Wonderful man, this author. He is not an artist, yet understands us. His objectivity and compassion, his range on all aspects of art in the world as well as the inner world of an artist, are indeed a much-needed expression available to all who read books.
The word that I prefer over "consumer" is appreciator. I feel hugely offended when I'm referred to as a consumer, I can imagine many others are disgusted by this word too.
HOW CREATORS ARE STRUGGLING TO SURVIVE IN THE AGE OF BILLIONAIRES (AND) BIG TECH *AND THE DANG AMATEURS* -- Still, agree with his conclusions. It's more competitive, compensations is poorer, but some people still make it work.
With only 7 minutes into the talk, my question is - did the author consider the new subscription-based models, pioneered by Patreon, followed by many, include RU-vid itself, with the new "Join" feature, that allows consumers setting up a recurring donation to the channel owners?
Art "deserves remuneration".....? So who gets to decide what constitutes "art," then? I'm an author in the self-publishing world and this chick he interviewed sounds like a dreamer who's not in touch with what people want to read. Literary fiction doesn't sell anyway! And who wants to pay for a "series of vignettes"?? Art does get remunerated. When it's the kind people actually want. People will give money even if they don't have to, in order to support an artist they believe in. The self-publishing world is an almost pure meritocracy. Either you're producing something people want to pay for, or you're not. 99.9% of artists are not producing anything worth paying for. But in this, nothing has really changed, except the market can make its own decisions instead of being subject to the whims of the Big Five with their huge marketing budgets
