Mary Carty

Here is something to ponder over the weekend. I have just read this very interesting article from Steve Blank about the film industry and their reluctance to innovate and embrace new technology. I wondered if there are similar parallels happening in the Arts and Culture sectors; where embracing new technology and new business models is viewed as a negative rather than a positive thing.

2011 was a good year for film. $30 billion came from box-office sales with the total revenue earned standing at $87 billion. Where did the other $57 billion come from? Other sources came from pay-per view, online subscriptions and digital downloads, as well as dvd rentals and sales.

In each case, the film industry argued strongly against these models saying they would mark the end of the movie business as we know it. So “Instead of leading with new technology, the studios lead with litigation, legislation and lobbying.” Shockingly, the film industry spends $110 million a year on lobbying. Unfortunately, the music industry has had a similar history.

Blank charts how each new technology since its introduction has had a positive impact on the film industry from radio in the 1920s to VCRs in the 1970s to the Internet revolution today. Blank asks a really important question: “Why was the movie industry consistently wrong? And why do they continue to fight new technology?” In conclusion Blank asserts that:

History has shown that time and market forces provide equilibrium in balancing interests, whether the new technology is a video recorder, a personal computer, an MP3 player or now the Net. It’s prudent for courts and congress to exercise caution before restructuring liability theories for the purpose of addressing specific market abuses, despite their apparent present magnitude.

This fear of disruptive technologies comes with a heavy price. Customers are certainly not the winners and innovation and personal freedoms are attacked once the focus is on control and not innovation. It might be some time before we see a film and music industry becoming as innovative as Silicon Valley.

So what can we learn?

Studios are run by financial managers who lack the skills to exploit disruptive innovation
Studio anti-piracy/copyright lawyers trump their technologists
Studios have no concern about collateral damage as long as it optimizes their revenue
Studios $110M/year lobbying and political donations trump consumer objections
Politicians votes will follow the money unless it will cost them an election

Now getting back to your practice ask yourself:

1. Are you embracing new ways to promote, sell and distribute your work?

3. Are you actively fighting against it? And if so why?

Drop me a line and let me know where you fit. Your comments and thoughts are very much appreciated.

Image thanks to Cian Ginty (CC)