For most of recent history, up until about 60 years ago, the act of creation was just a part of life. Everyone sang or played an instrument or wrote or performed or danced or Something.

But recording technology turned creative output in to a path to fortune and fame. Suddenly, if you weren't exceptional, then why were you trying at all?

This concept is, of course, bullshit.

TV never had a real amateur moment, and filmmaking barely did.

TV came close in 69 with the videofreex, but the FCC made sure that any potential home video might have had for artistic expression would be stiffled by distribution problems.

The video resolution of the 80s unlocked film a little (toxic avenger, El mariachi, an absolute glut of horror films and pornography) but distribution was still limited to single physical copies.

@ajroach42 Music did. Radio (or rather podcasts) did.

@alcinnz music is now, for sure. Bandcamp represents probably the greatest trove of creative output that has ever existed, and now it's owned by epic.

Podcasts are having a bit of a professionalism moment right now, but it's small and it's impact will remain limited as long as podcasts keep meaning audio or video distributed via rss or atom, and not "radio show on Spotify."

@ajroach42 I reject the notion that podcasts have to centralize to succeed. Podcatchers can and have been given a nice UX. Centralization is how the masses understand technology now, sure, but it doesn't have to be.

What I find tends to be the problem is that for many is that the medium of pure-audio is inaccessible. Yet audio video significantly ups the cost, which can be extremely prohibative to make depending on the story you want to tell.

@alcinnz what do you mean about the medium being inaccessible? microphones aren't too expensive and audacity is free @ajroach42