Your Fave is Problematic
- Thread starter gouis
- Start date
Bull Shannon
Well-Known Member
The Academy bans Will Smith for 10 years for Chris Rock slap
In a statement, Academy president David Rubin said Will Smith's behavior was unacceptable and harmful.
www.npr.org
Nope, not performative at all. Could’ve asked for the literal award back, you know the one he accepted with a lengthy justification of violence in Abuser Doublespeak, but yeah, disinviting him to future events for a bit is totally effective punishment.
ayayrawn
Well-Known Member
Rescinding an award (which has never been done to an actor, ever) from the only black best actor winner in 15 years would only be worse PR for them. This is fine, and we should all stop thinking about it now.The Academy bans Will Smith for 10 years for Chris Rock slap
In a statement, Academy president David Rubin said Will Smith's behavior was unacceptable and harmful.
Nope, not performative at all. Could’ve asked for the literal award back, you know the one he accepted with a lengthy justification of violence in Abuser Doublespeak, but yeah, disinviting him to future events for a bit is totally effective punishment.
gaporter
Well-Known Member
I did a little bit of looking into it and it appears this isn't a new thing... he's apparently liked tweets before in defense of J.K. Rowling's hateful screeds against trans people, which... wow, that sucks. A lot.
gaporter
Well-Known Member
It's just absolutely awesome that transphobia is totally being normalized all over the place right now and famous people with huge platforms can label all trans people as liars, pedophiles and mentally ill for the horrendous crime of existing without their expressed approval. And it's especially neat how many queer people and "feminists" are right there ready to die on the hill too, history is definitely going to look kindly on you.
Really interesting discussion about nepotism and our entertainers. While I have no wish to unearth discussions before, this has been my gripe with quite a few current entertainers.
The trend for unearthing the cultural heritages of nepotism babies has been on the rise for a while. It’s long been a running, repeatedly viral joke on Twitter that every time a new artist “breaks out”, they turn out to have “blue links on their family wiki”. Or, at least it seems that way. For the unfamiliar, the “blue links” badge is awarded when an artist is such a nepotism baby, that the “family members” section of their Wikipedia page is lit up blue with all the hyperlinks, leading to their relatives’ own biographies.
Although this viral trend is still young, nepotism is certainly nothing new. While there are no concrete statistics on how many musicians enter the industry through family members’ connections, it’s hard to find an artist who doesn’t have those “blue link family members”. Stories of nepotism are surprisingly common outside of the celebrity sphere, too. A study by the Debrett’s Foundation found seven in 10 young people from ages 16 to 25 have used family connections to get their first job.
When you see that you can’t reach your goals, while nepotism babies thrive off connections alone – no hard work necessary – it feels like our entire lives are built on a lie. “This is why celebrities should be open about their lineage and transparent about what they have access to. And use their birth-given platforms to showcase other emerging artists or to shout out the people who may not have exposure.”
theface.com
The trend for unearthing the cultural heritages of nepotism babies has been on the rise for a while. It’s long been a running, repeatedly viral joke on Twitter that every time a new artist “breaks out”, they turn out to have “blue links on their family wiki”. Or, at least it seems that way. For the unfamiliar, the “blue links” badge is awarded when an artist is such a nepotism baby, that the “family members” section of their Wikipedia page is lit up blue with all the hyperlinks, leading to their relatives’ own biographies.
Although this viral trend is still young, nepotism is certainly nothing new. While there are no concrete statistics on how many musicians enter the industry through family members’ connections, it’s hard to find an artist who doesn’t have those “blue link family members”. Stories of nepotism are surprisingly common outside of the celebrity sphere, too. A study by the Debrett’s Foundation found seven in 10 young people from ages 16 to 25 have used family connections to get their first job.
When you see that you can’t reach your goals, while nepotism babies thrive off connections alone – no hard work necessary – it feels like our entire lives are built on a lie. “This is why celebrities should be open about their lineage and transparent about what they have access to. And use their birth-given platforms to showcase other emerging artists or to shout out the people who may not have exposure.”
What TikTok’s obsession with nepotism babies says about class
Ever Googled your fave, only to find their success involves family connections? Unearthing nepo babies online is teaching fans about privilege faster than you can say “started from the bottom”.
theface.com
JonnyH
Well-Known Member
Really interesting discussion about nepotism and our entertainers. While I have no wish to unearth discussions before, this has been my gripe with quite a few current entertainers.
The trend for unearthing the cultural heritages of nepotism babies has been on the rise for a while. It’s long been a running, repeatedly viral joke on Twitter that every time a new artist “breaks out”, they turn out to have “blue links on their family wiki”. Or, at least it seems that way. For the unfamiliar, the “blue links” badge is awarded when an artist is such a nepotism baby, that the “family members” section of their Wikipedia page is lit up blue with all the hyperlinks, leading to their relatives’ own biographies.
Although this viral trend is still young, nepotism is certainly nothing new. While there are no concrete statistics on how many musicians enter the industry through family members’ connections, it’s hard to find an artist who doesn’t have those “blue link family members”. Stories of nepotism are surprisingly common outside of the celebrity sphere, too. A study by the Debrett’s Foundation found seven in 10 young people from ages 16 to 25 have used family connections to get their first job.
When you see that you can’t reach your goals, while nepotism babies thrive off connections alone – no hard work necessary – it feels like our entire lives are built on a lie. “This is why celebrities should be open about their lineage and transparent about what they have access to. And use their birth-given platforms to showcase other emerging artists or to shout out the people who may not have exposure.”
What TikTok’s obsession with nepotism babies says about class
Ever Googled your fave, only to find their success involves family connections? Unearthing nepo babies online is teaching fans about privilege faster than you can say “started from the bottom”.
It's not even nepotism that's the real problem for me in the music industry, it's class(which is of course tied into it). You may be the first musician in your family, but your dad who is a starbucks VP sure makes it possible for you to not have to have a job and focus on your music.
Yep, this too.
Plus, how are you going to learn how to play without lessons and instruments? All of this costs both money and time. I knew kids that weren't able to do any sort of after school anything because they had to work or they didn't have money to eat.
Bull Shannon
Well-Known Member
Really interesting discussion about nepotism and our entertainers. While I have no wish to unearth discussions before, this has been my gripe with quite a few current entertainers.
The trend for unearthing the cultural heritages of nepotism babies has been on the rise for a while. It’s long been a running, repeatedly viral joke on Twitter that every time a new artist “breaks out”, they turn out to have “blue links on their family wiki”. Or, at least it seems that way. For the unfamiliar, the “blue links” badge is awarded when an artist is such a nepotism baby, that the “family members” section of their Wikipedia page is lit up blue with all the hyperlinks, leading to their relatives’ own biographies.
Although this viral trend is still young, nepotism is certainly nothing new. While there are no concrete statistics on how many musicians enter the industry through family members’ connections, it’s hard to find an artist who doesn’t have those “blue link family members”. Stories of nepotism are surprisingly common outside of the celebrity sphere, too. A study by the Debrett’s Foundation found seven in 10 young people from ages 16 to 25 have used family connections to get their first job.
When you see that you can’t reach your goals, while nepotism babies thrive off connections alone – no hard work necessary – it feels like our entire lives are built on a lie. “This is why celebrities should be open about their lineage and transparent about what they have access to. And use their birth-given platforms to showcase other emerging artists or to shout out the people who may not have exposure.”
What TikTok’s obsession with nepotism babies says about class
Ever Googled your fave, only to find their success involves family connections? Unearthing nepo babies online is teaching fans about privilege faster than you can say “started from the bottom”.
This has been getting me really down lately; as someone who pursued the arts in college and after, I felt really stymied by the talent vs. privilege dichotomy. I think you can succeed without connections, but even privileges such as a specialized college education or a parent covering rent while you toil in obscurity can make the difference between the successes and failures. For the life of me I can’t remember if it was on this forum or elsewhere, and I forget who it was about, but there was debate over a musician’s talent and privilege, and some folks felt defensive: if someone is accusing my favorite musician of only gaining fame/success through privilege, that must mean they’re also accusing that person of lacking talent. I think the reality is more nefarious: if the main difference between a talented artist and a successful talented artist is economic, then the concept of a meritocracy is false.
I think as the middle class erodes and the gulf between the working and ruling classes widens, it becomes more apparent. On the good days it just fuels me to make sure I’m doing my creative work for myself and the people immediately around me.
ayayrawn
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it really is a bummer that the age of bands making it out of the garage are over. Wonder if people like Springsteen or the Ramones would have even had a chance in today's industry.
I've been thinking about this a bit because in some perverse way, it feels like technology making music so much more accessible for creators has subsequently caused a huge advantage for well connected musicians (in life) to rise out of that huge sea of artists to prominence. The point on cost and nepotism are taken (and IMO true), but there's also so many more people making and distributing music that the grassroots content world is much more of a marketing game than it was before.
I'm not even sure if it's worse than in the past in terms of overall net issues: the reduction of that onerous record contract to get music made is a huge win for all artists especially those without upper class money or social connections. But it's something that makes it so hard to parse through.
This has been bouncing in my head after the whole hubbub around abcdefu by Gayle came about. Newsweek had a pretty good primer here but like, even if you believe Atlantic's story...isn't this part of the issue? So she's a seventeen year old who had already moved to Nashville to start a music career (not sure when, probably safe to assume in the last couple years), had a few self produced singles that were "discovered" by music super insider Kara Dioguardi, and then had a label manipulating social media engagement covertly to promote a planned single. It seems reasonably safe to assume GAYLE is at least coming from some place of money, time, and connections to grow in this world. I struggle to hold it against, specifically, the artists but it's a deeply inequitable game. I think of artists I really do like to mixed extents. King Princess? Descendent of the owner of Macys and her father ran a studio. Paris Bennett? Michael Jackson's child (honestly her music is real good but still). Even a band like Haim? Just reading that "how they got there" page has so much of all of this that other artists try for decades to get even part of and fail. It's not to dismiss their talents at all but...yeah it's a rigged up game so often.
I'm not even sure if it's worse than in the past in terms of overall net issues: the reduction of that onerous record contract to get music made is a huge win for all artists especially those without upper class money or social connections. But it's something that makes it so hard to parse through.
This has been bouncing in my head after the whole hubbub around abcdefu by Gayle came about. Newsweek had a pretty good primer here but like, even if you believe Atlantic's story...isn't this part of the issue? So she's a seventeen year old who had already moved to Nashville to start a music career (not sure when, probably safe to assume in the last couple years), had a few self produced singles that were "discovered" by music super insider Kara Dioguardi, and then had a label manipulating social media engagement covertly to promote a planned single. It seems reasonably safe to assume GAYLE is at least coming from some place of money, time, and connections to grow in this world. I struggle to hold it against, specifically, the artists but it's a deeply inequitable game. I think of artists I really do like to mixed extents. King Princess? Descendent of the owner of Macys and her father ran a studio. Paris Bennett? Michael Jackson's child (honestly her music is real good but still). Even a band like Haim? Just reading that "how they got there" page has so much of all of this that other artists try for decades to get even part of and fail. It's not to dismiss their talents at all but...yeah it's a rigged up game so often.
I don't necessarily hold it against anyone, but we have to realize that we aren't getting the best of the best, because the meritocracy that never really was there, has completely broken down. I realize often that there are probably better actors, musicians and writers doing menial jobs because of lack of connections, not talent. I also think that this connection to wealth that a large portion of our entertainers have means that their art and music is usually somewhat out of touch.
Just to add to the discussion. The main problem with being any sort of creative artist is that it doesn't pay the bills and most do rely on other income streams:
Sad to say, there are fewer artists in the middle nowadays. I’m told that only 2% of creators on Patreon even earn the federal minimum wage. It’s hard to figure out how many people are making a middle-class living on music streaming, but I note that you don’t earn the minimum wage on Spotify until you generate more than 3 million streams per year. I imagine a similar stratification is happening to creators on YouTube, TikTok, and other platforms.
In other words, it’s easy to become a starving artist in the digital economy. And a few make enormous sums. But the more modest goal of living a middle-class lifestyle is harder to achieve than you might think.
A survey of more than one thousand visual artists found that the median income was below $30,000—that’s roughly half the typical household earnings in the United States. I note that 63 percent of respondents had art degrees, but on a scale of 1 to 10, they rated their education at only a 5 in preparing them for a financially stable career.
And they have good reason to complain. Only 19% made more than $50,000. In other words, their arts degree was more likely to put them below the poverty line than in the middle class.
Let’s hope they didn’t take out a lot of student loans.
Here’s the most revealing part of the survey: 29% of respondents relied on family financial support or an inheritance to pay the bills. Many needed to take on other work—in fact, only 10% devoted 40 hours per week or more to their art.
This is the real bottom line: Creative pursuits are increasingly turning into playgrounds for those with family money—typically from parents or a partner/spouse who works. That’s not very glamorous, so it’s usually left unmentioned. And journalists won’t ask about it either. They prefer to focus on success stories, not life in the trenches for the everyday working artist.
Is the Middle Class Musician Disappearing?
Sad to say, there are fewer artists in the middle nowadays. I’m told that only 2% of creators on Patreon even earn the federal minimum wage. It’s hard to figure out how many people are making a middle-class living on music streaming, but I note that you don’t earn the minimum wage on Spotify until you generate more than 3 million streams per year. I imagine a similar stratification is happening to creators on YouTube, TikTok, and other platforms.
In other words, it’s easy to become a starving artist in the digital economy. And a few make enormous sums. But the more modest goal of living a middle-class lifestyle is harder to achieve than you might think.
A survey of more than one thousand visual artists found that the median income was below $30,000—that’s roughly half the typical household earnings in the United States. I note that 63 percent of respondents had art degrees, but on a scale of 1 to 10, they rated their education at only a 5 in preparing them for a financially stable career.
And they have good reason to complain. Only 19% made more than $50,000. In other words, their arts degree was more likely to put them below the poverty line than in the middle class.
Let’s hope they didn’t take out a lot of student loans.
Here’s the most revealing part of the survey: 29% of respondents relied on family financial support or an inheritance to pay the bills. Many needed to take on other work—in fact, only 10% devoted 40 hours per week or more to their art.
This is the real bottom line: Creative pursuits are increasingly turning into playgrounds for those with family money—typically from parents or a partner/spouse who works. That’s not very glamorous, so it’s usually left unmentioned. And journalists won’t ask about it either. They prefer to focus on success stories, not life in the trenches for the everyday working artist.
Is the Middle Class Musician Disappearing?
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
The only thing I have to say about this is that from working in the movie industry there are tons of people that studied arts that are making a ton of money. They may not be seen as artists, but understanding of various methods of communication is a very valuable skill. You can make a lot of money off of it.
ranbalam
Well-Known Member
This is so true. I consistently have music projects, video projects, and other art projects in the works. I record and release music videos fairly regularly....but I no longer have any dreams of what I do getting any further than my circle, and maybe a few random folks. Even if I put twice as much time in, it's just not something that will pay bills. Plus I have a ton of music on Spotify, Apple, and the rest, but those .0006 pennies aren't really adding up.
Luckily I do it more for my sanity then for money. I feel for the people that have to rely on it for income.
My one breakthrough was getting a song placed on Shameless, and the streaming royalties provides enough money to buy something for the studio a couple times a year, but not close to enough to quit my day job...and yet it's a thrill to get checks even at that level. I'd probably have to sell 30 songs for it to be anywhere close to living wage...and yet, I feel so lucky to even have had that one break.
avecigrec
Well-Known Member
This is so true. I consistently have music projects, video projects, and other art projects in the works. I record and release music videos fairly regularly....but I no longer have any dreams of what I do getting any further than my circle, and maybe a few random folks. Even if I put twice as much time in, it's just not something that will pay bills. Plus I have a ton of music on Spotify, Apple, and the rest, but those .0006 pennies aren't really adding up.
Luckily I do it more for my sanity then for money. I feel for the people that have to rely on it for income.
My one breakthrough was getting a song placed on Shameless, and the streaming royalties provides enough money to buy something for the studio a couple times a year, but not close to enough to quit my day job...and yet it's a thrill to get checks even at that level. I'd probably have to sell 30 songs for it to be anywhere close to living wage...and yet, I feel so lucky to even have had that one break.
I had an 18-month stretch where I supported myself 100% through the arts (poetry shows and workshops, chapbook sales and some sound tech gigs) but I pretty much needed to be on the road for 11 to 12 of those months to make that viable - which was fun as can be at the time, but also completely not viable these days with family and a mortgage.
Joe Mac
Well-Known Member
Completely agree with this. It accounts for the shockingly low amounts of political or protest music in one of the most inequitable periods in history.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Funny this discussion. Im thinking about getting a Big Ego records subscription. It’s a small label/studios in LA or Long Beach that against all odds has managed to stay afloat. The main man Chris Schlarb has supported his family on the work he has done both at an artist and producer. His big goal was to get over 100 subscriptions for this year. Lots of great music. He often uses Jeff Parker.