[ad_1]
In the opening chapter of Ayn Rand water sourceprotagonist Howard Roark tries to explain why the Parthenon is a badly designed building to a bemused dean who is kicking him out of the university for his heretical views on architecture.
In short, the Greeks did not appreciate the novel nature of the new building materials they were dealing with.
“Your Greeks took marble and others did so, so they made copies of their wooden structures out of it. Then your masters of the Renaissance came and copied in plaster. made a copy in marble a copy in wood, now here we are making a copy in steel and concrete, making a copy in plaster, making a copy in marble, making a copy in wood ,” says Rourke.
This broadside to architecture’s slavish devotion to convention did not move the dean. Roark’s soliloquy wouldn’t apply to today’s social media and streaming company executives, who are racing to sacrifice the platform’s uniqueness for a chance to become a more successful TikTok clone.
Last week, music streaming service Spotify announced at an industry conference that it will revamp its app to include a new vertical video feed that will show users short, few-second snippets of new songs and podcasts selected by an algorithm and can be saved. Did. to listen to later. Spotify executives explicitly framed the move as an effort to compete with TikTok’s vertical feed of short, few-second videos, reports say. of wall street journal.
So instead of searching for songs on your own or listening to curated playlists, you can flip through 5-second sound snippets that play in truncated videos. The ultimate listening experience.
This is the latest and most baffling episode of the “TikTokification” trend taking social media by storm. All companies want to be the lowest common denominator in the attention economy, regardless of how inappropriate the change is for the media their platforms have carved out.
Meta-owned Facebook prominently featured “reels” selected by algorithms that users did not choose to watch. One’s Instagram feed is also a meta product, dominated by suggested video shorts.
Snapchat, once primarily a platform for users to send photos in messages to their acquaintances, has had a Spotlight feature for several years. YouTube has a “short” feed for vertical videos since 2019.
Indeed, competitors copying each other in hopes of siphoning off customers is nothing new.for all Armageddon, I have deep ImpactStriking a balance between embodying a unique appeal and staying on top of modern industry trends is always a difficult task.
Nonetheless, there is something particularly shameless and self-defeating in the move towards video shorts across social media and streaming services. Platforms are built around specific types of media that you share or enjoy. They develop a following of ordinary users who want to consume that type of media and the content he creators who are good at creating it.
As Roark told the obstinate dean, form and function are intertwined.
“The Parthenon did not serve the same purpose as its wooden ancestor. The air terminal did not serve the same purpose as the Parthenon. Every form has its own meaning,” he says.
Treating architectural designs as interchangeable meant that old methods of building continued to be repurposed for incompatible uses. Loss of individual form meant loss of function.
Something similar happens when social media apps and streaming services are treated as neutral content delivery mechanisms. Power users who have invested time and energy into a particular platform will intuitively understand Roarkian’s criticism.
Last year, after Instagram heavily promoted a short video, Kim Kardashian and Kylie Jenner said, “Let Instagram be Instagram again. (Stop trying to be Tik Tok, just be friends cute. I just want to see the photos)” called for action.
This was the negative reaction that occurred when photo-sharing apps attempted to copy video-sharing apps. bottom.
For music streaming services like Spotify, the move to video short feeds can be devastating.
Music is its own art form. There’s a reason songs are minutes rather than seconds long (grindcore aside). Choruses, verses, riffs, solos, breakdowns, and more combine to create something more than a 30-second clip can capture. Because that’s how TikTok works, letting people enjoy music that way takes away the unique appeal of music.
User ratings for individual songs are further degraded by the placement of abbreviated songs in Spotify’s feed, which constantly beckons to skip to the next song. Instead of singing, an endless stream of dry sound clips dominates the listening experience.
For those who scroll TikTok instead, it’s probably preferable. (But if that’s what they want, why don’t they stay on TikTok?) For those who actually love music and come to Spotify for it, this is a loss.
One counter-argument to these concerns is that the songs will continue to exist on Spotify. App users don’t have to spend all their time on feeds like TikTok if they don’t want to.
That’s probably true for now. But it also ignores the pushability of the app. When a service decides to pivot from one type of content to another, it generally has little qualms about forcing recalcitrant users into the new world order.
This discussion also ignores how this algorithm-driven video feed changes the kind of music that is created. The means of distribution of a product influences what is produced. If a music artist can only stand out to new fans with a 30-second video clip of her, they cut their art to fit that mold.
This could be bad for music and music listeners, even if it benefits Spotify by siphoning off a few more TikTok users.
One might think that Rand is a big supporter of the capitalist logic of Spotify’s move. The company exists to make a profit (something they don’t currently do), and if his TikTokification of the platform is the way to do it, so be it.
This is Rand’s water sourceHad Roark been willing to truncate his aesthetic vision and fit it into a ready-made design favored by his own professionals, Roark could have maintained his position at the university and pursued a successful and stress-free architectural career. could have moved on. Instead, he blows up his career multiple times (literally once) because he’s unwilling to sacrifice his personality to the wider world’s demands for fit.
One reason for optimism is that music artists will follow his example (hopefully not too literally).
As streaming services of all kinds become shallow clones of TikTok, people interested in listening to and making music will gravitate toward the niche platform designed for music lovers. Digital Galt canyon is coming.
This is why Rand was able to have both very specific aesthetic tastes and a general appreciation for artistic and financial freedom. That freedom protected the tastes and values of minorities at a time when social trends were going in the opposite direction.
Spotify is a privately held company and can change the service in any way it sees fit. But don’t pretend that new video feed is anything but trolls.
[ad_2]
Source link
