Rick Beato and Tim Pierce had an interesting conversation about this for the music industry. I believe the video was called "death of the middle class musician" or something like that. They also talk about the pros and cons of the new algorithmic content distribution model. Personally, I long for the old days

This is a good observation, and I'm sympathetic (I have no desire to build a brand in any domain, either) but I'm also kind of a hard-ass: the world moves on. Technology and its affordances change. Rewind twenty years and people were bitching about the tyranny of the labels.

There's always some tyranny. The tech of the moment just dictates its outline.

I think that was also a great related post: #388164

“You’re a slut and a whore for the algorithm. I couldn’t do it anymore. You can never feed it enough. You start out making art, and hoping that the door will open. You’re looking for that viral moment so it opens up the door and you can do the thing full time. But you start to compromise just to get the door to open: guessing what it wants, debasing yourself, alienating yourself. Until you’re not even in service to your art anymore. You’re in service to the algorithm. Deep down every artist just wants to be seen. Everyone does. And that’s how it controls you. The algorithm makes you behave in a certain way, create in a certain way, in exchange for being seen. And if something can change what you do, it can change who you are. And I didn’t sign up for that. I didn’t sign up to become a content creator. Art was supposed to be a way for me to be in search of, in service to, in community with. It was my ministry. Art was supposed to be my ministry.”

While Big Tech sites like Spotify claim they’re “democratizing” culture, they instead demand artists engage in double the labor to make a fraction of what they would have made under the old model.

At least for me, "democratizing" something means turning it into a popularity contest, and I think that's exactly what platforms like Spotify are doing.

Democratic leaders don't want to market themselves - They have to. They're in a popularity contest. If they win, the prize is a fat pay cheque and the power to run the government - ostensibly the actual job. But they can't do the actual job until they get hired by the voters.

Similarly, a musician's job is supposedly to produce music, but until they get hired (i.e. become "famous"), it's a popularity contest against their peers, just like the politician.

This is how self-employment fundamentally differs from salaried employment. Your employer is your listeners, viewers, customers, clients, etc, collectively. Until you establish a base of reliable customers, the popularity contest will never end.

So yes, you have to market yourself, because who else will?

Whether this is a "Good Thing" for the species or not, well... that's still TBD.

You don't have to use big tech.

You can be an indie publisher.

Yes...to be succesful is not enough to be a good artist...needs to be a good entrepreneur with a very good marketing!

Practically you need to be multilaterally developed :)

We need to replace Spotify, they area monopoly killing artists! He look over there, solutions! Nostr, Wavelake, Zapstream… dam bitcoiners are good!

As far as I can see, it's same with problem with all these big tech platforms.