The Time When New Media Was the Big Idea

One of my favorite running conversational topics with my Dad arises out of the following question, "Where do you hear about some of these bands?" In the end, the answer is not even really about music but has more to do with how my generation (Y/Millenial, I think) shares information as opposed to how Baby-Boomers (like my Dad) share information.

First, and as a bit of a digression, I should begin by saying that I'm not a member of the musical vanguard by any stretch of the imagination and do not take any great pride in listening to bands simply because no one else is listening to them. I'll listen to music if it is well done, regardless of the fact that it is perceived as popular or not, but as I said earlier, this really isn't about music. Instead, it has everything to do with the decentralization of the distribution of information.

Back in the 60's and 70's, if a band was really going to make it big, what did they need to do? First, they needed to all buy matching suits. Second, they needed to make an appearance on a show like "The Ed Sullivan Show". There are some bands, such as the Grateful Dead, that didn't take this route, and, in their own pot-addled way, rose to their own form of stardom, but for others, such as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, and countless other bands, they rose to fame through those set and established means of ascent.
There were set avenues of promotion and distribution, such as TV and radio, that had to be utilized in order to succeed. Everyone at school listened to the same music for a few reasons: 1. There was not anything approaching the musical variety that we currently have so you had to listen to the same bands, and 2. There was no way that you knew of some band that your friends didn't know about because you all watched the same 3 variety shows and listened to the same 2 or 3 radio stations playing rock and roll in your town.

Somewhere in between the 60's/70's and today, and I'm not quite sure where, those strictures opened up to provide greater variety in content and methods of distribution. I'm not sure if it was the fact that the musical community began to splinter and diversify at some point in the 70's or that the advent of cable television in the 80's created a greater reception for niche musical genres, or the rise of the internet in the 90's leveled the promotional playing field, but somewhere along the line, my friends could be listening to the complete discography of some band that I had never even heard of and vice versa, although I was probably still going to listen to Hootie and the Blowfish while everyone else listened to rap/Limp Bizkit.
Which brings me back to the question asked by my Dad: "Where do you hear about some of these bands?" As I said earlier, it's not even about the particular bands themselves, but about how people share information now. I'll see an embedded YouTube video on a friend's blog and listen to a group like The Hold Steady for the first time, I'll hear a band similar to other groups that I like on an internet radio site such as Pandora.com, or I'll look at a friend's Facebook page and see that they really like Ronald Jenkees (I'm looking at you, Lance Agan).

In a strange way, the cacophony of noise and information that has been generated by the onslaught of the internet and cable tv has caused us to return to a new form of word of mouth to get information on a variety of topics, whether it is politics or movies or bands or tv shows.

As the method in which we share information has been changed from a vertical structure to a more horizontal structure, the number of potential sources for new information has simply exploded. This, of course, does not mean that all of those sources are necessarily reputable or even authoritative, but that they are simply more accessible than ever before.

I've rambled a bit here, but if I've come to anything even approximating a coherent point, let me know what you think.