It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hollywood is their primary means

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 04:57 AM
Religion certainly instills the network of brainwashing but Hollywood is ultimately what keeps people watching the left hand while the right hand steals everything their god promised to them for their loyalty.

Consider that when you don't even get to pick who and what will entertain you in your leisure, you have even less choices in all other facets in life. When the performing art you have is placed before you rather than available publicly, how can there be any sense of freedom in anything else?

It's entertainment!
It's supposed to be the freest form of self expression and social interaction that exists and it's the complete opposite. It's manufactured in every respect and while free form entertainment does exist, it's not readily accessible by majority of the public. People turn on the television and radio where everything has been manufactured to deceive them. Music that talks about how corrupt and unfair the system is. How evil the system is and yet isn't it the system they work for?
In fact, aren't they really spreading a message of hopelessness and despair rather than identifying through clear and direct language what is being done to us and how we can deal with it.
The most ironic part being, many of these performers are still so brainwashed they don't realize what they're doing. They just know they're making a lot of money and believe they are preaching freedom when really they're just preaching a message that says we're helpless unless we use violence.

Now I could elaborate on movies and television shows but even those being brainwashed by these mediums are well aware. It has become a system where everyone just wants to sit down after work or dealing with the kids, clear their mind and forget about the screwed up world they're enslaved to. Unfortunately over the last decade, everything they watch has either become pure propaganda showcasing this screwed up world but in a more intense, comic book fashion or creates a world of perfect people where everyone is clever, infallible and of course has the most strict Christian values that they rarely or never stray from.

Then we all look at each other and laugh about it only to turn right back and watch this mind numbing lie some more.

Isn't it ironic that this industry, and it's pretty insane that art has been turned into an industry of the military industrial complex, can have it's product stolen on a massive scale in not just the country of origin but all over the world and remain in business?
But that's the beauty of the deception! It's already an elitist industry where those employed are picked based on their narcissism and willingness to do anything for fame and fortune rather than their ability to create and perform. Big business decided that wasn't good enough, we need a way to squash the true performers that are creative, intelligent and able to wake the public up from the dream. So, they created mass copyright violation on a global scale so only they could decide who would be a national icon and we now have entertainment comprised of 90% dimwit no talents that have no idea what they're part of and why they got to the top so easily.
They're so stupid, they actually believe they earned it and the public demanded them to be sent there. The fact is, their competition that would expose them for the fools they are has no outlet to do so. The opportunity is reserved for the pea brains desiring to be famous elites while the real performers have to try and put their work out there independently, earn back the investment plus a profit yet as soon as it's released, it's being stolen all over the world.

We can easily end illegal downloading on a global scale but, the corporations running Hollywood don't want to and why would they?
Without illegal downloading, ground level performers would found record companies and production studios that would be able to enter the commercial market.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama will go down in history as the biggest failures to have ever been the face of our government.

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 05:39 AM

Originally posted by JonDeath
We can easily end illegal downloading on a global scale but, the corporations running Hollywood don't want to and why would they?
Without illegal downloading, ground level performers would found record companies and production studios that would be able to enter the commercial market.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama will go down in history as the biggest failures to have ever been the face of our government.

"Ground Level" performers do start their own record labels, what do you think INDIE is all about? Independant (of the big 4) Record Labels. There are thousands of them, for all sorts of genres, and some of them are doing pretty darn well.

Now I agree that a huge amount of mainstream music is -SNIP- and sung by zombies, but a lot of it isn't. You can actually get some really positive messages from it, with ideas of how to change the world, if you know what to listen for. Not many big time artists can get away with saying it how it is but many of them know how to skirt the line and avoid peeing off their major label.

I think a very important thing to remember, is that while the labels can censor their artists, they struggle to create a large volume of fully maliable puppets. X factor can't produce enough and they all seem to flop after a year or so. So they have to rely on ACTUAL musicians and talented artists who've been doing it underground for years. For a musician this is a huge choice, which can cause massive problems with fan bases - To sell out or not to sell out? I think it just depends on if you can say what you want to say without it being too obvious.

Underground music is doing very well atm anyway, especially the various sub genres of rock.

*I say especially rock because I know from experience, I'm sure the same could be said of Dance/Hp-Hop and so on..

edit on 13-9-2010 by March of the Fire Ants because: to add *

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 07:26 AM
Being independent means no reliance on any outside sources of service.
It currently simply does not exist, even if you're doing every aspect of the work on your own but relying on clubs as your source of stage and audience. There are bands that are close but we're still not quite there.
You have to also be aware that being marketed in the underground scene, doesn't actually make you underground. You will find majority of these independent labels are a novelty in the sense that they don't produce viable income and are the owners hobby of sorts. Many independent record labels don't fail for this reason or because they're labels rather than manufacturing companies. They function as a subsidiary and contract with a record company even if they don't have to deal with that companies protocls.

Now consider that most independent record companies fail to reach the masses if they even manage to survive, most don't. The independent music scene has still become corporatism and being an underground band has largely become a marketing gimmick. Independent labels are simply favored because you get to keep 50% of the profits from your tours and album sales while 100% of the profits of merchandise sales. No signing bonuses, no $2500 a night hotel rooms and your faces aren't everywhere in the media so this course of action is more desirable by many bands today.

But don't fool yourself into believing these performers are truly independent.
They're still in a position where their music will never go beyond the local scene or a few local scenes without the aid of an established record label that can get them major distribution. A lot of bands flounder in the independent scene for 10, 15 and even 20 years before they make viable income and it's largely due to the commercial scene having dominance and the independent scene only having so much room in terms of large scale promotion.

As far as "solo" singers go, independent or commercial you're generally dealing with people that don't and often can't write their own music so it's pretty rare that they survive off their income from music. Singers typically start in the contest circuit or the club circuit, strive to produce a couple independent releases then target a commercial label contract based on that resume because there's not much opportunity beyond that.

But my primary point was the messages.
Independent film and music still wallows in stupidity. It's always abstract and metaphorical, no real information is provided to educate people and it's not simply a matter of the ignorant failing to pursue information. The information isn't being promoted properly which says to me, even in the independent scene, there is this disposition to suppress the solutions. I do feel we're seeing a slow emergence of knowledge coming out of the more aggressive metal genres from the new fusion genre of thrash death metal but it's a slow ascension and it's a very difficult music to succeed in on a wide scale in the United States. While all the rage in Europe, America's metal scene is pretty bleak in terms of the mood to the music.

Ultimately I feel we're being limited in options by a menu that is very clever and deceptive and the paradigm you're proposing exists really does not. It all boils down to marketing schemes and promotion in this country and a label can't produce a few hundred million in the independent scene or a few hundred billion in the commercial scene by signing and promoting tens of thousands of bands and singers. Cut that number down to a few hundred though and now those profit projections are very realistic. Then to ease yourself of the burden, promote music that creates a copacetic attitude towards the cultural situations influencing our lives while allowing the global theft of music and you kill two birds with one stone. You set up a lot of performers to lack ambition and realistic goals while defeating many of those that would become your competition and eating into your profits and fan bases. If you make it so they can't possibly turn a viable income out of their independent releases without you, eventually they have to buy what you're selling and cut you in on the profits, even if it's only 50% through an independent label.

Business is business whether you're doing it in a pair of khakis, button up shirt and name tag in front of a cash register or out of the trunk of your car in a dimly lit alley.

Meanwhile film and television is probably a million times more bleak for the independent producer and performer. Say you want to release your film at Cannes, can you afford it?
If your income is from hauling trash, data entry, hammering nails etc. and you have to fund the project yourself then afford the cost of traveling to France if you can manage to get your film in Cannes, what are the odds of being able to spare the time and finance. In terms of television pilots, you're looking at a damn near impossible expense unless you try to produce a reality based TV show but now you're contending with literally hundreds of thousands of people doing the same thing. How do you get anyone of influence to watch it?
Do you really believe kids like Justin Beiber were discovered on youtube?
Search around, there are thousands of kids just like him on there, many far more talented and nothing comes from their work. No job offers, no agents calling to represent them, nodda. He's just another product with a story created for a marketing scheme. He was auditioning constantly and simply using the youtube channel to promote himself with casting agencies, talent agencies and agents. Performers have what is known as a "reel" and what better way to get these people to look at your reels than to post them on the most popular video site in the world.

And I've only covered getting your foot in the door!
The way things actually function once you're considered a viable investment by record labels and film studios is where the loss of control and creativity comes into place. If you want the wide spread influence over cultures and the financial reward, you're going to end up being told what to do or tricked into it. Otherwise you're going to be small scale and continue the cycle of creating a small populous of people that aren't the walking dead but are a single hair on the tail wagging the dog.

I feel the only way to truly be independent is to be your own producer, manager, marketing director, promoter, label, manufacturer, booking agent and sponsor your own tours or film releases which 99.99% of performers are not competent to do. People competent in all these facets are generally running the label or studio and recruiting people who need them so they can do the least amount of work and make the most amount of profit while of course, taking on the primary financial liability and even that isn't guaranteed with the way they screw bands in the contracts and place financial liabilities on them in the fine print. With the internet finally emerging with internet radio, live broadcast streams, music, video and file hosting the opportunity to succeed in the true independent capacity I've described just finally exists.

But we're probably a good 50 to maybe even 100 years off from their truly being a commercial/independent production paradigm. Right now nobody is getting by without the aid of an outside company.

edit on 13-9-2010 by JonDeath because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 08:18 AM
reply to post by JonDeath

I don't agree that underground solo singers don't write their own music. I know MANY who do, and make (just) enough money to live on. I'm not sure we're on the same page when it comes to underground music, perhaps because I'm from the UK.. I could name hundreds of people who are involved with underground music for love of music and the DIY community, not to make any profit or con people into having a listen. There is no marketing, it's a network of like minded people who all go out of their way to support each other however they can. It's more than a hobby, it's a way of life!

I'll fool myself into believing what I want considering I AM an independent musician

Anyone who feels they are 'floundering' in the independent scene(s) has no business playing there. It's not about 'making it' and doing the rockstar thing. People who strive for this are mocked, shunned and scorned for their fakery.

I'd be interested to know which particular Metal bands your talking about because I agree that Metal, particularly the heavier sub genres, has always been the fore front of.. well, discussing interesting subjects.. knowledge as you put it.

I think perhaps what we've come up against here, in our difference in opinions on what constitutes an independent scene, is that yes, there has been a concerted effort to hi-jack underground music, and to take the coolness of it and make it into a saleable product. This fakery revolts me as much as you I'm sure but if you dig deep enough there is still a huge community of thoroughly independent musicians who pride themselves on DIY ethics, Alternative politics, Authenticity, Creative Freedom and STICKING IT TO THE MAN

I'd also like to point out that there are some massively popular artists who have fought massive legal battles with their labels to retain creative freedom, such as TOOL. Weather you like them or not, they do say some interesting things!

I'm less willing to discuss Film/TV because I've had little to do with it, but I think you're generally right on that one. I would imagine there will be a fair sized underground film 'scene' but perhaps on a smaller scale than with music, and again, because it's cool it will have been hi-jacked to some extent.

I agree with your ideas on how to succeed independently. It's not easy to do, sooner or you later you may have to sacrifice certain things (for example having a booking agent, or publisher) but some things are worth sacrificing to get your message out, so long as you can retain a level of creative freedom. For me I would want total creative freedom, but I can see why some may sacrifice some of this, if they feel they can spread a positive message.

Thanks MOTFA

posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:30 PM
I feel that we've strayed from topic and some very specific facts that can't be dismissed.
Unless you go live in a cave or a tree in the middle of the forest, you're going to be influenced by Hollywood directly and indirectly. You will never escape the people it controls and you will never escape the influence and power it has over your life. The number of idiots it creates is massive and it's going to continue splitting the populous which hopefully gets those of us seeing things clearly in great enough numbers to start taking control over the living dead.
To truly level the playing field and even up the players on each team, we really need people with the independent scene philosophy to force their way into the commercial market and spread a message that promotes self awareness, freedom of expression, educates the masses on the globalist agenda and inspires people to oppose what they've already been conditioned to favor. The independent scene will never, ever do this. So I hear what you're saying but I think you've lead yourself astray as most people in this frame of mind and liberated cultural trend do. They forget that the purpose of their music was to change the people that need it most and unfortunately, it's the dimwits buying MIley Cyrus, Justin Bieber, 50 Cent, Eminem, Madonna, Linkin Park etc.etc.etc.
THESE are the people that we need to reach most and unfortunately there is only one way to do it. Segregating yourself and saying how stupid everyone buying into pop culture is tends to be a huge aspect of the independent music scene regardless of what genre it's built around. It never fails to hear the people in this scene talk about how stupid everyone outside it is and how unique, artistic and intelligent they are.
It's really just another form of elitism but in far smaller numbers and less glamor. It's another music scene that tends to have very little real world answers and terminology. It all gets lost in the selfish desire to be artistic and the sad truth is, artists aren't generally intelligent enough to produce something that is educational in terms of giving their fans sociological weapons to use against the establishments minions. It's still far too driven by emotion and the desire to be respected and valued as an artist which is why art is in essence, a superficial and selfish form of self expression.
Should it be so shocking that it produces so many selfish people that are blind to it.

I think you're just splitting hairs and not making the realization that there's using it as your creative outlet regardless of how much money you do or don't make and then there is the distinct purpose of doing it as a tradesman. Selling out in truth is taking a crappy job you hate to pay the bills and sacrificing your goals in art or the performing arts. Ultimately 90% of the people that do this will settle into consumerism even if they believe it's on their own terms. Anyone who says they would rather work under the slave system of monetary debt rather than be their own boss and generate a viable income from their performing is either lying to oneself or naive and unrealistic in their understanding of how life unfortunately works.

The reality of the club scene is, most people realize they don't have the talent to produce music that is going to sell on a wide enough scale to live off of so they modify their thinking and goals. I am aware of the scene you're talking about, I've spent plenty of time around it but you're only fooling yourself to believe it's a community where nobody cares about money and wouldn't trade mass market success regardless of the terms rather than to scrimp by off a meager living from the local music scene or packing boxes in a warehouse to pay their bills.

Consider that in major cities like New York, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco etc. the local underground scene is wide scale and the money is there if you have the talent. Suddenly the philosophy about making it about art and rejecting the establishment become an intertwined community that can't be sorted one from the other because there is now no distinct line between the commercial scene and the independent scene. Now flip the situation to where you're in a lesser city or a small city and it's more about culture than it is career, the philosophy has no choice but to be different. The acceptance that it's going to be difficult to generate a survivable income greatly influences what realistic goals now are. The bottom line is in terms of marketing, your music is a product no matter how you feel about it as an artist. Either your product is going to be in great demand or it isn't and unfortunately this is where the independent scene and commercial scene converge in terms of product quality.
There's no shortage of low quality "product" in the commercial market generating millions just as there's no shortage of low quality "product" in the independent scene generating very little and the logic of the creators is, I'm doing it for the sake of self expressive art. One makes a lot of money by whoring themselves to the corporate imperialists and the other simply does not. They're so marketable because they represent the average person who has great limitations and they're more or less stuffed down everyone's throats by million dollar marketing schemes.

The reverse side to this being the person that does it as their trade just as an architect designs houses or a doctor heals the sick. The obvious difference being the demand and the fact that music as a trade was never meant to be controlled as a mass market industry allowing corporate monopolies to oppress and discriminate so they can generate hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars.
This produces of course the musician that wants to earn a living, is capable of producing a great product but marketing it on a large enough scale to produce a viable income creates the necessity of relying on the help of corporatism, even if you're dealing with independent businesses that won't subject you to fulfilling stereotypes. There's also the reality of being stonewalled even on the moderate independent scale. The ultimate reality being if you can get a hit song on the radio, whether it's commercial radio or commercial free and college radio, you're going to generate a really good income. Since you're relying on the promotion of an entity with power, there will always be someone holding power over you until you've amassed enough of a fan base.

So honestly, I don't feel you're being realistic at all lol.
You either want to make a living off of music or not and if you're one who can produce music that will be demanded enough to do just that, you're typically going to earn a very good living just in the independent club scene, an outstanding living in the independent mass market scene and of course a spoil of riches if you enter into the corporate marketing scene.
I'm a metal musician which unfortunately, is the hardest form of music to earn a living from and all my endeavors really rely on the entertainment business in general. Therefore it's very difficult for me to read what you're saying and not see it as a bit unrealistic and you don't have both feet on the ground. I don't want to be a rock star, I want to make sure the world has the opportunity to hear my music and I am able to generate a solid reliable income. If fame and fortune are a byproduct of these goals, I'll have to cope with it.

I live in Ohio near Cleveland.
Mushroomhead is a band that has been very independent and amassed a nationwide following, at this point it's surely global. But it only took them 10-15 years! lol. They also still play a lot of ratty clubs in some very swanky areas. In my opinion, it's just not worth the trouble if you can generate a solid stable income and abandon the dives. I suppose the ultimate independence as I laid out in my previous post not only includes self management, promotion, recording etc. but owning your own clubs in your primary locals that have supported and stabilized your career.
At the end of the day, I want to have made a difference but not at the expense of living in the poor house.

edit on 13-9-2010 by JonDeath because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

log in