FUCK MYSPACE: Why MySpace sucks...



At first, who owns MySpace?!
An australo-american businessman called Rupert Murdoch. In brief, he's a billionaire, a personal relation of the Bush family, a political propagandist thanks to his media empire (among whicj the famous channel TV Fox News, first US television channel) and his active support of the US military operations throughout the world. During the preparation of the Iraq invasion, 175 worldwide newspapers and broadcast cources belonging to Murdoch have unambiguously supported the war process.

Why boycott MySpace ?
The logic is simple. the most demanding effort for medias basing their business on advertising is to create some content. The content of the MySpace network is 100% users created. Mr Murdoch purchased MySpace 580 millions US$ and which is now estimated 10 times more. All that thanks to each of the MySpace users... And this added value only benefits strengthens to the power and social control on the populations. Sadder is to witness punk or skinhead bands asserting anti-capitalism and claiming to defend alternatives on one hand, selling themselves to MySpace without comments on the other hand under an airline or a cell phone advertisement. Worse, less and less people seem to wonder about it. It quickly fell into fashion, making some bands to consider having a MySpace sometime after first practice. A stupid gadget filled with ads became vital, with supporters getting fierce when questioned about what is behind. Some preach about D.I.Y. but don't even bother spending half an hour to publish a website broadcasting their songs and express whatever they want to the world. These people spend hours to create melodies, write lyrics, record tracks, and bring out what they have in the guts... only to throw it to everyone through rotten websites filled with advertisements and belonging to the scum of society... "cause that's simple, easy and almost everyone have one". Too bad if an ultra powerful fascist stinker gets richer, as long as some can have their anti-militarist and highly political songs broadcast. Lack of time or of technical skills are great excuses... . . When the Dell catalogue, or leaflets for a bank which of course will have sponsored the show will be handled at gigs, there will sure be some to explain that the process remains subversive and that it harms the system... We beg in advance to right to be not so sure of it ! Few answers for the too much often heard arguments …

"Myspace is a tremendous tool"
And how did people do before MySpace? Well, they created websites themselves with their own fingers and brain, sent each others emails and everything was working just as fine. Connections and networks did still organize themselves as well. They inspired from the punk movement, which has always supported the D.I.Y. approach in its acts. Do It Yourself, / making a webpage to present a band. Anyone can achieve that, or at least has a relative who knows little enough of the computer systems. It only requires (a little bit) more effort than opening a MySpace account. But it allows on the other hand to remain independent.

"Too bad to boycott MySpace, since this is a tremendous free communication tool for thousands of bands. Thanks to MySpace, we can listen to and get in touch with bands that we can't hear anywhere else...or almost."
Wrong. It still exists (and fortunately!) thousands of bands which don't have a MySpace, or which don't want one. And nothing prevents to discover them with any good search engine, by reading fanzines, listening to good radio shows or chatting on good message boards.

"We can meet much people, thanks to MySpace"
Oh yes ? So it was not all just about mentioning "thanks for the add !"? Anyone can boast to have plenty of virtual friends in the underground scene... What's the point ?

"If we wonder about MySpace, then we shall also ask ourselves about the entire chain: the electricity supplier, the brand of the computer etc..."
This way of thinking is wrong. One must keep apart things for which there is a choice and things for which there is not. In much places, there is currently no alternative way to avoid the national energy provider. Similarly; do you know a way to bypass to the computer manufacturers? We don't... It is strange actually to put MySpace on the same level as an electricity supplier, as the latter being obviously more vital than the other.

"We know there are lot of criticisable things about MySpace, but..."
The D.I.Y. principle should be bared in mind : - If something is knowingly wrong or criticisable, one shall manage to find/propose an alternative.

"There is more importants fights than MySpace"
Defining action priority is an usual way forward for those who never do anything except looking for excuses. It must be considered in a more global frame : how does anyone concretely acts against capitalism, and other sources of exploitation, if he always lowers any struggle, as simple and apparently insignificant would they be ? "There are more importants things than vegetarism", "There are more importants things to do than criticize Nike or Mc Donald's", "The fight for free OS is OK, but there are more important battles" and now: "Criticize MySpace, yep, but don't you have anything better to do?!".. Each of this struggles are only various approaches of the same fight, toward a more global and constant battle. If we are to abide by a misplaced tolerance, such as "Be a little cooler man, that's not so important.", the whole momentum of the daily activism is lost. By definition, this activism doesn't have to be conspicuous, and include many things seeming "unimportant". we break all the mechanics of the daily activism - which, by definition, doesn't have to be much visible, and include many things who appear "unimportant". Eventually, this things add up in a consistent fight, of it own scale, but which at least exists. "There are some very commited bands on MySpace !"
And then ?! Who need idols to follow ? either knowingly or by ignorance...

THE ultimate argument : "Stop bothering us, MySpace is only a tool to connect bands with the people who want to reach them quickly and easily, blablabla..."
The final words are left to Patrick Le Lay, TF1 CEO (French leading TV broadcast): "In a "business" frame, let us be realistic : basically, our job is to assist Coca-Cola, for example, the TF1 job, is to help Coca-Cola, for example, selling its product [...]. But enabling the perception of a commercial requires to guarantee the viewers brain availability. Our shows aim to achieve that availability : to entertain it, to relax it, to prepare it between two commercials. What we sell to Coca-Cola indeed is human brain availability time [...]. Nothing is more difficult than reaching this availability. That's where the need for permanent change is We must continuously seek the programs which works, follow the fashions, surf on the trends, in a context where information accelerate, multiply and gets standardized."

http://dynamite.lautre.net

Feel free to copy, distribute and translate this text at your will...

Index

Retour aux articles politiques