It's been tried time and time again. It's the one thing that bites at the insides of anyone with human-level ethics; to make money off one's death- How soon is too soon?
This past weekend a shock vibrated across the world with the news of Whitney Houston's sudden death. This tragedy comes after a long, heart wrenching battle with drug abuse and alcohol. Questions are raised on her value across the industry. Was her "legacy" as so many industry people repeatedly say, a price point? Does the industry ethically mold a person into a price?
Now, I understand business is business. I understand supply and demand. Last time I checked my economics books, demand wasn't about price hikes, but more having your product at the right place at the right time to service the demand. BUT, besides all of the obvious business perspectives of how a company, and in this case, Sony Music, can make money off of a death, the question in my personal ethics book is, how soon is too soon to make money off an artist's death?
A friend in the industry once told me, and this is when physical sales were actually relevant, that as soon as someone goes on life support, put in the hospital, or had any kind of health concern, there is an increase in production. He said, "so-and-so is on life support, put in 30,000 more orders".
If a product is a product, and by that I mean, it's not a living, breathing human, then is it still okay to increase prices and supply? Sure. For example: If there is a shortage in Aquafina water, for supply and demand purposes, Poland Spring should increase their supply to gain profit. There is a demand, and Poland Spring supplies. But dammit, why is Whitney or Michael, Amy or Etta or any person that's viewed as a product, valued in the market place the same way? Again I ask, how soon is too soon?
Other people in the industry have had a few disturbing thoughts in a sequence like this: "Whitney died!!!!" "Oh my gosh, Whitney is gone!" "I can't believe it!" "My bonus is going to be nice this year!" "What has this industry done to me?"
Does there come a point when we depreciate the value of a human based on the increase in value of them as the product?
Not more than 6 hours after being pronounced dead, there were already tributes happening to Whitney's life. Her cause of death had not been known nor her body even removed from the scene. Not more than 13 hours later there were conference discussions on price campaigns and price hikes. Not more than 15 hours later album sales and individual download records were being analyzed.
My ethics question here is not about the artist as a product, because like Film, Art and even Sports, we all know some people are worth more in death than in life. My questions here are, do we value mourning, do we value the life lived, do we value time or simply equate time to money and act with such a lack in human value only to watch how that quadruples the amount of zeros in the bank account? Do we value the legacy or do we simply value the price point we put on it?
How soon is too soon to profit on the death of a legacy? Is there room for a soul in economics?
(The above mentioned companies and names are mentioned out of personal opinion and do not reflect the facts of said companies are names)
No comments:
Post a Comment