Jeremy wrote:

] I think there is a message in here about the evolution of our
] interaction with media. Popular music is a dominant cultural
] currency, but in an age in which spending an hour just
] listening to an entire album (without simultaneously running,
] driving, eating, playing, or otherwise) seems like an
] exceptional commitment, the individual "track" has become the
] denomination of choice. When an outstanding five minute song
] needs a sub-four minute "radio edit" in order to even compete
] for airtime, we are collectively suffering from a serious case
] of attention deficit disorder, coupled with a "super size!"
] programmer mentality that selects two mediocre-but-short
] tracks over one great-but-"long" track.

indeed, it's a dangerous precedent to set -- art is becoming a backdrop for your life, rather than a reflection of it, or a part of it.

] Music used to be an event, not a product. For the iPod
] generation, music as Art is being increasingly devalued, even
] as it becomes pervasive to the point of ubiquity.

i'm not sure i'd blame this on digital music, although the process is accelerating now. we've been moving towards this state steadily for many, many years. MTV gave the trend a big kick 20 years ago, by emphasizing the single... i think we're actually in a better position now, because people can sample the other tracks without buying the record, or finding a friend who has it, and download some other tracks, without being tied into the whole album. it bodes ill for the Album as Art, but it's probably better for exposure of more good music. at least, that's my hope...

RE: Social discrimination by iTunes playlist | Wired News