a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by JonBanes

Lack of imagination about new revenue streams by aging musicians is hardly going to result in a lack of creative content. Look at how much more diversity and creativity there is on the music scene now than 30 years ago, this is largely due to the democratizing effect the internet can have on such industries.

I think there is an interesting parallel with comic strips (think funny pages, not spiderman). Pre-internet, you made a comic strip and then sold it, selling to just one person or newspaper was not profitable so you would sell it to an organization that could distribute it for you, a syndicate. The rise of the internet brought us some of the first web-comics, syndicated by the internet. But how do you make money off of that? Well, they had to do a lot of trial and error, but there are now a growing number of people capable of maintaining a living (and doing it better than traditional syndication ever did) and they are doing it in a gigantic diversity of ways, not just by creating product X (the comic strip itself) and selling it.

Music still feels like it's stuck in the pre-internet era. Musicians create a 2-3 minute song and try and sell it. That seems like a really inflexible model, there is no technical reason music needs to be packaged this way and I'm guessing that the people capable of finding a new way to package their talents could start a revolution.

I don't have answers, but all this fatalism about how music is dying is silly and short-sighted.





Cruxen  ·  3846 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    The rise of the internet brought us some of the first web-comics, syndicated by the internet. But how do you make money off of that? Well, they had to do a lot of trial and error, but there are now a growing number of people capable of maintaining a living (and doing it better than traditional syndication ever did)

I largely agree with the point you're making in the rest of your comment- But webcomics are not the best choice for a medium that's doing "well" profit wise. I mean, yes, you have comics like Questionable Content that are able to do it full time- but the vast majority of the time web comics are a profitless medium. It hasn't drained creativity from the medium of comics- but I would say the internet was bad for the profit margins of comics.

JonBanes  ·  3846 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The point was really that web comic people diversified. Look at penny-arcade, Scott Kurtz, randal Monroe, Ryan west (I mean North), the oatmeal, kris straub. Questionable content is almost traditional by their standards, making one product, one way and selling it. All the other talent in comics have branched out, using that art to make more diverse things than a formula driven 3-panel comic.

EDIT: Also, all those people do make a good living, heck, penny-arcade has a staff of like 7 people, a multi-million dollar charity and an international expo, they are doing pretty good. I can name more people living off web-comics than I ever could for syndication.

EDIT: Ryan North, Ha!

cov  ·  3844 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Ryan North, for example, drummed up a lot of sales for his anthology Machine of Death, it's sequel, and his recent Hamlet book just because people are fans of his writing. He's got enough popularity that he's writing now for the Adventure Time print comic. Most of the time, people are interested in his stuff because, hey, it's by "the guy that writes Dinosaur Comics".

KC Green writes the Regular Show one. Kate Beaton did some work for Marvel. Anthony Clark has done covers for Marvel, and I'm sure there's a few more examples that are slipping my mind.

They've built themselves a loyal fanbase who will provide interest in their other endeavors.

JonBanes  ·  3843 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Zach Weinersmith also comes to mind, he's done everything, youtube skits, two comics, science podcast, interactive book.