift" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">taylor swift</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/spotify" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">spotify</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/pandora" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">pandora</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/music-streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">music streaming</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/music" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Music</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming-services" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming services</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/1989" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">1989</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/musicians" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">musicians</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/copyright" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">copyright</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Angelo Franco</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-photographer field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Photographer:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Google Images; Wikipedia Commons</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Out Slider</div></div></div> Fri, 30 Jan 2015 18:09:09 +0000 tara 5670 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/4606-how-war-over-streaming-services-changed-music-industry#comments The Ongoing Revolution of Television https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/3741-ongoing-revolution-television <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/news-features" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">News &amp; Features</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Mon, 02/17/2014 - 10:09</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/mediumhouseofcards.jpg?itok=srigo2hD"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/mediumhouseofcards.jpg?itok=srigo2hD" width="480" height="320" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p> </p> <p>As Robin Wright accepted her Golden Globe for best actress in a TV drama, she made sure to thank Netflix for casting her as Claire in the original series <em>House of Cards</em>. Best actress in a TV drama was just one out of the six categories that Netflix was nominated for this award season. Another was a nomination for outstanding directing for David Fincher’s work in <em>House Of Cards. </em></p> <p> </p> <p>The win and nominations in a major industry award category solidified Netflix as serious competitor for networks like Fox, NBC, ABC, and CBS. It highlighted Netflix’s impressive roster of writers, directors, and actors --Kevin Spacey, Jason Bateman, and <em>Weeds </em>creator Jenji Kohan--who are helping the Internet-based service produce successful and artistically rich original content. But if anything, Netflix’s strong presence at the Globes suggests a broader and more significant change within the television world. </p> <p> </p> <p>With the rise of new media platforms such as Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, audiences have more places to watch TV. Sellers also have more programmers to sell their series to and television has become a buyer’s market.  </p> <p> </p> <p>Media platforms like Netflix, Hulu, and even Amazon have all released successful series this past season. They have lured big-time writers and directors like <em>Weed's </em>Jenji Kohan and “Fight Club’s” David Fincher. TV is now drawing big-time players like Matthew McCaughey (<em>True Detective</em>), Martin Scorsese (<em>Boardwalk Empire</em>), and John Goodman (<em>Alpha House</em>) to the small screen,  which was unthinkable 10 years ago.</p> <p> </p> <p>Yet this “Golden Age” in TV also means fierce competition. With the rise in popularity of digital platforms like Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu, the television landscape has been severely altered. Internet channels have revolutionized the way television is consumed and produced. Audiences are no longer restricted by a network’s broadcasting schedule. And these alternative programmers are producing original content with the luxury of time, money, and flexibility. These channels are creating original, critically acclaimed content like <em>Orange</em><em> Is The New Black, Behind The Mask, </em>and <em>Alpha House</em>.</p> <p> </p> <p>According to <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2013/binging-is-the-new-viewing-for-over-the-top-streamers.html">Nielsen’s Over-the Top Video Analysis</a> report, “45 percent of Netflix streaming subscribers say the types of shows they watch when they stream are original programming, such as <em>House Of Cards</em> or <em>Lilyhammer</em>.” As a result a debate has ensued within the television industry in which critics argue that the “traditional” television model is outdated and perhaps restrictive with changing audience demands, habits, and desires.</p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/1arresteddevelopment.jpg" /></p> <p> </p> <p>The “traditional” broadcast television model runs on what is known as the pilot season. The season runs from January through May. It’s during this period that a new slate of shows are developed and shot. In May, the new pilots are presented to advertisers who then decide which new shows they will back. This means that broadcast networks are controlled by the time restraints and inflexibility of the pilot season. This can’t change until advertisers change the way they spend money. This is why critics argue that the pilot is a broken system. </p> <p> </p> <p>Streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon have recognized the space for original content and are reaching out to fill the need that is left behind. These media platforms don’t work under these time and financial restraints when producing original content. They have the luxury of spending more flexible time and with certain programs more money on developing content—a convenience that broadcast television does not always have.</p> <p> </p> <p>In a February 1, 2013 <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/01/technology/innovation/netflix-house-of-cards/">CNN Money</a> article, Juliane Pepitone wrote that, Netflix spent $50 million per season on <em>House of Cards</em>. This kind of capital and time flexibility also allowed Netflix to secure a star-studded cast that includes Kevin Spacey, Robin Wright, and Kate Mara. Some have argued that quality is sacrificed under the tight and inflexible time restraints that pilot season creates. Time flexibility means you can get feature actors and artists who are weary of the 22-episode model. Networks, the argument goes, should spend less time on pilots, and more time on developing talent and content. Critics claim successful networks should focus on series rather than pilots.</p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/1alphahouse.jpg" /></p> <p> </p> <p>Perhaps the biggest indicator of these shifts and changes was FOX’s announcement that it would bypass pilot season. On January 13, 2014, <em>The Hollywood Reporter </em>reported that at this year’s Television Critics Association’s press tour, Fox announced that it will now focus on developing series rather than pilots. (The network already has nine projects in the works under this model).  “RIP pilot season,” joked FOX chief executive Kevin Reilly at the press tour. Reilly explained that, “The broadcast development system was built in different era and is highly inefficient.” He argued, “It is nothing short of a miracle that talent can still produce anything of quality in that environment. When they are competing, frankly, with a huge swath of cable that has a lot of flexibility and order pattern and flexibility in when the shows can go on, cable networks are able to course correct creatively and reshoot and recast." Fox’s decision to move away from pilot season is a huge marker that perhaps TV’s traditional development system is antiquated.</p> <p> </p> <p>It is important to note, however, that broadcast television can still be successful. This past season, NBC’s <em>The Sound of Music</em> drew in 18.5 million viewers live and with the DVR numbers, viewership jumped to 21.8 million. And with the its biggest competitor being the Olympics, <em>The Big Bang Theory </em>still drew in 17.5 million viewers.</p> <p> </p> <p>Similar to most creative industries, new technology has brought about major changes in the world of television. Companies must get creative to adapt to the new landscape and successfully compete within their industry. This can be seen with Amazon’s <em>Betas</em> and <em>Alpha House</em>, which are the first shows to be chosen directly by consumers. This past season, Amazon put out a new slate of pilots that are voted on by Amazon users. Based on the audiences’ decision, Amazon will develop those pilots into series. Critics argue that broadcast television must do the same in order to adapt to a rapidly changing climate.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Author Bio:</strong></p> <p><em>Veronica Mendez is a contributing writer at</em> Highbrow Magazine.</p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/hulu" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">hulu</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/netflix" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Netflix</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/amazon" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">amazon</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/television" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">television</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tv-shows" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">tv shows</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/alpha-house" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">alpha house</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/house-cards" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">house of cards</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/arrested-development" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">arrested development</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/networks" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">networks</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/abc" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">abc</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/nbc" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">nbc</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/fox" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">fox</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/cbs" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">cbs</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tv" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">TV</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/watching-tv" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">watching TV</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tv-stars" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">tv stars</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/hollywood" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Hollywood</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Veronica Mendez</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Out Slider</div></div></div> Mon, 17 Feb 2014 15:09:14 +0000 tara 4282 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/3741-ongoing-revolution-television#comments Is Streaming Another Fad or a Lasting Trend in At-Home Entertainment? https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/1159-streaming-another-fad-or-lasting-trend-home-entertainment <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/film-tv" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Film &amp; TV</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Tue, 05/15/2012 - 20:24</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/mediumnetflixarticle%20%28inspiredvideomarketingdotcom%29.jpg?itok=E-8qgXAK"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/mediumnetflixarticle%20%28inspiredvideomarketingdotcom%29.jpg?itok=E-8qgXAK" width="480" height="320" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>  </p> <p>  </p> <p> If there’s one staple of American life, it’s entertainment. Movies have been around since the 1920s, providing the populace with forms of escapism and storytelling. And while there’s nothing quite as leisurely as actually going to the movie theater to see a film, the at-home theater experience is quickly gaining speed as the popular entertainment activity of choice.</p> <p>  </p> <p> But film as a format is dying out. It was announced at this year’s <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/story/2012-04-29/cinemacon-wrapup/54632896/1">CinemaCon in Las Vegas</a> by the National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) that 20th Century Fox would end 35mm film distribution. The CEO of NATO, John Fithian, had predicted at last year’s CinemaCon that distribution of the celluloid format would end by 2013.</p> <p>  </p> <p> The switch to digital distribution is mostly economical. Whereas it costs about $1500 per theater, digital distribution is one-tenth of that, around $150. Most theaters also switched to digital projection after the release of <em>Avatar</em>, James Cameron’s 3-D digitally filmed movie.</p> <p>  </p> <p> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/2mediumnetflix.jpg" style="width: 600px; height: 338px; " /></p> <p>  </p> <p> Of course, how movies are made will affect the format of the home-video and video rentals. VHS had petered out by the mid-2000s with the introduction of the DVD. The DVD format had a higher resolution and better sound quality than VHS, but it was expensive to remaster films for the new format This issue has repeated itself with the existence of Blu-ray discs -- most classic films aren’t available on Blu-ray because of the digital and photochemical process it takes to change formats.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Today, there are many options for at-home movie viewers. For streaming, there’s Netflix, Hulu and even Sidereel, while DVDs can be rented from up-and-coming giant Redbox, Netflix, Blockbuster.com and the rare movie-rental store.</p> <p>  </p> <p> But more and more companies are switching to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/06/movies/homevideo/06dvds.html?_r=1&amp;pagewanted=all">streaming</a>. Dish Network Corp. acquired <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/06/us-blockbuster-dishnetwork-idUSTRE7351VA20110406">Blockbuster</a> after its bankruptcy and launched a streaming service last October. And while Redbox currently offers physical DVD rentals, the company has partnered up with Verizon to create a streaming movie service as well, thereby competing with Netflix.</p> <p>  </p> <p> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/3mediumnetflix.jpg" style="width: 358px; height: 441px; " /></p> <p>  </p> <p> According to an <em><a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/07/business/la-fi-ct-verizon-redbox-20120207">L.A Times article</a></em> from February, "The most instant way for customers to access content is to have the option of either pushing a button or going on a two-minute drive to the store,’ Bob Mudge, president of Verizon consumer and mass business markets, said in an interview,” in regards to the partnership of Verizon and Redbox. That statement also sums up today’s rental consumer culture.</p> <p>  </p> <p> What does this mean for <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-05/D9UM29R81.htm">entertainment</a> today? Even with the arrival of Redbox, which has rented  more than 1.5 billion movies and games since March 2012, video streaming seems to be the mainstay for at-home entertainment.</p> <p>  </p> <p> YouTube and Hulu are good examples. YouTube is free and allows its users to upload videos of mostly everything, given that it doesn’t infringe copyright. But the website has also started to offer free movies, although the selection is eclectic. Hulu also offers free streaming of current television shows and movies. But after a certain date, available content switches to Hulu+ which is the company’s own paying streaming service, for current and back seasons of TV shows, as well as movies. The price is $7.99 per month for unlimited streaming, similar to Netflix’s current plan.</p> <p>  </p> <p> While Redbox is bringing back the DVD rental, it currently can’t compete with accessibility. Both Netflix and Hulu+ offer streaming onlineon iPads and iPhones, on video game consoles, and Blu-ray systems.</p> <p> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/4mediumnetflix.jpg" style="width: 368px; height: 441px; " /></p> <p> More evidence for online streaming? Cable companies are looking into it as well. Companies like Netflix hold licenses to stream popular movies and television shows from bigger networks. Netflix used to have a deal with Starz that recently ended, shrinking the rental-company’s movie selection.</p> <p>  </p> <p> But these licenses also endanger cable networks’ ad revenue. An article from <em><a href="http://stopthecap.com/2012/05/03/harming-the-core-business-the-precarious-future-of-video-streaming/">Stop the Cap</a></em> points to the example of Nickelodeon. The cable network had licensed some shows to Netflix, and analysts found that households chose the on-demand version instead of traditional TV viewing.</p> <p>  </p> <p> In the same article, Craig Moffett, an analyst with Sanford Bernstein, is quoted as saying “Broadband is increasingly the flagship product, not the video distribution business.”</p> <p>  </p> <p> With this in mind, it might be easy to conclude that online streaming will eventually reign as the at-home experience. If we look at the numbers, Netflix has roughly 26.5 million customers: 10 million of them rent DVDs, and 7 million of the 10 million also stream content. Redbox has roughly 37,000 kiosks and has rented  <a href="http://www.redbox.com/facts">more than 1.5 billion</a> movies and games.</p> <p>  </p> <p> What it comes down to, though, is how the movie and television companies will distribute their products. It is essentially cheaper, on both ends, to offer content via streaming. Also, as people become more engrossed in technology and its instant-gratification services, video streaming will become the top contender for products.</p> <p>  </p> <p> <strong>Author Bio:</strong></p> <p> <em>Gabriella Tutino is a contributing writer at</em> Highbrow Magazine.</p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">streaming</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/dvds" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">DVDs</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/blu-ray" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Blu-ray</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/redbox" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Redbox</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/netflix" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Netflix</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/blockbuster" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Blockbuster</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/online-streaming" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">online streaming</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/movie-rentals" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">movie rentals</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/videos" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">videos</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/games" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">games</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Gabriella Tutino</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-photographer field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Photographer:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">inspiredvideomarketing.com</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Out Slider</div></div></div> Wed, 16 May 2012 00:24:22 +0000 tara 953 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/1159-streaming-another-fad-or-lasting-trend-home-entertainment#comments