thelemmingface

(Before saying my piece I just want to make clear that I'm not attempting to either defend or criticise this proposal).

As someone involved in the arts in the UK, I can confirm that there are two major issues in the current British arts landscape.

The first issue is a general lack of funding: since 2000ish, the vast majority of our most successful actors, writers, comedians, musicians, artists etc have all come from privileged backgrounds. This is no coincidence: one requires a reasonable private income (ie from rich parents) in order to be able to start a career in the arts. This naturally restricts the diversity of the arts world, and makes our artistic landscape much the poorer - many talented creatives are unable to even consider getting a career off the ground.

Secondly, enjoyment of the arts is increasingly becoming available only to the privileged. Theatre tickets cost a fortune (even at festivals such as the Edinburgh Fringe!); concert tickets are extortionate; exhibitions are surprisingly costly and original artwork is prohibitively so. This is generally not a result of greed (at least, not in all cases!), but rather because our economy is tilted against artisan craftsmanship and personal creation. If you can only fit a small number of people in the theatre, you have to charge a lot for tickets simply to pay the salaries of all those needed to mount the play. It's a matter of great personal sadness to me, the arts thus being put out of the reach of so many: kids from poorer backgrounds have never been to the theatre or a live concert! This was the case even before the pandemic; it is especially so now, and is a situation that really does need to change. The arts are such an essential part of our culture (Apple, for instance, would never have existed without a whole plethora of artists inspiring Steve Jobs and the team in myriad different ways, as you will all be aware).

The second issue demonstrates that the solution to the first issue cannot be to simply 'charge more for art' or 'make something people want to pay more for', as suggested by some people above.

As I said at the top, I haven't considered the pros and cons of the 'Smart Fund' proposal, so I am certainly not attempting to express an opinion about whether it is a good or bad idea. I'm just pointing out that there is a problem with the arts in the UK, and a state-sponsored financial solution is probably the only way to solve said problem. Contrary to the general tone of the dismissive comments above, I don't believe the premise of this campaign is flawed.

sflocal said:

thelemmingface said:

This attitude ("if you can get concessions...that's what you do") is still a moral choice. Business does not exist in a vacuum.

Cry me a river.  This kind of crap is exactly the same whining that goes on when people demand Apple pay more in taxes for “moral and ethical” reasons when not legally required to do so.  

Those landlords that have made so much money in rent from Apple over the years that they too should be expected to tighten their belts too when everyone else is expected to.  I doubt they’re in the same league as small mom-and-pop businesses.  

Not whining. You'll note I didn't offer an opinion on whether Apple have done the 'right' or 'wrong' thing. I'm simply pointing out that they HAVE made a moral decision to pursue this approach. Just because a decision is a 'good business decision' does not preclude it from having moral worth.

And you're right: the same applies when deciding what tax loopholes to use. I wish people defending these practices would have the guts to accept that they ARE moral decisions, and defend them on those grounds.

lkrupp said:

elijahg said:

Rent is being cut for companies that are struggling and likely to go under without a cut, clothing stores, grocery stores etc. Apple isn't going to go under: they just reported record revenue while a lot of high street names are making heavy losses (and still paying more than Apple in tax). Even some malls are financially struggling, there's no way they can afford a 50% cut.

Apple's morals really seem to be in the gutter lately. This is a case of the big guy bullying the little guy. Several companies didn't take the government's furlough subsidy and paid employees out of their own pockets, but from what I've read Apple took the government subsidy despite being barely affected by the lockdowns. For a company I've supported for 25 years, this kind of thing is a big kick in the teeth and incredibly disappointing to read.

Such twaddle. Business is business. If you can get concessions from your suppliers (or landlords) that’s what you do. And Apple’s landlords are fabulously wealthy already, no need to worry about them or Apple’s “morals”. Apple is offering to extend leases in return for lower rent. Sounds like a win-win to me.

This attitude ("if you can get concessions...that's what you do") is still a moral choice. Business does not exist in a vacuum.

AppleInsider said:

Martin has said he intends to remaster The Beatles album "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" ... but now he's done "1" instead.

The new Atmos version of Sgt Pepper was quietly uploaded in Nov 2021 - there wasn't an announcement, but the copyright on the mix changed to 2021 and it sounded better than the Atmos version that was originally on Apple.

Appleish said:

Glad to have it, but I really wish he had re-done Pepper first. He could apply whatever lessons learned there to 1 and Revolver, which I believe is next on the remastering schedule. 

If you haven't found them already, the Atmos mixes Giles made of Abbey Road and Let It Be are fun (and available!).

DAalseth said:

This is different than AI generated art or text. Those are simulating creativity, where this is reading someone else’s work.

Voice acting = acting = creativity.

Sorry to be blunt, but I suspect bad audiobooks have led people to draw a false distinction between 'reading someone else's work' and 'acting'. If your audiobook just sounds like someone tediously reading, then it's a bad performance - for the art of voice acting is just as much a creative endeavour as acting on stage or in film.