According to Forbes, this is Taylor Swift with a revenue of 185 185 million in 2019.
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the answer to this question was probably Elizabeth Billington. British singer Billington has been called the best soprano in history. He had many fans and his biography sold out in less than a day. There were queues at the opera house to watch his performances, and the opera house would bid exorbitantly to pull Billington. His voice made him very rich. And his income was ہزار 10,000 in 1801, which is about 1 1 million today. About half of Taylor Swift's revenue.
What is the difference? Why is Taylor Swift's income 200 times higher than Elizabeth Billington's?
Alfred Marshall estimated the effect of the telegraph in 1875. By this time the United States, Britain, India and Australia had been connected to the telegraph. "Because of this invention, the dominance of those who are dominant in any field will be wider," he wrote. Be it the best industrialists in the world or the average business gap will start to widen. But the effect doesn't reach professions that can't take advantage of the technology, such as singers. "
Two years after Alfred Marshall's prediction, Thomas Edison invented the phonograph. This machine could record human sound and repeat it. But no one knew what to do with the technology. A suggestion came to record a will, to give a dictation. Edison thought it might not work.
But then its use became apparent in music. Initial recording was not easy. One recording made three to four copies. In the 1890s, the famous black American artist George Johnson sang fifty times a day. He choked and made two hundred records.
The next invention was made by Emily Berliner in which the recording was done on disc. Being able to copy from one record to another opened up the market extensively. Artists like Charlie Chaplin are now reaching out to the whole world.
New technology meant more fame and more revenue. But for artists who weren't at the forefront, the invention was devastating. Not everyone could go see the best artists, even ordinary artists could see and hear. But if you can hear the best at home, why spend money just listening to a good artist?
This discovery by Thomas Edison made a wide difference between the best artist and the best artist. The best superstars began to get richer than they thought. It was difficult for him to live from the best to the worst. Economist Sharon Rosen called the difference a "superstar economy."
In Pakistan and India, the art of storytelling, comedy, acting, dancing and singing was passed down from family to family. Similar differences arose with the families who carried on this legacy. There were a few superstars. For the rest, the word of his profession was also despised.
It's not just about singers. What the telegraph did to the industrialists, what the gramophone did to the singers, what the satellite TV did to the players. Even the best player could be seen in the stadium a few decades ago. Now every move of a player in football, cricket, tennis, athletics or any other sport can be seen. Again, viewed from many angles. And so satellite TV made the players superstars. Their importance in society has become much greater because their access is not limited to those who go to the stadium.
As the number of TV channels increased, so did the bidding war for the rights to show, which made the best players very rich. The income gap between the superstar and the star has widened. Because everyone wants to see the best players. Not the best player.
Changes in technology can cause sudden dramatic changes and are not easy to digest. There was no difference in the skills of the people but the income was very high. Positive for some, negative for others. And what to do in comparison? There is no easy answer. And this unequal distribution is not due to any government policy, tax code, any pressure group, monopoly of big institutions. So there is nothing to protest against. For example, Google or Facebook cannot be banned in order to save a newspaper reporter's livelihood.
In the twentieth century, new inventions, such as cassettes, CDs, DVDs, etc., retained the gramophone model. And then came the Internet and MP3. Songs could now be heard online and often for free. It changed the business once again. But at the moment, artists are earning five times more than the top 95% of the total, and the gap is widening with the help of technology.
The gramophone is gone, but with the help of technology, the wide gap between winners and losers will remain with us.
The gramophone that sowed the seeds of all this was an invention that had a much deeper impact on our world than recording people's wills.
0 Comments