Serialised hubris
Gerd Leonhard is releasing his new book in weekly chapter installments. It’s called ‘The End of Control’ and you’ll be able to get it free from his website before it’s out in paperback.
Leonhard, if you’re not familiar with his work, is behind another book entitled ‘The Future of Music‘ and is one of the proprietors of a rather clever music promotion/distribution/retail widget called Sonific.
He’s a smart man and, from my own experiences of him, a very nice one.
But it worries me that he is taken so seriously. By all means read his book and mine it for good ideas, of which I’m sure there will be many. But please, for goodness sake, do not believe everything he has to say. He has seized upon several surefire methods of being completely and utterly wrong in every important respect.
Here’s a quote from his press release:
“The End of Control (EoC) book expands on the key topics introduced in my previous book “The Future of Music” while escalating the debate out of the music realm and into media at large. EoC addresses the single most important issue underlying many debates about the future of media: who controls what, why, when, and where, and how can digital content still generate revenues when most of the traditional ways of controlling its flow (i.e., distribution) are no longer available. In the book I will argue that in the future, controlling distribution is replaced with earning, receiving, and maintaining attention; that in media’s future friction is fiction; and that the “people formerly known as consumers†now literally run the show.I believe that this radical shift will require media purveyors to switch from a “push†to a “pull†approach. Pointing out ways to monetize digital content in the future, I will reveal the bold new paradigm that has been dangling in front of our noses since the advent of the Web browser: by letting go of our obsession with control, we receive new streams of revenue and plenty of growth opportunities in return.”
I agree whole-heartedly that control is one of the key issues behind the trouble with copyright as it stands now is that corporations have been using it as an instrument of control, rather than as an incentive to creativity.
But — I’m sorry — “reveal the bold new paradigm”?!
Generally speaking, I think that distribution has become problematic for people used to making their money by charging for access to media content. I don’t think this means that the future will involve everybody making access free to all people at all times.
It’s the worst kind of technological determinism: the idea that shifts in media technology MAKE things happen. New technologies do certainly create environments within which different ratios of effects are possible — even encouraged. But media shifts are always socially negotiated. The internet doesn’t decide what happens. People do. And people can be unpredictable.
And yes, strong technological determinism irritates me, because it’s just sloppy and narrow thinking. But what pushes my buttons even more is the idea of ‘futurism’ (to which I bring the same skepticism I would bring to a crystal ball gazer at a carnival). Anyone who claims to be able to predict a future based on current trends and trajectories is pretty much guaranteed to be wrong. The world is full of unexpected and unintended consequences.
You can only look at where we are now, and make intelligent decisions based on a clear understanding of what actually surrounds us. Making business decisions in the music industry on the basis of where we’ll end up sometime in the future is fraught with difficulty.
First of all, we won’t end up anywhere. Things don’t arrive at some completed state. They continue to change.
And second, the idea that we are currently going through a phase of confusion and complexity, in which different people do different things, and that eventually people will act in a coherent and predictable fashion is obvious nonsense.
Leonhard seems to have been fully sucked into the idea of ‘the people formerly known as consumers’ — or, as he puts it ‘usators‘ (shudder), a combination of the words ‘user’ and ‘creator’. It’s a reasonably fashionable and somewhat totalising fiction based on deeply lazy thinking.
The concept is, simply put, that because consumers now create their own media and engage with the objects of consumption in a more active way, they are now all going to be a new category of undifferentiated ‘pro-sumers’ (let’s pray the term ‘usators’ doesn’t catch on).
Let’s just overlook, for the moment, issues of education, economics and culture. And let’s also leave aside the idea that the ways in which we engage with media changes from moment to moment.
Sure, sometimes I want to remix a song I’ve downloaded or blog about something that happened in the news. Sometimes I want the freedom of infinite choice. But sometimes, as Douglas Adams once put it, ‘I just want my mother to put a plate of food in front of me and tell me to eat it’.
Perhaps worst of all, Leonhard imagines some sort of utopian society where media has been fully democratised. Power relationships no longer exist between producers and consumers, control over the means of distribution is no longer a factor and frictionless markets allow anybody who wishes to make and sell music and media to effortlessly create and distribute, all for one easy monthly payment of five magic beans.
It’s tempting to try and guess where things are headed and try and jump ahead to the final chapter in the book, but can I please encourage you to do the harder thing, and examine in detail where your business is at, where your customers are at, and the opportunities afforded you with the technology that is currently available.
We’re not going to be wearing silver jumpsuits, eating meals-in-a-pill or flying around in jetpacks any time soon, as nice as that is to think about.
I apologise that this makes me as cross as it does. I have nothing against the man personally, and a lot of what he says is insightful and based on some very good analysis of current factors.
But beware: he’s selling snake oil.
_______________________
That all said, the idea of relinquishing control over access as a strategy to ‘generate new streams of revenue and growth opportunities’ is a reasonably sound concept. Forget about this as a totality of music business. Let’s ask the more important question: ‘How could this work in your specific instance?’
15 Comments. Write a comment or link to this post
Gerd Leonhard
Andrew, as usual, fast fire from your end which is always good. I just wanted to remark that in general, my new book “The End of Control” is designed to provoke, of course, to be bring things down to the crucial points, to tickle out the resistance. And believe it or not, a media world without, or with less, control, is indeed a bold new proposition since it entails embracing the inevitable shift of power to the users (whether or not you believe that they can create, themselves, or not). I fail to see why you think that is technological determinism – I am not talking about technology here; I am talking about how PEOPLE have changed due to the technology that is now available to them. Also, nobody has ever accused my of narrow thinking, btw – that one is new
. But where I really take issue with your ‘review’ is when you allege ‘deeply lazy thinking’ – I have been accused of thinking too deep or too fast or too BUSY, but not the opposite; until now. Maybe, Andrew, you could possibly question your OWN assumptions before you dish them up here – your thinking here is decidedly uninspired, imho. And lastly: I am not selling anything, not even my book. I am sharing my thoughts while you are seem to be sharing your flawed assumptions. Readers beware: Andrew is selling …Andrew.
Oct 1st, 2007
Christian Ward
From the wonderful Charlie Brooker: “There’s a whole industry devoted to working out what’s going to happen in the future: jittery governments paying big bucks to learned men and women who call themselves “futurologists” (or “guessers”) and make informed predictions (or “guesses”) about the shape of things to come.”
Oct 1st, 2007
Dubber
My problem is with totalising thinking, which might be far-reaching, insightful or ‘busy’ – but whether you’ll go along with lazy or narrow (which, in most instances for most people, it decidedly is), the point here is that the simple act of claiming that the world will be a certain way is necessarily an act of oversimplification.
Talking about how PEOPLE have changed as a result of technology is pretty much a spot-on working definition of technological determinism. I’m far more interested in talking about how people negotiate change within a technological environment.
It might not be trendy or particularly quotable to point out that the world is a complex place. I probably won’t get a book deal out of it or get on the consultancy/public speaking fast track either. But my purpose here is not (entirely) to put down your work, Gerd – just to point out all the red flags that your press release waves furiously.
The press release embraces all of the sorts of soundbite prophesy that make me really uncomfortable — especially when it comes from people I respect who more or less do the sorts of things I do.
I’m looking forward to reading the book itself.
Oct 1st, 2007
declan
I have to agree that predicting tomorrow is impossible within the “music industry”. I am all for discourse and looking forward when trying to create new business models and delivery/reward systems. There is nothing wrong with suggesting possibilities and promoting active discussion.
Claiming that the possibility as a fact however is a big leap. Remember the idea that the Internet would be a grand panacea for indie musicians and the download would elevate the artist while traditional record companies crumbled creating a musician’s Utopia?
People believed it because they wanted an answer to uncertainty and it sounded great. People do not like being in an uncomfortable state of ignorance about tomorrow and will often latch onto the biggest and brightest piece of intellectual driftwood that offers the most hope.
The simple fact is at the moment no one, from the top to the bottom, has a clear idea of which definite business model or set of models will work for today not to mention tomorrow.
I will read the book with an open mind and thanks Andrew for bringing it to our attention. Leonhard, i wouldn’t worry about people not reading your book because of Andrews very good points. I think the readers on here are very open minded and filter lots of information.
Oct 1st, 2007
mikhail alexandrovich
I am eating popcorn and reading with interest
Oct 1st, 2007
mikhail alexandrovich
Gerd says “I am talking about how PEOPLE have changed due to the technology that is now available to them.” What figures are available on things like now many people have access to new technology, how many have changed as a result and how many are carrying on regardless? Again, there will always be numbers of people, with, without or don’t even care about technology and of course this will cause complication in making assumptions on what will happen. I still deal with bands who sell music on vinyl at gigs and have no interest in the internet or even cds for that matter. And technology may be one thing but huge numbers of people have no access to credit, credit cards, or even broadband so that will influence pirating, copying, and the rest….I think…
Oct 1st, 2007
Bruce Warila
Great exchange guys!
When I talk to artists and I say things like “technology is changing the music industry”, I get a short stare, a long draw on cigarette, a slurp of beer and response like “you think so…”
I pause and I think again. Nope your skepticism is worthy of my reconsideration. My statement is meaningless to you. You are an artist and you need a deeper explanation.
Technology does not reach into the sole and therefore it can not be the deep reason why your music can’t buy petrol for the wagon.
So, I dig a little deeper – really deep, and I say “technology is enabling humanity to return to our source; to help us reconnect with our ancestral tribes with unprecedented speed…”
I get a long stare this time, his cigarette burns in his hand untouched and the beer stays on the table.
He says “I can see that…how can I find a tribe that will buy my music?”
I’m stuck, but I say “I will get back to you with a solid answer next week…”
Oct 1st, 2007
Gerd Leonhard
Guys, about Futurism: for me, this is simply a good tag I use to describe what I do. In fact, I only started using it after dozens of people told me that they wanted to hear more ‘about the future’ from me! Fact is, I am just about as interested in the Presence than I am in the Future. And on that note: I don’t claim to offer definitive scenarios about what’s going to happen in 3 years. I just look at trends and developments, put a very large puzzle together, and try to scout out where things are going, and how one can jump on the right train at the right time. If you are looking what great people and thinkers like Glen Hiemstra do (www.futurist.com – he’s a friend) I am definitely in a rather modest range as far as serious futurizing is concerned. And also: which possibilities am I claiming as facts (declan) – ALL of my work is always presented as opinion. Cheers Gerd
Oct 1st, 2007
Milton
Reading this exchange here while also digesting the Radiohead new release article located in the Newswire section supplied me with a considerable amount of information to ponder.
A band like Radiohead has the means (money, technology and talent) to seemingly make the most of the current conditions being discussed here. Unfortunately most “unknown” artists will be hard pressed to implement such a high standard of consumer/artist satisfaction. This is not to say that we; the striving musicians/businesspeople are not capable of similar ideas and concepts…just that the funds to put such a plan into action are much more accessible to the boys in a platinum selling band.
I may or may not have a point here…but if I did I guess it might be for the little fish out there to think just as creatively but on a much smaller/affordable scale. Anyone making music in their home studio that has plans of rock stardom and all the riches so many associate with it…well…slow down and think smart and think about the here and now…and think about what you can do in a localized way to bring about your hopeful success. (Not to mention defining what success actually means to the specific individual)
Mr. Eno, Mr. Gabriel and even Mr. Timberlake will not need to worry about how to feed the family…but many, many, many of us do. Don’t quit your day job.
Oct 1st, 2007
MindscapeMusic
This is a great discussion! I think Mr. Alexandrovich has a good point – this isn’t *quite* the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in action (ie that the act of “examining” something changes its nature), but it’s something similar:
We shouldn’t assume that the most *interesting* aspects of the trend are the most *common* aspects of a trend. The fact of fan-made mashups is singificant, cool and new; but it’s not so commonplace that everyone is doing it (among all my music-loving friends, I don’t know anyone who has made a mashup!)
The model for the music business is indeed changing, but, as Bruce Warila implied, some core aspects of peoples’ reaction to music and WHY they consume it will remain unchanged.
Oct 1st, 2007
Nolan Smock
Milton,
I think that actually the beauty in Radiohead’s release is, sure they have the funds to do these things, but they are essentially creating their own capital. I’m sure they already have the funding for the disc-box but when I look at my situation, a relatively unknown musician with a fan base of a couple hundred, I see this idea still at work.
I released a free album last Tuesday and it bumped my attention through the roof and this is with no label support. Because of that attention, I have people all around my state who are willing to essentially finance my tour (that is, feeding me, putting me up, paying for merch, and paying for performance) and I have made no loss as of yet.
I’m an “artist” and I think what sets me apart from others in my area (geographically) is not the understanding of the technology, but the understanding of the shift of power from labels into the hands of the consumer. The middleman is dying out and I can be responsible for my own success or failing.
While I think what Leonhard has to say about everyone creating content and media is utter nonsense, I still think what he has to say about the separation between producer and consumer disappearing is almost right on. However, not everyone wants to create! Some people just want to experience and enjoy creativity. The line isn’t disappearing because everyone is creating, it’s disappearing because there’s no middleman and those providing creative media are finely-tuned to the consumers tastes and a part of their everyday experience instead of just a CD on the shelf.
Something like that, anyway.
Love the blog. Started reading it via a link in Hometracked after I was getting frustrated about having no musician friends know what I was talking about. It’s good to know there’s a bigger dialogue about this stuff going on.
Oct 1st, 2007
Nolan Smock
Oh yeah, I should say this isn’t a tour of venues (except for a couple nights, anyway), it’s a tour of house gigs and public space performances… a literal embodiment of that “disappearing line” I mentioned, I guess.
Oct 1st, 2007
Craig
Another great discussion
I respect Gerd’s ideas, but one of the biggest problems I have with the ‘music like water’ idea is the amount of change required. It requires a total re-adaptation from many different angles – government, business, consumers etc
Apple sure as hell wouldnt take it without a fight – etc
In fact I’m coming to the conclusion that I really dont know what’s wrong with the way things are shaping up now – there are more and more ways appearing to accept payment and social networking/PR as well – we have already seen the technology come into play that has cut out the middle man – we’re seeing more and more cases of musicians doing it themselves, and some people even dont see it as the death of the record industry, more their transformation into PR/promotion companies
why would everybody want to push to make all the changes neccessary to have a flat tax when as it stands now you can buy tracks for a few cents?
It all just seems a bit like coming up with solutions to things that are solving themselves naturally
sure people are downloading off P2P – but maybe the only difference in that to taping albums onto cassette is there was no way of telling easily how many copies were made – but there must have been billions of cassette copies of albums made between the 70s-90s
illegal downloads are just a fact of life, and I see it more as the responsibility of the artist to just provide more reasons to pay them the money – and there can be loads
I think we have to accept that the price recorded music fetches is much less than it used to be, but the cost of producing it is too, and by cutting out the middle man and doing it yourself you get to keep all of it
Nov 3rd, 2007
So... What do YOU think?