World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
And you don't see yourself as enabling the problem?
And you cut the quote before they explain they have no other choice. People aren't choosing to buy tickets from Ticketmaster over another competitor. If they want to see their favorite artists live, there frequently is no other choice. Ticketmaster maintains its monopoly by threatening to blackball venues that provide tickets through other providers, and many of these large spaces can't afford to fall out of Ticketmaster's good graces.
Sure, live music isn't a necessity, but blaming the consumers for feeding into a broken system instead of the monopoly that enforces it is incredibly disingenuous.
Yes, they have another choice. Don't go.
Right, because if I don't buy the ticket to go see Micky Dolenz, no one else will, Ticketmaster will see the error of its ways, and they will change their business practices. And while we're at it let's tell dads not to buy tickets to Taylor Swift for their teenage daughters, so no one will go to her concerts. That will change everything.
You live in a fantasy world if you think "Don't go" is a feasible alternative. If I don't go, someone else will, and all I've done is deprive myself of something that I want to make a point - a point that won't matter a tinker's damn to Ticketmaster. There's no way that there would realistically be a public boycott big enough to make any difference.
I'm absolutely not one for big government, but this is the definition of a monopoly and should be dealt with. But while the CEO of Ticketmaster has three gold toilets, they've bought and paid for four golden toilets for those in Congress through lobbying (aka "legalized bribery"), so nothing will be done. So again, it's pay up or give up something that I want. I don't buy tickets to events that I don't care about just to have something to do, but there are acts that I don't want to deprive myself of just to make a point to Ticketmaster or try to force them to change their ways through boycott. Because neither of those things will make a single solitary difference as long as they have their paid governmental exception.
Come on mate, you could say this about any kind of protest or boycott.
Yes that is exactly how boycotts work. You make a personal sacrifice as a protest against something that's unfair or immoral.
If you're not prepared to make a sacrifice, that's OK, but at least have the honesty to admit you just don't care enough about this particular issue.
My point was, if I make the sacrifice and don’t go, somebody else will buy the ticket. So it’s not that I don’t care enough, it’s that it won’t make a difference. There simply cannot be enough of a boycott from the general public to make any difference to Ticketmaster’s bottom line. Only government intervention and anti-monopoly enforcement will, and that isn’t going to happen either with politicians in Ticketmaster’s pocket.
In the end I’m missing out on something that could be my last ever opportunity (in the case of the Micky Dolenz concert I discussed earlier), while not losing Ticketmaster a dime.
One family not buying tickets is not going to put a dent in Ticketmaster's bottom line. I understand the principle, but a total boycott of the majority of live music isn't feasible. This situation isn't getting fixed without anti-trust getting involved and since it doesn't fall under the umbrella of big tech, I highly doubt the current administration will do anything.
Such a cop-out. Every boycott is a personal sacrifice, and every individual participating in a boycott knows that their one purchase isn't by itself going to make a difference.
You're missing the point. In this one case a boycott is pretty pointless. Those who can't afford to go are effectively already boycotting, and those that can afford to go, don't care about the prices because they can afford it. So how is a boycott going to make a difference? For every show I boycott, there's two more people ready to buy the ticket and replace me.
I get that, but my wife and I are huge fans of The Monkees. The only one of the 4 alive is Micky Dolenz, who is still touring at 80 years old. How much longer will he be doing concerts? I don’t want to miss out on seeing him perform when he’s near in what, at any time, could be his last concert just to make a stand against Ticketmaster.
Understand, we don’t go to multiple shows a year, but when there’s something that we really want to see, they’ve got me by the short and curlies. Either pay up or don’t go. There are times when its more important to pay up than to prove a point, but that doesn’t make me hate them any less.
The Prefab four. Who couldn't play their own instruments until their 4th record. A fool and his money....
Alright now, let's not get into an argument about The Monkees. In 1967, they outsold both The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, so they're not nobodies. And just to clear up a few fallacies, Mike was an accomplished guitarist and bassist, Peter could play banjo, bass, and keyboards, and Davy was a drummer. (They didn't want to put Davy behind the drums because he was short, and they were afraid he wouldn't be seen.) They were not allowed to play their instruments or even have any input on the songs they recorded on the first two albums by Don Kirshner, the person hired by Colgems as music supervisor for the TV show. It was their 3rd album (not 4th) that they were finally able to get control. The resulting album - Headquarters - Rolling Stone magazine called one of the 500 you should hear before you die. They went on to make six more albums up to 1970 where they had complete control over the songs and played on them. They even had a top 20 album in 2016 on their 50th anniversary called Good Times, with all four members contributing (a previously recorded vocal track by Davy, who was deceased at the time, was digitally cleaned up and put over new music).
Yes, they were the Prefab Four, but Micky likes to use the metaphor that Pinocchio became a real boy. They were put together to act like a band, but they actually became a real band.
Also, You're wrong Nemesth made up that he outsold The Beatles and The Stones.
Source: https://flashbak.com/in-1977-mike-nesmith-fooled-the-world-when-the-monkees-sold-more-records-than-the-beatles-and-rolling-stones-combined-386535/
Yeah, no. They were entirely a product, based on The Beatles Success. Drummer couldn't even play any instrument before they went on tour.
Yeah and Justin Bieber's early music outsold Outkast.
You can like corporate produced slop, targeted to get mass mainstream appeal. That's what it's for that doesn't make it good though. Case and point, approach a stranger on the street and ask them to name as many songs by The Beatles, or The Stones, or The Kinks and then the Monkees and see what has actual staying power because I guarantee you it's not The Monkees. Music is the most invasive artform in the world, you don't get a choice, out in the world if people are playing something you don't like. That's why people galvanise so strongly around likes and dislikes. It's not I don't care for U2, it's I hate U2 and vice versa. You subconciously redirect your emotional state at the time, onto the music you listen to. Why do you think so many dudes wind up listening to the music their Parents liked as they get older, it reminds them of better times. Mass appeal in the short term is strictly for profit. That's what The Monkees were for. We don't have to debate this, we all know this and record companies have been buying their own songs to make them number 1 since the beginning of Tin Pan Alley. So, they outsold The Beatles one year, means nothing. There are people born within the last 20 years that can sing along to the entire tracklist of Sgt. Pepper's. Which came out 50 years before they were born. But you're a Monkee, so of course you'll Monkee around.
The Monkees aren't about music. They're about rebellion! About political and social upheaval!
Yeah completely, which is why they continued to have reunion tours and re-release the same majority manufactured Bubblegum pop for the next 60 years. Totally, raging against the machine.
Oooh, retirement-age gossip. And debunked gossip at that.
From The Wikipedia Page: The Monkees were originally a fictional band created for the NBC television sitcom The Monkees. Dolenz, Jones, Nesmith and Tork were cast to portray members of a band in the sitcom. Music credited to the Monkees appeared in the sitcom and was released on LPs and singles beginning in 1966, and the sitcom aired from 1966 to 1968. At first, the band members' musical contributions were primarily limited to lead vocals and the occasional composition, with the remaining music provided by professional songwriters and studio musicians. Though this arrangement yielded multiple hit albums and singles, the band members revolted and, after a brief power struggle, gained full control over the recording process in 1967. For two albums, the Monkees mostly performed as a group; however, within a year, each member was pursuing his own interests under the Monkees' name, rendering the Monkees once again a group in name only. With widespread allegations that the band members did not play their own instruments—followed by the cancellation of The Monkees TV series, diminishing success on the charts, and waning popularity overall—band members began to leave the group. The Monkees held a final recording session in 1970 before breaking up.
Nesmeth Lying about outselling The Beatles and The Rolling Stones in 1967: https://flashbak.com/in-1977-mike-nesmith-fooled-the-world-when-the-monkees-sold-more-records-than-the-beatles-and-rolling-stones-combined-386535/
Bubblegum pop band has marginal success as a TV show, turned band. Take control of their recording and arranging, careers fall apart. Hey Hey you're a Monkee
Your words. They're bunk. None of the text you quoted supports that. Yes, they were a constructed band, like many examples since. Others wrote the hits. It's pop. The producers wanted control. It's irrelevant to the claim.
Relevant to the claim
https://www.woot.com/blog/post/the-debunker-did-the-monkees-play-their-own-instrumentsQuote from Ken Jennings, known for being knowledgeable about a wide range of topics:
More in depth:
https://medium.com/cuepoint/fake-it-til-you-make-it-how-the-monkees-performed-live-f9fea6c9a6b9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Tork
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Nesmith
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micky_Dolenz
I'm under no delusion that the Monkees were great. But they were absolutely musicians. And it's tiring seeing the same trite cliches trotted out for almost sixty years now.
You seem pretty committed to your one-note dismissive summary, mocking anyone who doesn't conform your narrative. You're free to be a clown. Have a wonderful day.
Made for TV Bubblegum pop band has marginal success as a show, learns to play their instruments, turned band. Take control of their recording and arranging, careers fall apart.
Again, you can like slop. People still like Milli Vanilli