Live data from Hacker News

Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

stratechery.com

21–30 of 87 posts

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#21
post #2

It seems as though the author has a (relatively) specific view of both Taylor Swift and Disney that he is trying to generalize, while ignoring the social ecosystem that both currently exist in. I don't know what knowledge can really be gleaned from this piece. Walt Disney's claim to fame were some of the incredible risks that he took, and his near Jobsian ability to predict what the consumer wanted. Taylor Swift's cl…

> Taylor Swift's claim to fame is that she is an attractive white woman from affluent parents, who is both highly malleable and a very hard worker.

I don't think you understand Taylor Swift whatsoever.

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#22

> I had friends who went to the first show, and I think she played 45 songs — it was 3+ hours ... She’s sold out 6 straight shows here in Los Angeles I'm surprised it is physically possible to sing for 3 hours, 6 nights in a row.

That's style dependent. Nobody's belting or doing fry/false chord distortion for 3 hours, but a gentle throaty style of singing could easily be sustained for longer with water breaks.

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#23

I never understood the "Disney's differentiator are their theme park". We didn't have a theme park in all of Europe until the '90s, but the whole continent grew up with Mickey Mouse & Donald Duck.

Business differentiator. Presumably, Europe simply wasn't very profitable for them until the parks opened up

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#24
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that being from affluent parents is any part whatsoever of Taylor Swift's claim to fame.

Then perhaps you should read about the inorganic way in which her career started.

That’s still not her “claim to fame”, as the OP phrases it. She’s famous for her music, not her wealth. A better fit for the OP is someone that is “famous for being famous”.

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#25
> Music is art, and art is important and rare. Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for.

the rarity is not the source of the value, but an amplifier for the value in a market driven society

> It’s my opinion that music should not be free, and my prediction is that individual artists and their labels will someday decide what an album’s price point is. I hope they don’t underestimate themselves or undervalue their art.

does she understand privilege? she's a music slaver, she's advocating that music remain a limited experience accessible for a few. I have a HUGE problem with this.

this is, in my view, an energetic interaction centered about value, perceived value, and measured value. i could say more but i rant... something something digital assets can be copied for free let's not let a scarcity mentality ruin this for all.

finally, what she really sells in her shows has real value, the scarcity is her physical existence, this is NOT THE SOURCE OF VALUE. the energy/money dynamics are a form of power.

edit: I echo this sentiment: "Sad to see generations grow up on music being a spectator sport and not a communal, participatory activity". but notice how this huge Taylor mega shows ARE a communal activity. Dancing is the main avenue for communal musical participation

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#26

> I had friends who went to the first show, and I think she played 45 songs — it was 3+ hours ... She’s sold out 6 straight shows here in Los Angeles I'm surprised it is physically possible to sing for 3 hours, 6 nights in a row.

I wonder if it is partially lip syncing. Apparently when Celine Dion was performing nightly in Vegas she mixed lip syncing in to her performances to give her voice a break.

(I don’t have a source on that, just something I remember hearing years and years ago)

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that being from affluent parents is any part whatsoever of Taylor Swift's claim to fame.

It typically increases the opportunities an individual has in their life; it's reasonable to assume it was a factor in her achieving fame in the first place. edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Swift#Early_life This is the kind of opportunity that less affluent—let alone poor—families don't tend to have.

I don’t think anyone is disagreeing. But that’s not what “claim to fame” means.

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#28

I never understood the "Disney's differentiator are their theme park". We didn't have a theme park in all of Europe until the '90s, but the whole continent grew up with Mickey Mouse & Donald Duck.

The parks are a very particular thing, obviously oriented towards children. But recently some people have been talking about how they might offer "live experiences" that go beyond that.

Disney just shut down the Galactic Starcruiser, a two-day immersive Star Wars LARP experience which was weirdly mis-marketed as a hotel. Adrian Hon has a long, interesting writeup on it and suggests that future versions could be much more successful: https://adrianhon.substack.com/p/star-wars-galactic-starcrui...

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#29
post #8

I still could not accurately identify one of her songs by audio if my life depended on it OR if someone offered me $100 million I'd definitely lose out on that money. Yet, she is the biggest popstar on the planet. It's weird, somehow she is everywhere in image and presence but the art she produces eludes me. On the other hand, there are catchy songs like the Benny Hill theme that I know by heart, yet I could not name…

How about Rich men North of Richmond?

Re: Disney’s Taylor Swift Era

#30

> Taylor Swift doesn’t understand supply and demand: I think that's a poor reading of Swift & her team. They've clearly got a rock-solid understanding of supply & demand, and other economic concepts, to the extent that their behaviour subverts textbook economic thinking. Spotify acts like a textbook perfectly competitive marketplace: all actors have perfect information, there are no monopolies, the market price for a…

>> Taylor Swift doesn’t understand supply and demand:

> I think that's a poor reading of Swift & her team.

My read of Thompson's piece was that he agrees with you. He quoted Patel to say that he (Thompson) agreed with him (not her) back in 2014 but later learned that this reasoning was wrong -- too shallow and too net-boosterist.

Post reply on HN