Scobleizer - Latest Comments in Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

di.onys.us — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 13:40:20 -0000

I was robbed at gunpoint once, in Bed-Stuy Brooklyn.

I did not go to the police. I did not tell them a damn thing. I wasn't about to have a bunch of white, asian, and latin police officers tearing through the ghetto harassing every black man on a bicycle they spotted, creating even more hatred.

I only lost what amounts to two hour's worth of wages. The fellow who robbed me will likely be trapped in that run down corner of Hell for the rest of his life.

I heartily encourage *EVERYONE* to avoid working with the police, too. You'll be much happier for it.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

tony — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 03:45:12 -0000

With many loopholes in the system, big corporations are making financial gains.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

chris — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 15:01:42 -0000

So many of you are such a buncha white-bread honkies that it would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic. Much like 60 Minutes it's easy to take a stance on this piece without acknowledging and understanding the culture complexities that drive this behaviour. As was mentioned before the relations between the police and those in poor neighborhoods is less than optimal. Unless Robert is going to lay out his street cred growing up in Compton then perhap he shouldn't get so self-righteous about this. Of course if he did have that cred, he likely would be approaching this in a more reasonable manner.

By the way Robert, snitching was one of the greatest tools of the Nazis since fear drove people to hand over others as a way to protect themselves.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

LayZ — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 23:06:32 -0000

@82 "This is not evasion but it is an abuse of global systems."

By the letter of the law, agreed it is not "evasion". But let's be honest..by the spirit of what they are doing, they are indeed evading taxes.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

rabsteen — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:35:59 -0000

robert, it's a shame to see your sharp eye applies only to the online world.

what percentage of how many inmates are African American? Is it any surprise that their culture reflects an antagonism towards police?

and yet you blame this serious social problem on Warner music? are video games responsible for columbine too?

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Kevin — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:14:16 -0000

Robert, I typically read the Scobleizer, but this is one of the first times I have seen you deliberately antagonize for the sake of antagonizing and introducing a bunch of bs rhetoric in your responses. I found so many logic flaws in your responses to Ethan that I just didn't know where to start. Maybe you need to go back and read this thread. No-one gains and I sure as heck didn't learn anything from this interaction.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Sylvia Paull — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 12:31:12 -0000

Reading through these exchanges, I actually forgot what the original argument was all about. It's like a tribal war that continues for so many centuries no one can recall the original sin, which probably involved a goat from one tribe that ate some crop on the other tribe's territory.

I like both players, Ethan and Scoble, and I think they both help to make the world a better (more interesting, technologically advanced, communicative) place. Thanks, guys, and now I hope we can get back to doing what you do best.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

LayZ — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 23:08:50 -0000

@78 Dude, again! Do so research before responding so you don't look ill informed. Being incorporated in Nevada or Delaware doesn't give you the same type of tax haven being incorporated in the Cayman's does. Incorporating in those states for the most part saves companies on STATE corporate taxes, not FEDERAL. Seagate is ducking FEDERAL taxes. And generally it's LLC's that get most of the advantages.

And being incorporated in Ireland doesn't get you out of paying taxes; the tax rate is just lower. Whereas in the Caymans there is no income, corporation or capital gains tax and no estate duty, inheritance tax or gift tax.

Nevertheless, I wasn't talking about other corporations, I was talking about Seagate. What other corporations may or may not be doing is not relevant to the Seagate topic. You do understand how to debate a topic, right?

Look, I congratulate Seagate on figuring out a way to avoid taxes. Good for them. Then again, unlike you, I don't think the Fed Govt is responsible for creating federal charities, so the less money they get from us, the better. But because you think the Fed Govt should be our Mommy, I thought you might want to know Seagate is not contributing its fair share to the welfare state.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

lnxwalt — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:05:05 -0000

@27 billsayzthis

"But wouldn’t other, less ethically questionable companies jump at the chance to hire someone of his talent and experience?"

Haven't you been around long enough to know that NEARLY EVERY LARGE COMPANY IS AMORAL? It is their nature. There aren't enough mom & pop businesses around for everyone to leave their corporate jobs.

Even so, if you have qualms about what your employer is doing, look for a replacement job. It does not mean that you'll find a suitable replacement job in a more moral or ethical company, but you should still be looking. It may take you years to break free, but keep looking.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Robert Scoble — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:02:11 -0000

LayZ: look into why hundreds of companies are incorporated in Nevada or Ireland.

But I didn't even know about it until you mentioned it. I'll do some research and see if it's something I will comment on more.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

G-Dog — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:59:08 -0000

Robert,

Here's the problem-- working for the music industry has always been about taking the hypocritical path. It's accepted as part of the job, and people move on. From the Sony machinations in the mid 90s, to nearly every single desktop in the cubes of Warner Music Group running Napster, to the inability of Universal to sell music online at a time when it really would have revolutionized the industry, the technical/online arms of the industry have always been an exercise in bailing out a sinking ship with a thimble.

You need to get to the core of what Ethan is saying. It is a paycheck, pure and simple. Now, why someone in the online department is attempting to speak for the company is beyond me-- only a few short years ago he would have been crucified for that, but who knows, maybe the business really is getting better. (Or it's even worse than we thought.)

Keep this in mind, though. Ethan has about as much connection to that 60 Minutes story as you have to the direction of the War in Iraq. Asking him why he works for a corporate behemoth that behaves like that is like asking you why you're still a US citizen. In his role he has the ability to decide what software WBR runs, but not a whole lot more. You didn't have influence over Microsoft's OEM deals, why would you take him to task for this?

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

LayZ — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:27:15 -0000

And since you are in the self-righteous mood, Scoble, how do you feel about Seagate being reincorporated in the Cayman Islands for tax haven purposes? How long will you remain silent on that issue? As long as they are your sponsor, I'm assuming? For someone with the social beliefs you have I would think you would outraged being associated with a company that is not paying its fair share of corporate taxes.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

LayZ — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:47:10 -0000

@62 "I +hate+ this “tear down the other guy” shit that’s been happening on the blogosphere lately."

And yet that's what you do whenever you disagree with someone's argument or whenever someone writes something you disagree with. You resort to name calling and ad-hominem responses rather than address the core argument. Physician! Heal thyself!

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Keith — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 11:38:37 -0000

just one question how many of you people have grown up in the inner city and know what goes on there and how many options people are limited to and the things we have to do to feed out families and how the cops treat us when they show up. if we call the cops the first thing they start doing is questioning us like we are the suspects, so i dont talk to cops about anything a cop asks me a question i have not seen anything. this music sells because this is freedom of speech and this is the way we feel about law enforcement in general

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Preston — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 11:23:53 -0000

Excellent point Robert. The report should have taken the questions a little further. Here's how it should have gone:

Q: So, as a rapper, with your street cred and all that, you wouldn't tell the police about the serial killer, you would move?

A: Yep...

Q: Okay, now let's assume that that serial killer is a child predator...and let's assume that the child predator abused your daughter and you have 100% credible evidence proving the neighbor did it...do you tell the police?

A: Nah.

Q: Are you going to move now?

A: Nah.

Q: If you don't tell the police and you don't move, what do you do?

We all know what would happen, but the sad reality is, no one is talking about it. As the guy on the show said, "we've lost the rule of law in some of these communities." And big companies love that they are making money off of it.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

1389ad — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:25:29 -0000

Anybody who wants to know what people like Ethan who are "passionate" about the record business are really all about should decipher this URL and go and read this article:

victoryarticle [dot] tumblr [dot] com

Suffice it to say that there are no clean hands anywhere at this business - not at the "independent" labels, nor at the "major" labels like WB.

I saw this controversy mentioned on Twitter, and out of curiosity, I went over to Ethan's blog to have a look around. I was so repulsed by what I saw that I left some acerbic comments, which is something that I seldom bother to do. But his blog was such an obvious example, in microcosm (or perhaps nanocosm) of everything that is wrong with the world, that I couldn't resist the opportunity to let him have it.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

weyouth — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:01:37 -0000

Hey I just visit your blog and I must say that you have very nice and impressive blog. Keep it up. And you are all very welcome on my blog to some time visit me www.weyouth.wordpress.com

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Damon Billian — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:46:36 -0000

" I’d rather listen to Ethan since he DOES have a blog. Thanks for trying so hard."

I think this is where Ethan is talking about the self-importance displayed by many bloggers. Since when did having a blog make anyone smarter than everyone else? Some of the smartest people I know DON'T blog.

After reading Ethan's post, I think the main point is that technology still has a great potential (not being fully utilized) to help change the lives of people that need help. Does our having technology help us understand these issues? Yes. Will it change it directly in the developing countries, countries that have more dire concerns (food, water) than internet access? Not right now.

And while the music industry certainly does have issues, I would actually argue that music is much more of a universal item than a blog...which means it has more potential to create the changes he was talking about.

Note: I have a blog. I' not under the delusion that I am going to change the world because of it. If you want to focus on some companies that are trying to change the world, I would recommend checking out sites like kiva.org or unitus.com (micro finance). Perhaps that could be the focus of one of your shows? You could also encourage your fans/readers to join some of the organizations found in Facebook causes. Is 10.00 donation to a cause a lot of money to either one of us? Not really. But 1000 people donating that much money to a cause will actually help someone...

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Tony — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:35:06 -0000

Then I stand corrected. I was unaware that Podtech had severed its relationship with Loren since I no longer hang out in places online where such behavior is tolerated.

Thank you for doing the right thing.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Robert Scoble — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:25:39 -0000

Tony,

Excellent example!

I spoke out about my beliefs about Loren on the Yahoo newsgroup which was against my company's interests (hint: that represents career risk).

And now Podtech won't be distributing future Loren Feldman work and our logo is off of his Web site and you'll notice that his latest video is on YouTube.

So, no, I am NOT on the other side of the issue.

This is EXACTLY the point.

I can control what PodTech is involved with. When I see the company I am involved in doing something wrong I speak up and take action BOTH internally and externally. And quickly, I might add.

Maybe you should have listened to what I told you when you called. You didn't seem willing to listen when you called but glad I got the chance to explain my position once more to you.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Tony — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:23:47 -0000

Let's see..you are angry because some else is using their technology to distribute something evil?

---------------------------
PODTECH: why do you fund this crap?

I just saw a very disturbing set of video podcasts on 1938 Media that pushes a racist campaign. It impugned Podtech. That’s the company that Robert Scoble works for (as head of content). Now, admittedly, he’s a geek there but is directly involved in choosing the content strategies of PODTECH, so let’s start there.

Robert: why do you guys fund this kind of crap?

You talk about vile things at Warner.

What you are doing and funding (and supporting through your technology) is FAR worse for the human race than any arguing we’re doing about Warner.

What do you say about this Robert?

How can you write hypocritical posts like this one about Warner and go to work for the company you work for who are spreading the kind of obvious racist vile that 1938media is?
---------

COMMENTS OF NOTE:

LayZ: if I saw Slate distributing evil I’d have spoken up against it. Slate did fire someone named Michael Savage for doing just that when I was there.
(Why not PODTECH then? oh...they sign your paycheck and afer my call with John where he completely defended such speech and his intent to continue to distribute it and a large byline on the 1938Media that thanks PODTECH for somehow supporting artists' rights)

Nick: and when you work for a company that is intellectually corrupt your very presence mirrors the emptiness in your soul and Warner, by profiting by this type of music, which is souless and without merit and which speaks to the basest elements of our society, reflects a moral bankruptcy that we should not tolerate. (well said..read it again with the whole TechNigga issue in mind...change the word "music" to "video podcasting" and tell me how this racist hate speech against black people should be different.)

As I said on the phone with you, Character can only be measured when there are consequences to demonstrating it. Time to do some inward reflection, Robert.

Kind of sucks to be on the other side of the issue, huh?

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Robert Scoble — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:22:40 -0000

Jim: http://scobleizer.com/2007/... is my answer for now.

I think you nailed it.

It also is why I like my video work better than my blogging work lately. I don't do "ego strikes" in my videos. Of course my interviewees don't try that crap in them either where on the blogosphere that stuff comes into my trackbacks and other places regularly. Heck, I was getting SMS's at Gnomedex from people who were asking me about Valleywag's latest claims during sessions there.

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Jim — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:16:43 -0000

@63 No, it frankly wasn't good for anyone. I don't know if it was painful to write, but it was certainly painful to read.

More and more I'm having a hard time understanding who Scoble's audience is...who he's talking to with ScobleShow and this blog. It's not me, that's for sure...not Joe Blow internet consumer. I expect to see this level of dialog from middle-schoolers, not adult technology pundits (my momma? YOUR MOMMA! WTF?)

Is he aiming this all at money-men, CEOs, etc.? Makes lots of sense - if you want to influence the tech industry aim for the decision makers. However, assuming this blog then acts as a CV/resume what the hell kind of statement do posts like this make? There's no credibility being built here...quite the opposite.

Between this unrelated retort, his recent "What are A-List Bloggers Good For" reply (http://tinyurl.com/2cbkaf) and approval of Pirillo's monkey boy response to Loren Feldman (http://tinyurl.com/392tfc) what I'm getting is Scoble's idea of conversation being less about dialog and more about sophomoric ego-strikes.

So Scoble...who is your audience, man? Who do you want most to read this blog and this post, and just what response were you expecting to replies of this nature?

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

meanguy — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 05:34:34 -0000

it was good for me. was it good for y'all?

Re: Warner Music: why do you fund this crap?

Robert Scoble — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 05:25:30 -0000

Ian and Eric,

I believe the two ARE joined. I'm going to keep the reason they are joined to myself for a second. Instead, let's look at Ethan's post.

**I just hate the fact that you have these blowhard hacks who suck the life of the room with their own sense of self important.**

And yet did Ethan solve anything other than sucking us down his OWN self-important blast on other people?

I agree with the premise that Ethan has here. That other people don't always bring light. They don't seek truth. They aren't nice. They don't teach. Jason, for instance, pushed his product to a captive audience. At least when CEOs do it on my show you can close the video if you aren't feeling receptive. It's hard to walk out of a room, especially when you've paid to be there.

But, did Ethan elevate us through his post? Did he demonstrate a way to behave better than those "self-important morons?"

No.

OK, let's go on.

**Make part of it on the streets of Seattle, coming up with technological solutions to the povery, drugs and lack of health-care that exists on the very streets outside the conference hall.**

Ethan, you missed that Sunday there was a Gnomedex un-conference and a Mesh Walk where attendees of Gnomedex DID get out on the street. I believe even Pirillo was part of that.

**We pay attention to some stupid fight between overweight white guys inside a conference hall.**

Is this a way to elevate Ethan's argument? First of all Jason weighs about 190, which for his height is NOT overweight. It sounds like Ethan just is here to tear down other people. Why? Why does Ethan do that? I find that people who have to make their points like that are usually wrong.

**The area that makes us question our motives and understanding of our world THROUGH technology rather than using technology as a means to validate our own insecurities with unneeded self-import.**

I agree with this. But I don't think Ethan has been paying attention to what a whole lot of us have been doing. Maybe he's just reading too much Valleywag or something. But, let's say his point is good. Why not just DO SOMETHING about it instead of ripping everyone else a new asshole about our weaknesses?

**that we forget the real power granted through every glowing screen in the room.**

Right. But most human beings aren't even willing to do what those "blowhard" bloggers are doing. Most humans would rather watch Paris Hilton or whatever the metaphorical equivilent is.

**We yield dangerous tools. They can and have been used against us, and our loved ones.**

Yes, and the reason I wielded this tool against Ethan is because he loves aiming his writing at other people and not DOING anything. I +hate+ this "tear down the other guy" shit that's been happening on the blogosphere lately.

People make shit up about me and my employer and post it without care to the consequences. I don't see people standing up against the personal attacks. Everyone sobbed about Kathy Sierra and then went right back to the same shit.

**If we continue to get caught up in playground fights over who’s dick is bigger, we’re just holding the gun to our foot and pulling the trigger.**

OK, I buy into this. It's why over the past few days I've uploaded tons of videos by people who are trying to improve the world. No attacks. Just lots of doing.

Can we move to a world where we DO instead of ATTACK?

I doubt it. Ethan didn't get us closer, that's for sure.

Back to the joining. I don't think Ethan attacked the right issues. I didn't attack the right issue either.

Ethan attacked something that mostly happened on blogs and not on stage. Well, OK, Jason gave a salespitch on stage. So did other speakers (I heard that on Twitter from other attendees). And Dave Winer and at least one other voice I heard interrupted Jason to point that out. I didn't speak up in the session, but I said the same thing on Twitter.

But that whole incident took, what, one hour if you count Jason's entire speech? Out of about a dozen sessions? That HARDLY defined Gnomedex.

I'd rather be constructive and give Chris Pirillo some real, actionable, items. The one thing Ethan told Chris to do is already being done as part of the Mesh Walk. So, let's throw that one out.

The rest of it seemed more of an attack on me and other people with no real justification behind it.

He attacked me for speaking at the end of a session. Well, sorry, my SMS was going nuts because of the false rumors being made about me on a variety of sights. Did Ethan care about that? No. Did Ethan care about the feelings of people he aims his abuse gun at? No.

So, I turned the bullet around and asked him why he isn't cleaning up his own house first. It's a legitimate question to ask someone who isn't ADDING anything to our community and is just taking pot shots from behind his screen and keyboard.