... in 1974 Supertramp's Crime of the Century was a huge pop album.... Oh well.

Yes, this happened for example in the nineties, there was an explosion in variety suddenly as the dance music scene blew up within a few (2, 3) years and it became unrecognisable for most, for a while. In hindsight, exactly that was the most fruitful period when a lot of the basic defining cultural groundwork was created. (combining previous culture with new tech, and new social contacs and ordening.
However it sorted itself out. Instead of increasing chaos, and increasing lack of coherence, clusters of culture formed spontaneously, after some time and recognisable for most. When diversification disappeared, so did most of these cultural clusters.
Ok, I'll do that tonight, before sleep. heh

Ehm, I expect that patterns will emerge from a chaotic group of measurements (does this belong to this culture or something different?), the more input enters the process. Perhaps even a "tipping point" as larger (or smaller patterns - and connections) form underneath the range tested.
But I'll have a look first, before guessing more.

Yes, that is why cultural markers (flags) are so inportant. Without it it'll turn into a goo, And information is then not identified as such. Until new markers are "invented/created" to fit the new order in information (trends). Trying to control the tags and the communication of these towards the public (from a top down perspective) will only work until the nex phase. I think that's why the majors are in a hurry. They don't want to miss the next boat.
Instead of competing in the same marketplace, they take possession of the marketplace, and prevent new influx, and changes to their business model.

Yes, I agree. But in the end most tend to erect artificial constructs instead and fail to keep track with some things they don't understand themselves, and therefore remain hidden.
As a consequence, the modus operandi of the bigger corporations has been to;
either ignore the whole thing and deny access (like they did in the nineties)
or use the same markers for another product of another artist thus using mimicri to draw attention to it. (like they're doing now)
So, I think neither has a chance of success in the longer run.
They can't stop the fragmentation and they can't see which patterns will form after it's dropped to zero.

I think so. heh The difference in vocabulairy takes some getting used to.

Hmm I don't know about that. Since anything occupies one single point in time/space, everything that we experience already happened in the past.</nitpicking>

But nevermind that, the issue is that Fukuyama had the idea that everything got reworked again and again in processes of evolution in culture, until natural progression filtered out the denominators that mattered before (notably he thought "-isms" were obsolete, and everything else, like shared distinctive characteristics, just "fell off" as obsolete bagage. They rejected categorisation because it was too fragmented. That's why I drew a comparison when I read your post. Different POV, same process.
This applied to social-economic and cultural expression because according to him the two are joined at the hip.
Fukuyama was THE posterboy of the "post-modernists" a part of science of history. This is a short but good definition: Glossary Definition: Postmodernism
FWIW I've always maintained that of course this was just a contracting phase in culture, and there would be expansion in ordening in another way afterwards
Of course that could be preceded by an implosion, for exactly the reason you mentioned: too much diversity and loss of identifiable tags/characteristics. But that will not be "the end of history" (at least if we survive the present disasters hmm).
I'll look up McLuhan, and see if I can make some cheese of it.
Thanks!

Very interesting to put different specialities next to each other and try to discover different yet parallel analasys. I have to take a little more time though to fully get into the subject core

I think it is. And yes we're sort of in the same direction. But, as said, I need to study it more.
I think there's a definitive movement towards decentralisation, and diversification, and this is countered by another movement that retains it's control over mass media. Apart for the internet, and older type social connections. The present connections will break down at some point. It is inevitable. So is the technology of the consumer society. I think we're already "peak conusmer tech". (social economic reason)

thanks, I'll get back to you on this. 2:50 AM here and my eyes tell me it's done heh

Re: "The only way is Essex"

well maybe, but if that's true, what the forces & constraints which drive it are harder to get to grips with.
I see the program as a fusion of traditional magazine shows with trends in the explosion of access to media.
The feedback loop in new media shifts away from old media forms to new media and the public themselves.
The TV format has to figure out ways to utilise the public while retaining it's production values.
so if you look at what the characters in 'The only way is Essex' actually do, you can see how the
show designers must have constructed the idea. The interviews and research carried out to find the
right participants will probably be culled from a load of already accumulated material and data.

here's what the characters in the show do in the real world.

lingerie shop, beauty salon, Co-owner of Minnie's Boutique, Singer, Owner of cupcake shop 'Bella Sorella',
Owner of fashion boutique 'Love Lucy', nightclub owner of "Sugar Hut", Salon owner, Hair stylist,
Beautician and model, Glamour model, Male model and fitness trainer, Model and socialite.

so for them it's promotion and for the traditional industry it's a new general lifestyle promotion vehicle.

there's always a strong desire to conform in the public at large and if you transpose that large demographic
to the internet, your going to have that force translated into content creation. which might get us back to
the initial thread idea I guess.

imo conformity often entails a lack of imagination and a resistance to think in new ways, but every now and then
the depth to which those clichés are leveraged by the media, astounds even me.

Reptil: I'll try to encapsulate why I take the possition I do on the, old model new model debate
and I'll try to address some of your last post while doing it. might take a while though..

what is the goal of the old major music industry?. in fact what is the old music industry?.
is it just some simplified construct in our own heads?. a quaint story we use to render,
what we don't understand make sense?.

the majors weren't interested in music in any case, they were interested in business. the business was
quite a tight ship. they weren't interested in brands and had little affiliation with them either.

the product was pretty self contained. it contained its own visual artwork and the artist had the
identity for visual and audio mediums. even the live stage mediums. almost a perfect self contained
multimedia capable Art-form with no need for any auxiliary advertising funding.

then we get the change to digitisation and mass electronic communication becomes common place.
the significant archive of the era of vinyl production has it's rights bought up and at the same time
the public use the new medium as a natural extension of their everyday practices. e.g. they share.

to any established communications command and control system this kind of a state of affairs is
a perfectly viable opportunity. sacrificing Music could be seen as killing two birds with one stone.
then the problem of a self contained multimedia capable Art-form with no need for any auxiliary funding
is no longer a significant threat to established structures within established communications economies.

The reason why I often stand back and let the conflict in discussions propagate is simply to aid the
progression of the dialogue. that debate hasn't really happened and it needs to in order for Artists
to internalise the crux of the issue imo. it takes time for the ramifications to sink in.

I'd be perfectly happy to see works of peoples Artistic creativity being a significant contributor
to the economic life of any society. I'd actually go way further than that and argue that it's critical.
because a world or virtualised or augmented reality where every body else but Artists themselves,
can make money and transact value, is a world that's telling you that free Artistic creative expression,
is valueless.

what artists are then forced to become in order to gain a maximum spread, is to become a
homogeneous non threatening robotised servo mechanistic extension of P.R. & advertising.
there's little surprise to me that music is conforming to these underlying forces.

and in case anyone thinks this should all be considered mumbo jumbo, then
here's a quick word from our sponsor.

At about 1:30... is that him talking to the Grim Reaper?

just at that point I think your supposed to concentrate on the music.. not on what he actually says.

I thought he was just demonstrating the range of his clientele...

So it's a fact then. But if you want a perfect illustration of why it's a fact take a look at the pitiful number of comments the two threads on the passing of Hal David got. Embarrassing and shameful.