There are two things that are notable about all the arts today: music, film, TV, publishing, radio, art, theater, dance, etc. - they're lousy, and the media says they're great. From about the 80's on, we havne't been in a golden age of anything in the arts. Excluding technological advances (special effects in movies, for instance) these last few decades have been barren of either quality or creativity.
There are three things that are notable about the media today - TV & radio news, newspapers, newsmagazines, etc. There are more news outlets than ever before, they all seem to cover the same stories in the very same way, and they cannot be questioned about anything they do. What a mess!
My name is Tom Hendricks. As a musician, artist, writer, I was getting nowhere. It finally came to the point that I saw that unless I did something on my own, no one would ever see my art. I also decided the same thing was happening to talented artist friends of mine. So I, under the name of Art S. Revolutionary, started the art revolution for those artists outside of the system. At first I was against radio that refused to play indie records, then I saw that they were under the influence of a handful of record companies. But they were owned by bigger conglomerates that owned other companies producing other types of art too. They also owned much of the media that reviewed the art.
While I was studying these conglomerates, a strange thing happened - they were gobbling up every small art company in sight. Then, hungry for more, they began gobbling up each other - and that is still going on today.
Along the way, I came across the book The Media Monopoly written by Ben Bagdikian in 1983 (it's a classic with six printings to date. Get a copy if you can find it.) In it he gave an extremely strong argument why 50 companies should NOT control so much of the arts and media. That was in 1983. Today it's down to 8.
So what does it mean to have only 8 companies controlling almost all of the arts, their distribution, and almost all of the electronic media (and much of the print media as well) that reviews the art?
In art, it means lousy art for $$$. Quality doesn't matter, money does. It's usually art that brings in a safe return on the investment. Unfortunately for those who know and love art, great art seldom is safe, or a sure bet. So great art is out, safe, sanitized art is in - Corporate Art. It's art that Stepford Wives love (see the movie).
And what of the media? They promote Hollywood movies, push conflict stories (lots of black v. white stories, or Arab-Israeli conflict stories, gore reports, scandal, etc. - they used to call it yellow journalism), promote big business, and refuse to talk about anything else. So what you don't see them report on is often greater than what they do talk about. This invisible news includes almost all international news; labor struggles; anti-big business protests; anti-car or city sprawl issues, etc.
It also includes these taboo subjects. Anything that questions their journalistic practices (the media refuses to be questioned, period), anything that questions advertising (advertising has absolutely no benefit for children - ever) or any art that isn't owned by Corporate Art.
What that means is that there is no talk about indie music outside of the control of the "Big 4", no talk about the indie Internet sites (the media puts all internet sites into two categories - the good ones - that sell something; and the evil ones - everything else).
And never a mention of zines - you're reading one now - they are those thousands and thousands of indie desktop published magaZINES that are being made by thousands of zinesters from just about every country in the world. What a mess!
Now let's list the hall of 'lame' - the 8 companies who own it all: Warners (now trying to merge with AOL); Disney (ABC); Seagrams (Canadian conglomerate); Viacom (CBS); GE (NBC and Nuclear Power); News Corp (Fox, an Australian Company); Sony (art & electronics from Japan) and BMG (Bertelsmann, a German conglomerate that is the world's largest publisher). That's it. Add a few newspaper chains and you have most of the newspapers too.
With 8, and only 8, voices, you don't get a variety of opinions. You get stock answers and lawyer morals (sue the competition out of existence). You get a handful of old men running everything...into the ground. You get companies so large they don't have to answer to anyone - even, and this is happening more and more - to government regulators. And at its worst, you began to lose your freedom.
What is the solution? I think first we need to know what is going on. We need to know how bad a mess it's becoming and we need to begin to question and protest the abuses of Corporate Art and Media, and we need to know how to stop it.
Here's my solution: These 8 can either own companies that make art, or distribute art, or review the art. But they CANNOT be allowed to own all three. That would give a chance for competition form indie film makers, writers, musicians, writers, etc. Also, we need to get ads out of the media. Media should be about journalistic integrity, not about doing well in the sweeps weeks.
I encourage you to learn more, to get involved, to reprint this article, and to joint the protest. For more information on the Art Revolution, please see my monthly zine Musea. Long live the revolution in the arts! - Art S. Revolutionary (Tom Hendricks) Back to Contents or The Main Page