The Short End of the Long Tail

I’d like to explore the changing landscape of the entertainment industry and its effects on culture. The real change has come about with a shift from mass production to “the Long Tail” business model, and this change is economically and culturally significant. All of the sub-genres and independent releases in film, literature and music fall under the Long Tail. It is essentially a “miss” as opposed to a “hit” market. But it’s a massive market. As venture capitalist Kevin Laws puts it, “the biggest money is in the smallest sales.”

WIRED journalist Chris Anderson’s great article shows how the Long Tail of business has powerful economic sway, and its effects have reshaped the cultural landscape. “Long Tail business can treat consumers as individuals, offering mass customization as an alternative to mass-market fare,” he writes. “And the cultural benefit of all of this is much more diversity.” But the depth of Anderson’s study of the positive aspects of the Long Tail business model forgets some of the underlying issues to this new economic power, which is shaping the way we see the world and ourselves.

From an economic standpoint, the Long Tail is part and parcel of a fragmentation of the market into a highly nuanced, small business based or niche model. The implications of this fragmented market are significant. Under mainstream or mass-production, there is certainly an economic, political and cultural hegemony, but there is also a strong trade union presence. With the increasing competition and narrowing profit margins of mainstream entertainment, “the death of the blockbuster,” corporate belt tightening was inevitable, and the Writers Guild of America’s strike may serve as one example amongst thousands. In the media industry, journalism layoffs are taking place at media outlets in North America and abroad as media outlets fragment, diversify and move online to compete globally. The effects are even felt at home with the Montreal Gazette buyouts (I wrote on this in “How the West is Run”).

While this new niche market does allow artists, producers and writers access to specialized markets, it comes at the cost of employment security. The mainstream has naturally exposed this volatility, relying increasingly on part-time, temporary and sub-contract work, and in the case of newspapers, this exposure means more freelance writers and looser contracts. Insurance coverage, pension rights, job security, all art lost in what I would call the short end of the Long Tail. Anderson points out that niche markets cut out “packaging, manufacturing, distribution [and] space overheads,” which, I would argue, mark a clear drop in the labour force. It would not be difficult to prove that these new market conditions have made disadvantaged groups such as women, blacks, aboriginals, minorities and the disabled more vulnerable.

But what effects does the Long Tail have on culture? Certainly, the Long Tail is mutually beneficial for artists and consumers alike. Artists are pleased because they have virtually locked a global niche market, and consumers are pleased because of the diversity of specialized consumer products available. But to this end, niche markets need to be in a state of constant change in order to sustain their small hold on a volatile market. The Long Tail then pays close attention to quick-changing fashions and new trends, so that the only constant in culture is change itself. Consumers of arts and entertainment are then placed in a state of constant change as the market adapts to new sensations and specialized desires. Art and entertainment in the Long Tail is reabsorbed into the market, itself in a state of constant change as new trends develop. While culture does become ephemeral and unstable, the effects of diversity provided by the Long Tail are praiseworthy so long as the distinction between culture and product is clear.