I'm just amazed, of all the sources of oppression, it's ... music and motion pictures? Really?! Not to commend an evil job well done, but really?! Of all the moneyed sources out there, it's those two that have managed to totally lock all of politics?!
...It's not just the entertainment industry...
Probably the most likely - and certainly the simplest - explanation is provided by the GCS "Good Corporate Psychopath" model. (Sorry, "GCS" being used phonetically.)Go back to basics:
the GCSes are those legal persons created by Western legal systems and which are effectively more powerful and in possession of apparently greater lobbying and voting rights than the consumers - the latter being the legal persons called "voters" (QED).
The GCSes that succeed do so because they focus remorselessly on their primary objective of max. return to shareholders - continued survival with max. profitable revenues - above all else. They hang on to that objective like grim death, hacking down all opposition in their paths. Nothing else matters. This is what they must do
, according to the laws governing their incorporation (QED).
Thus, if a corporation that has as one of its mottoes "Do no evil", then it is, by definition, an anomaly and an aberration, and the motto will necessarily - nay must
- become just another cliché without substance, regardless of how high-sounding, humane or philanthropic it might have been when first announced. It will revert to meaningless corporate BS where it arguably rightly belonged in the first place.
So, though it is disappointing, there are no surprises really when we read that Google Ties the Knot with Warner Music Group
they would - must
- do something like this.
And yes, it is "...music and motion pictures..." - really! It is arguably obvious that it has to be so, as they are part of the **AA, a syndicate of GCSes with a strong common interest, combining their resources to succeed in their role as GCSes.
We can be assured that they are not doing this out of a sense of bonhomie, camaraderie, mutual philanthropy or loving-kindness. The GCS model is perfect and intact. This is all as it should be. "We" made it that way. If they need to be dishonest with each other or stab each other in the back with callous disregard to make max. profits, then they will do so and without compunction - they're psychopathic, remember?
So, when you read about something like this: “Six Strikes” Evidence Re-reviewed to Fix RIAA Lobbying Controversy
..."A lack of transparency is also at the origin of the current controversy as TorrentFreak learned that other than the RIAA, none of the CCI partners were aware of the link between Stroz Friedberg and the RIAA. It’s not unthinkable that CCI would have picked another company to start with if the RIAA had disclosed this relationship."...
- you might be able to fall about laughing (as I did) because of the apparent naivety of the journalist. Why would the RIAA not
wish to keep mum about the relationship for goodness' sake? It would surely be obvious to all but the most obtuse that to have their plant on the inside
would mean that the odds would be stacked more highly in their favour.
The GCS model is here seen working perfectly, again.