This Black March Thing
Jan. 22nd, 2012 10:43 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Okay, so someone had this idea to boycott the Hollywood moguls who are behind SOPA/PIPA by refusing to buy stuff in March, and decided to call it "Black March".
Really unfortunate name.
Look, folks, this boycott is not going to work. (And I'm not the only one who thinks so)
The moguls won't care.
Because people will just buy stuff in April. Seriously, if you have moral objections to Hollywood moguls and want to boycott them, then boycott them properly. Don't just postpone buying stuff, don't buy the stuff at all. Support indie labels and indie producers. Buy stuff on the internet directly from the artists.
The moguls won't notice.
Because with the huge amounts of money involved, any boycott will just be a blip on the radar. Joe Blogs in the street will keep on buying stuff.
The moguls won't be harmed.
Okay, suppose that this boycott gets huge support, and it does make a dent on their bottom line. The ones who will be harmed are the little people. First thing that happens when the bottom line is threatened: people get sacked. And that's if this is a targeted boycott that only targets RIAA/MPPA companies, as distinct from small independent businesses who can't afford a dent on their bottom line. The ones that will be hurt first are the retailers who have already paid for their stock, not the big companies they bought it from. And that effect is even more diffused if one doesn't live in the USA, because the moguls won't even know that foreign retailers are hurting.
The moguls will not get the message.
So, let's say that the boycott is really big and widespread and the moguls do sit up and take notice. You know what they will do? They will blame it ALL on PIRACY. They will take their sales figures to the politicians and say "See, we needed SOPA/PIPA and you didn't give it to us!"
Talk about backfiring spectacularly.
IMHO, one of the reasons why Wikipedia's blackout last Wednesday was so effective was because the action and the message were side by side. It wasn't just that Wikipedia was blacked out, it was that Wikipedia explained that it was a protest, and what they were protesting against.
You can't do that with sales figures. Figures are open to interpretation, and you can be sure that the moguls will twist the interpretation to their own advantage.
I perfectly understand that folks are "as mad as hell and they're not going to take it any more". You want to DO SOMETHING! And "Black March" is SOMETHING that can be DONE. But the only thing it will be effective at is letting people vent.
I really wish I had a brilliant idea that I could propose as an alternative, but I don't. (iz sad) I mean, apart from the usual things like writing to one's representatives, supporting organizations like the EFA, signing petitions, all those boring and responsible things like that. And if you live in the USA, the single most effective thing you could do: VOTE. (Voting: not just a right, but a duty)
(Screening comments from folks not on my flist, because I learned my lesson from the last time I voiced an unpopular opinion)
Really unfortunate name.
Look, folks, this boycott is not going to work. (And I'm not the only one who thinks so)
The moguls won't care.
Because people will just buy stuff in April. Seriously, if you have moral objections to Hollywood moguls and want to boycott them, then boycott them properly. Don't just postpone buying stuff, don't buy the stuff at all. Support indie labels and indie producers. Buy stuff on the internet directly from the artists.
The moguls won't notice.
Because with the huge amounts of money involved, any boycott will just be a blip on the radar. Joe Blogs in the street will keep on buying stuff.
The moguls won't be harmed.
Okay, suppose that this boycott gets huge support, and it does make a dent on their bottom line. The ones who will be harmed are the little people. First thing that happens when the bottom line is threatened: people get sacked. And that's if this is a targeted boycott that only targets RIAA/MPPA companies, as distinct from small independent businesses who can't afford a dent on their bottom line. The ones that will be hurt first are the retailers who have already paid for their stock, not the big companies they bought it from. And that effect is even more diffused if one doesn't live in the USA, because the moguls won't even know that foreign retailers are hurting.
The moguls will not get the message.
So, let's say that the boycott is really big and widespread and the moguls do sit up and take notice. You know what they will do? They will blame it ALL on PIRACY. They will take their sales figures to the politicians and say "See, we needed SOPA/PIPA and you didn't give it to us!"
Talk about backfiring spectacularly.
IMHO, one of the reasons why Wikipedia's blackout last Wednesday was so effective was because the action and the message were side by side. It wasn't just that Wikipedia was blacked out, it was that Wikipedia explained that it was a protest, and what they were protesting against.
You can't do that with sales figures. Figures are open to interpretation, and you can be sure that the moguls will twist the interpretation to their own advantage.
I perfectly understand that folks are "as mad as hell and they're not going to take it any more". You want to DO SOMETHING! And "Black March" is SOMETHING that can be DONE. But the only thing it will be effective at is letting people vent.
I really wish I had a brilliant idea that I could propose as an alternative, but I don't. (iz sad) I mean, apart from the usual things like writing to one's representatives, supporting organizations like the EFA, signing petitions, all those boring and responsible things like that. And if you live in the USA, the single most effective thing you could do: VOTE. (Voting: not just a right, but a duty)
(Screening comments from folks not on my flist, because I learned my lesson from the last time I voiced an unpopular opinion)
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 01:09 am (UTC)There are a lot of things to be done over here, and unfortunately we're fighting an uphill battle. We need to be able to stop companies from buying our politicians; we need to have parties other than the Republicans and Democrats. Technically speaking, I'm a Democrat, and two of my representatives in Washington supported SOPA/PIPA - the other representative is sensible and signed their name to a letter against the bills.
I'm the first to admit I feel frustrated and helpless. I want these people to understand the harm they're doing, these moguls. I want them to have what us customer service folks call a "Copernican Revolution" (best described as "no, the world doesn't revolve around you, customer"). But I don't have a clue on how to reach these people and make them understand.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 02:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 02:19 am (UTC)I am incredibly pleased that the blackout was so effective. But I spent the past four years working in the accounting office of a Fortune 100 company, and I know that when the company hits hard times, the CEO is still driving his fancy BMW convertible, and it's someone who has been working her ass off to make ends meet who finds out her job has been made part time with no health insurance.
Bitter? ME? Heh.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 01:01 am (UTC)Whether they will care or not? Who knows.
But it's certainly no great hardship for me to not buy anything in March given that I probably wouldn't have been doing so anyway. LOL I tend to only buy dvd's etc for presents, and I don't have any birthdays happening in March.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 01:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 01:43 am (UTC)Kat is absolutely right about the first people to get hurt by something like this. We need something more targeted, more visible, and less likely to damage below-the-line workers and the films that deserve to be seen (not all of which are indie, believe it or not).
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 02:27 am (UTC)All I was saying is that I think that yes, it will get noticed... anything widespread on the internet is always going to get noticed... that doesn't mean they'll care.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 05:35 am (UTC)Honestly, I think it might be a better idea to deliberately buy music/dvds from sources that you originally discovered via internet activities of dubious legality, then send the companies letters stating that fact. (Said letters might have to go unsigned, since I wouldn't put it past many in the industry to prosecute based on mentions of past piracy.) Point out that illegal sampling of something sometimes leads to legal purchase, and the best way to combat piracy is not to keep stamping out websites while more spring up like hydra heads but to give people less incentive to pirate. Let them access sources from their computers, when it is first released, for free (maybe with ads) or a reasonable price.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 05:35 am (UTC)Not that I can afford to buy much anyway.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 06:07 am (UTC)But that's the argument RIAA/MPPA have always made: that they "ought" to be making more money than they are, and that the reason for that is that people are getting pirated versions rather than the real thing. They argue that every single person who got a pirate version would have bought a real version if the pirate version weren't available. That's where their "billions of dollars of losses" is figured from. They aren't actual losses, they're hypothetical losses.
They will never ever concede that (a) there are people who would never have bought it even if pirate versions weren't available, (b) people don't have an infinite amount of money, and they can choose to spend what money they have on other things.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-22 06:15 am (UTC)Loreena McKennit - discussion on Highlander mailing list
Jars of Clay - lyrics quoted in Sentinel fanfic
Plumb - Doctor Who fanvid
Evanescence - Harry Potter fan vids
That's not to mention all the DVDs of TV series that I've bought...
no subject
Date: 2012-01-23 12:22 am (UTC)But I think this discussion has gotten right away from the original theme, which is whether or not the boycott will work. You make good points there, Kathryn.
Sorry, I can't agree that piracy is okay because "we wouldn't buy it anyway". If it's not good enough to pay for, it's not good enough to help yourself to a bootleg. As a writer, I've done a lot of work researching and writing my books and I see red when I stumble across a website offering one of my books as a PDF download. Im pretty sure they haven't asked my publishers and every person who downloads a free copy or pays the website for it is depriving me of my royalties that I worked my guts out for and have earned. It's too much bother for my publishers to try chasing this up and I've given up asking them about such things.
A free sample is another matter, if it's a case of "fair use" and I have uploaded free sample chapters from a couple of my books on my blog, The Great Raven, with permission from my publishers. But that's just a sample, which I suspect is what you got, Kathryn, when you discovered those artists.
Fan films are a grey area; some artists and companies are okay with them, others aren't. You need to check this.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-23 12:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-01-23 11:35 pm (UTC)I do pay, don't assume I don't.
However the RIAA seems to be making more money from threatening legal action and getting people to settle out of court. The artists don't benefit from the RIAA fines either.
no subject
Date: 2012-01-25 01:22 am (UTC)