[Eric_WVGG]

Most of the responses here are just sort of saying "no you're just old," but I wanna buck that and point to some actual differences between now and whenever you're marking the last stage of culture as.

Media consolidation we've evolved into is nuts. Disney has turned American national culture into a creamy smoothie, Sinclair and Clear Channel have made radio and television across municipalities into photocopied and rubber-stamped content, and the Internet killed local newspapers.

We used to have a monolithic mainstream culture and a handful of subcultures. There is still a mainstream, but the subcultures have proliferated, and now are so niche and rapidly evolving that they're difficult to even track as real. Meanwhile, Sunday night football and Simpsons reruns keep chugging along unchanged for decades.

Although it was the cultural left that warned against media consolidation, we basically have the Telecommunications Deregulation Act of 1994 to blame for a lot of this. So, thanks Bill.

[tomc1985]

Should note that subculture seems to have died out among the youngest set. My little sis claims her high school class didn't have cliques and she's currently "studying" goth culture like an anthropologist. (She wants to join them)

[PaulHoule]

My son graduated from high school, possibly a pathological one, but it seemed the main subcultures were "black kids who like to jump over white kids", "fat kids who don't identify male or female", and "people who put up black lives matter signs in a place that last saw a black person in 2007".

If you actually knew them you'd know there are some atomized individuals who "think different" like the Chinese incel who was begging his mom to pay for plastic surgery. We keep rooting for him to run away from home and live in a "Fight Club" house. He dropped out of the blackpill cult he was in because he didn't want to associate with Indians, so now we're worried he'll fall in people who incite violence.

[kpennell]

you might enjoy this read 'The internet didn’t kill counterculture—you just won’t find it on Instagram'

https://www.documentjournal.com/2021/01/the-internet-didnt-k...

[randcraw]

Actually, thank Ron as well. I blame the end of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 for ending the open exchange of ideas and enabling the rise of polarized media oligopolies and local monopolies. Anything run only by giant corporations is soul killing. It's inescapable.

Craigslist and Google sealed the deal by eliminating ad revenue from the diverse media outlets that existed prior to 2000 (now long gone), thereby killing off all but the largest media outlets. Henceforth, all forms of entertainment has to be "giant corporate approved" in order to cut a distribution deal to sell the pap-ish drivel that corporate suits demand. Welcome to the machine, indeed.

[dougmwne]

I think there is also an environment consolidation that is driving this. People are very determined by their environment and experiences. Their art and creativity flows out of those experiences. They also respond to the demand for their art because they want the art to be viewed by many. With our hyper connected and globalized world, the environment that most people experience is getting more homogeneous. Likewise the immediate feedback of social media pushes people to only attempt to create art that will be well received. No more artists misunderstood during their lifetimes struggling to understand how to attract an audience. Just like big tech creates a winner take all market, big media and social media creates a narrow window of content being created and consumed.

And besides, if someone is out there making weird, novel, innovative and unpopular art, the algorithm will never show it to you.

[nine_k]

I see how big media will only show mainstream content: they are the mainstream.

But what about user-curated content in communities such as Reddit? These are vote-based, not corporate-algorithm-based. I suspect you can find worthy unorthodox art there.

And of course if you need non-mainstream content, you have to actively look for it, and always have had, practically by definition.

[Fervicus]

Reddit is ripe with astroturfing, bots, heavy moderation, and a politically/ideologically curated front page. There are some niche subreddits that can be great though.

[nine_k]

Certainly! The front page and popular places like r/pics are the mainstream.

[dougmwne]

Yes, my point is that reddit is an algorithm driven popularity contest that resists novelty and experimentation. Same with all social media. You can certainly post your weird art there, but the algorithm will never show it to anyone.

[krapp]

Yes, which is why subreddits like /r/imsorryjon and /r/fifthworldproblems never took off.

People seek out novel and interesting things - there are subreddits and networks of subreddits dedicated to that. Popularity algorithms aren't monolithic, they take trends like novelty into account.

[mattbrewsbytes]

Maybe its more commercialization ala moneyball metrics on all media. They get analytics that tell them certain content gets more ads, ads feed the bottom line so that is what they do. Same for movies or "free" content on video services like youtube, twitch, etc. those go by the number of views. They have optimized their revenue funnels and counter culture things just don't pay.

The corporate consolidations have made it a conflict of interest for them to investigate themselves essentially (i.e. will you ever see stories on ABC that cast Disney in a bad light?)

You could say its ripe for a revolution but then you will have people asking how to monetize that revolution and you are back at the same problem.

[krapp]

>Same for movies or "free" content on video services like youtube, twitch, etc. those go by the number of views. They have optimized their revenue funnels and counter culture things just don't pay.

I take it you haven't actually been on any of these platforms lately because there is an insane amount of niche content on all of them. In fact, catering to subculture and niche interests is what makes them successful.

Also, the commoditization of counterculture by mass media is a thing in general. Hip-hop, punk, anime, D&D, you name it.

[mattbrewsbytes]

I would say within a niche on something like youtube you will find the content is different from other topics but the format and "what works" is all the same. In-spot ads are the same companies pushing the same stuff - ray con, hello fresh, if its gaming its something shadow legends, etc. Do these channel owners actually use that stuff? (rhetorical question)

Any new person into a space has to mimic others that are successful in order to get views - copying thumbnail formats, topics, video length, "putting links in the description in case you're interested" (aka buy stuff with my affiliate code), etc.

This leads to content within a niche forming a monolithic format/topics because they are all following the same "what works" roadmap for every channel in that niche. Everything is for profit, to do things counter to that means it is unseen, except rare cases like LockPickingLawyer but even his stuff is now pushing the products they make.

[scyzoryk_xyz]

If only the USA was the center of the world then yeah we could blame a U.S. administration from the 90’s, but this homogenization effect can be seen globally.

I do agree with the rest of what you say - inter connectivity seems to have suppressed the local and the hyper local. The internet promised endless possibilities of niches, but the corporations who seized that opportunity have managed to do something strange to them…

[dragonwriter]

Ironically, you complaints about things that are different is...unoriginal.

> Media consolidation we've evolved into is nuts

Compared to when there were three major broadcast TV networks, that were also the major broadcast radio networks, that also owned many of the local stations?

> Disney has turned American national culture into a creamy smoothie

This complaint is older than many adults.

> Sinclair and Clear Channel have made radio and television across municipalities into photocopied and rubber-stamped content

Again, narrow controls of broadcast outlets isn't new, and they matter less now than ever.

> the Internet killed local newspapers.

Corporate consolidation and destruction of local newsrooms in centralized media operations killed local newspapers. In the 1970s-1980s. The internet swept away the dead husks of zombie mastheads that were satellite distributors of centralized content and revitalized the content of the survivors.

> the subcultures have proliferated, and now are so niche and rapidly evolving that they're difficult to even track a

That’s just “there’s a lot more originality available than before” in other words.

[Eric_WVGG]

> Compared to when there were three major broadcast TV networks

You're not wrong, but crucially those three broadcast networks didn't run their own studios. They couldn't prefer their own, lowly-rated tv shows over more expensive, highly rated shows run by other studios.

[dragonwriter]

> You're not wrong, but crucially those three broadcast networks didn't run their own studios.

Yes, they did (starting before they even were TV networks; NBC Studios has been around since the 1930s), though they also purchased outside content.

Just like the (more than three) major streaming services.

> They couldn't prefer their own, lowly-rated tv shows over more expensive, highly rated shows run by other studios.

Yes, they could. And did.

[lkxijlewlf]

> ...have made radio and television across municipalities into photocopied and rubber-stamped content, and the Internet killed local newspapers.

I recall growing up in redacted 4 decades ago and there was a popular radio station that played top 40 that we all listened to. I remember being disappointed on a road trip and listening to the exact same radio station in another state but with different DJs.

[jonjon10002]

Look up the history of FM broadcast automation for more on how this worked - it's fascinating. Starting in the 60s, companies like Drake-Chenault started implementing these Rube Goldberg-esque analog systems that involved tapes with subaudible tones at the ends of songs that would trigger a relay system playing other tapes or cartridges with commercials on them. Stations would subscribe to a service that would send them new tapes with the latest Top 40, AOR, or MOR hits, and then they'd record carts for local ads, weather, and news.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_automation

[bluefirebrand]

Wanna know something even crazier?

There's a radio station here in City1 that has the same morning show hosts as the radio station in City2. They literally do two shows, or pre-record one, I'm not sure. They talk about local City1 news and such, so they try and make it relevant and local. But it's crazy! Are there no radio personalities in my city they could have hired?

Bonkers.

[aaaaaaaaata]

I'd love to see how this actually plays out, but respect your anonymity!

[bluefirebrand]

Cheers to that. I don't know why I am being cute about this, actually. I've almost definitely shared my city at some point or another.

Anyways the morning show is "Willy in the Morning" and it's in three markets now, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton.

I grew up listening to Vancouver radio stations so it was a bit surprising when I heard some radio personalities I recognized in Calgary.

Source on three markets:

https://broadcastdialogue.com/corus-extends-reach-of-willy-i...