basspistol.com/_posts/2020-10-22-streaming-to-the-masses.md

---
title: Streaming to the masses
description: >-
  Most musicians carry a dream. In the beginning of the new millennium internet
  had an intrinsic promise that spoke directly to that dream: to liberate the
  market from the middle-hands.
date: 2020-10-22 12:07:00
artist:
author: set
category: highlights
album:
tags:
  - article
image: /images/posts/markus-spiske--cpu-nljxie-unsplash.jpg
video_path:
download:
link:
  url:
  buttontext:
chat:
check_this_if_cannot_be_bought: false
stores:
  - name:
    url:
    icon:
    download: false
---

## What happened to our dreams?

It's a fairly simple a common story. We thought our new tools would be a remedy to a social problem.

![](/images/posts/photo-2020-10-22-13-59-23.jpg){: width="749" height="403"}

We thought the music market operated differently from other markets, at least i did. I thought that if an industry [freshly grown into a global multi-billion industry](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/music/inside/cron.html){: target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"} could suddenly be on the brink of fall, internet had to be bringing a new variable to the table. And it's almost true: music is a bit different. The music market is a lot more shady then say; the market for salad. (Although i wouldn't be surprised if i am making a debatable claim here.) And while the variable internet brought to table was new, it wasn't any different. Maybe even worse.

But it's not the shadiness of the music market that sets it apart from others. It's how it's value is being created. In that sense, making music is a bit like any art: it can be compared to printing money. You do something with a couple of tools and because of X and Y factor it is determined if it's valuable or not. It doesn't have to bring any actual value to society: it will not transport goods, build housing, make food...