Okay so what I'm hearing is you want companies to make investments in artists directly - so a form of profit sharing essentially. Why would a company invest in artists if artists get all of the profits when its successful and the company loses all of the capital if it fails? Why would any business want to partake in a system like that?

[–] tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

No, fuck the middle man, we don't need billion dollar conglomerates to distribute our media. The people have the tools and connection to create and share without these old business models trying to keep us in the 19th century as wage slaves, happy for the peanuts that their monopolies allow us to have.

I pirate things, and I also pay artists directly for their work when I can. Companies like Netflix manipulate the data and the market to ensure they are making the most profit possible. That is their entire goal as businesses. This exploitation should be separate from art altogether.

[–] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

To be fair, the billion dollar conglomerates are the ones that fund the creation of the media. Without those billions, the media just doesn't get made.

[–] tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago

They spend the majority of those billions on marketing, higher tier salaries, a very small portion goes to the artists. Without those billions media would still get made because there is always demand for entertainment and art.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Nobody is saying that. You made that up as a stupid alternative to what we're saying is bad to make the bad thing look like it makes sense.