As the information age hits its stride, the old gatekeepers of creative licensing and distribution are suddenly subject to some stern evaluation. With the rapid increase in both the internet's power and popularity, it became less and less difficult for the creators of information to distribute it, for the seekers to find it. In the case of the music recording industry, this has seriously undermined their regular business model, allowing their traditional sources of income to slip through their slimy clutches.

Naturally, the industry has handled this challenge to its dominance with all the grace of an epileptic rhino, launching what amounts to an all out attack against society itself. The RIAA, in response to the notion that it must sink or swim in an evolving market has done everything in its power to stifle that evolution, from treating its consumer base as de-facto criminals to attempting to entirely abort the development of information sharing. This only serves to further the divide, encouraging the viewpoint that avoiding entities like Sony or Virgin is preferable, even ethical. I fall into this category, contending that as the Creative Commons explodes into the mainstream, there is very little reason to continue pandering to assholes like the RIAA membership, that people should instead be devoting their attentions to the artists directly. Its better for us, its better for them.

Its almost universally accepted that the demise of the old guard, if it really is coming to pass, is nothing but a good thing. Greedy, dishonest, hostile entities who have screwed both artist and consumer over in every conceivable manner outside of simply having us all rounded up and shot, they will not be missed. Alas, there is one service they provide that can't simply be dismissed or replaced. They're good at building a true fan base. The recording industry made it possible for an artist to actually make a real living from their art, to make the production of music their profession. Without the recording industry, the prospects of being able to commit oneself entirely to music and not starve to death become considerably more risky.

The idea has been proposed that any musician could realistically manage to survive on art alone, without the help of dicks like the members of the RIAA, if they could accumulate the “1000 True Fans”. But, as many have pointed out, that is no mean feat. One of the problems with such an amazing and vast system of information sharing is that there is now a ton of information out there. Merely convincing one thousand people to even listen to your music is a trick in and of itself. Impressing a thousand people enough that they'll pay to hear more means you need a lot of exposure. Just dropping an album onto the internet isn't enough. Its just one of hundreds people release for free every day. So artists need a way to draw attention to their works.

I would love to be one of the 1000 true fans for every artist who I think deserves it. But I can't. I'm far too poor and frankly too lazy. What I can do, though, is try and help provide some of the services people loose when they don't deal with the recording industry, most notably good word of mouth. By writing positive reviews of artists that deserve it, I might be able to help funnel more listeners, and more true fans their way. And in this way, perhaps, critics can continue to make the creation of quality music a profession that pays, while still being able to bypass the vile, inhuman dicks who now dominate the highest levels of the recording industry!