UK artists seek 'luvvie levy' on new gadgets to make up for all the media that consumers access online

Leading lights in the world of "the arts" have called for a techy tax on mobiles, laptops, and PCs to help finance creative industries they claim have been ravaged by lack of revenue and funding. DACS – the visual artists' rights management nonprofit – reckons a levy of 1-2 per cent on the sale of new tech gadgets could help …

[Pascal Monett]

What ?

"redress the balance caused by people accessing music, films, and other creative material online without paying for it directly "

Hey, I'm all for supporting the Arts, but why choose to tax the equipment ? If people are consuming creative material online, they're going somewhere for that, so tax that place.

Are we going to start hearing a variation on VHS killed the film industry ?

Stop this nonsense.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What ?

> If people are consuming creative material online, they're going somewhere for that, so tax that place.

We've already got a bedroom tax. <fnarr>.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: What ?

>We've already got a bedroom tax

So all those kitchen, washing machine + step-sister incidents are just a tax dodge?

[Arthur 1]

Re: What ?

Sadly these can and do get passed. Every piece of blank media (tape, optical, whatever, might even apply to flash?) in Canada has a $0.29 levy on it to support the poor artists whose material you clearly intend to steal.

[nintendoeats]

Re: What ?

Crap, so this is why CD-Rs are so expensive here. That is several times the actual cost of manufacture. I can't believe that some of my money has gone to Kanye West because I wanted to install software from companies that no longer exist on computers that are slower than the microcontroller in my fridge.

:(

[Arthur 1]

Re: What ?

If it helps over 75% of the money collected bypasses artists and goes right to the studios/publishers and their execs, so Kanye probably didn't get anything from you.

[nintendoeats]

Re: What ?

You know, that almost makes me feel better. Wait, no it doesn't.

[big_D]

Re: What ?

It is the same in Germany, all blank media and mobile hard drives and USB sticks, I believe, have a similar levy.

As I only use them for storing my own material and making backups of my own material, I find it a poor idea.

[big_D]

Re: What ?

Exactly. I don't listen to music on my phone or watch films, I listen to audio books, which I have purchased already, and I listen to podcasts, most of which I already support financially (I pay a voluntary subscription to around 80% of the podcasts I listen to - I could download them for free, but I want to support the people producing them).

Why should I pay more, when I already pay for everything I consume on the device, or the podcasts are handed out for free?

[Richard Jones 1]

Another VD TX, (Value Deduction Tax)

Who else besides the luvvies would think up a VD tax? I have nothing produced by them on my devices, though I do have some self-created images from the last 50 plus years, Can I tax the damned luvvies? To recover the cost of film and digital cards used more recently.

Another daft, no make that obnoxious idea for file thirteen.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Another VD TX, (Value Deduction Tax)

I was just thinking there should be a "tech tax" on the crayons and art paper to help re-build our struggling science and tech industries.

[Grunchy]

Guilty as charged - I blame FM radio

I never buy any albums and why would I when I can nail the dial to ckua.com?

(and if I wanted I could capture the stream with "total recorder" for time-shift purposes, I guess I could, I never have.)

[karlkarl]

So they want to dip in to every tech sale *and* keep strict DRM on their sales?

But on the bright side. I bought a new mouse the other day, so I suppose all my years of pirating films is now justified. All is right in the world once more.

Megaphone icon because: If I bought one of these tech gadgets, it means now I can steal a handbag or a car right? My memory of that classic advert is fading!

[Kane]

"Megaphone icon because: If I bought one of these tech gadgets, it means now I can steal a handbag or a car right? My memory of that classic advert is fading!"

You Wouldn't Download A Car, Would You?

[Ordinary Donkey]

Okay.

There is a video on the internet somewhere of me making a glove puppet sing happy birthday. Where do I sign up for my cut of these millions? Does the puppet have to sign too?

[karlkarl]

Re: Okay.

I bough a tech gadget once. Therefore it is my consumer right to be presented with this video.

(Seriously, now I do kinda want to see it! I always predicted that some of the guys on these forums must be more creative than me. I never dreamed that I would one day get to experience it!)

[Ordinary Donkey]

Re: Okay.

If you can find it you can watch it. It's a wolf with a balloon.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Okay.

Did you pay the licence fee to use the song Happy Birthday in your video ...?

[Arthur the cat]

Re: Okay.

Did you pay the licence fee to use the song Happy Birthday in your video ...?

It's public domain in the US and Europe, the copyright claim was invalid. See Wikipedia.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Okay.

But the concept of "happy" is now property of the Disney corporation

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Okay.

Well, he bought the tech gizmo that he wrote that post on.

That should cover it right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Too much money is already wasted on "supporting the arts". Approx 4 billions pounds a year of our tax money.

If these artists are talented enough to make salable product, then they can sell it, otherwise they should just sponging and get a proper job like everybody else.

[EvilGardenGnome]

That's how you end up with only Marvel movies and TV reboot series. Also, the spin-off money from the arts has the highest ROI for any government investment.

[SkippyBing]

If it's such a good investment then may I suggest the luvvies invest in themselves to make up any perceived shortfall in profits.

[BlokeInTejas]

Citation needed.

[John Brown (no body)]

"If these artists are talented enough to make salable product, then they can sell it, otherwise they should just sponging and get a proper job like everybody else"

Isn't the struggle of being poor supposed to be what feeds the creative juices and provide inspiration?

[nintendoeats]

I've really had enough of salable products. The world is dramatically improved by the existence of non-salable products. Salability only demonstrates that somebody has convinced somebody else that the thing has value. Quite often, that event is completely independent of the thing's actual value.

This effect is not exclusive to the arts.

[Robert Grant]

If you think something is undervalued, then buy it yourself. It's not different to anything else someone thinks is undervalued.

[Snowy]

Blank media tax V2.0

First they did it with a tax on blank media (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy) and now they want to put it on devices.

Oddly the articles does not includes tablets.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Blank media tax V2.0

There is still a 25c/each tax on blank CDs here to pay for piracy. The money goes to the equivalent of the RIAA but somehow never made it to any artists, meanwhile small bands selling CDs at their gigs had to pay the tax.

There was a proposal to put a $50 tax on iPods but the iPod died out before it got passed

[Dazed and Confused]

Re: Blank media tax V2.0

> meanwhile small bands selling CDs at their gigs had to pay the tax.

My son is just getting into the content creation business, I assume this tax means that he and the many others like him are being expected to pay to subsidise the established players in this field.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Blank media tax V2.0

In theory yes, in practice it never covered the costs of the industry body administering the scheme so the money just went to paying executives

[jake]

Re: Blank media tax V2.0

Just like your common or garden pyramid scheme.

[Dazed and Confused]

Re: Blank media tax V2.0

The small time players don't make enough money to fund the executives expensive habits through the normal channels, so I guess they have to find another way to gouge money out of them.

[Mishak]

redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

So, my Netflix, Amazon subscription doesn't generate any revenue for them? Or do they mean they should have asked for more? Or do they just think that they should be paid more than once?

Why should they get 2% on the $10,000 I used to build a crypto mining rig? (I didn't, but I might have).

Get real.

[nintendoeats]

Re: redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

I mean, the reality is that for music at least streaming has been horrid. It is almost impossible to make money on Spotify.

[SkippyBing]

Re: redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

I'm not sure an extra tax solves that though, it's just subsidising Spotify's business model. Which I object to.

No I don't have a Spotify account I still buy CDs and rip them. So come the zombie apocalypse and the fall of civilisation I'll still have all my music. Who'll be laughing then hey?

[nintendoeats]

Re: redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

I completely agree, this is not the solution. I just wanted to acknowledge that capitalism has completely failed to ensure that minor artists get paid.

[Robert Grant]

Re: redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

Of course it has. It's failed to ensure that I get paid for typing this as well.

[theDeathOfRats]

Re: redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

Then that's something to be solved between Spotify and the artists/creators/performers/whatever.

My computers are not iPods, Zunes, or Fucking Walkmans. These machines are fucking workhorses. There's no way they could be involved in your streaming shit. We already pay a tax on every fucking blank media because "it can be used to pirate registered shit". And there is no way to get a refund when you use it to store your own(ed) content. Like backups and shit.

So, no.

And sorry, not sorry for this rant.

[SundogUK]

Re: redress the balance caused by people accessing ... online without paying for it directly

True but this cure is way worse than the disease.

[TeeCee]

What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

I mean, apart from grey imports destroying the UK media devices business overnight...

[elsergiovolador]

Re: What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

Sounds like one of instruments Russia or China could come up with to keep pulling apart our economy.

It's so easy to find a group of young bored people, given them money in exchange to scream whatever the agenda is to the media and hoping some of that will stick.

[Pierson]

What free stuff?

Hmmm, my "media consumption":

Netflix, Spotify ... Paid by monthly subscription

BBC etc ... Paid for with my TV licence fee

ITV etc ... Supported by advertising

DVDs ... All paid for at retail prices

So, where's all this free shit that the luvvies imagine I'm mainlining 24/7 ?

[arthoss]

Re: What free stuff?

it's probably art displayed on your way from your place to your work... A lot of good that does when you work from home.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: What free stuff?

Would that be the art in posters, for which I assume the artist gets a fee, or graffiti?

[Evilgoat76]

Re: What free stuff?

As a landlord I also pay Three organisations to make sure the executive<<<< artists are paid whenever a song is played in the building on top of all you've mentioned.

[Kurgan]

We have this shit in Italy

We have this shit in Italy, it's called "equo compenso" (something like "the right compensation") and it's needed to fund the SIAE, which is a clusterfuck in itself. It's applied to almost everything: servers, disks, any recordeable media, pcs, phones, set top boxes, etc. It's quite easily avoidable by buying online from some European seller.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: We have this shit in Italy

This type of scam is copied in every country.

From Wikipedia:

65% of artists registered with the SIAE receive royalties totalling less than their registration fees.

[Claverhouse]

Re: We have this shit in Italy

Looked that up.

From 2013 to February 2015, the main spokesperson of the SIAE organization was the songwriter Gino Paoli, who was the president of the society. Paoli resigned after he was investigated for tax evasion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIAE

[Anonymous Coward]

They already have something similar in Germany...a portion of your broadband bill goes to the media industry, on the assumption that you're just going to pirate everything, so at least this way they get something from you.

But...it's still illegal to pirate. Hmm. So...they charge you a levy on the assumption you're going to do it, and it's illegal if you actually do it. How does that work?

[jake]

It works the same way you pay taxes on all income ... including income received from doing illegal things, like dealing drugs or selling stolen property.

[Pascal Monett]

I have a hunch that people who sell drugs or stolen property have a tendancy to not declare that revenue on their income tax.

[Nifty]

Isn't Britain the country that saw a sharp increase in GDP when drugs & prostitution were included in economic activity?

[jake]

True enough. It's still tax evasion, though.

Read up on what took down Al Capone.

[Robert Grant]

> It works the same way you pay taxes on all income ... including income received from doing illegal things, like dealing drugs or selling stolen property.

You've missed it. The entire premise of this new tax is that it's to make up for content you're no doubt pirating. Income tax is not taken on the basis that the government thinks you stole the income.

[Andy The Hat]

Oh the irony ...

Only in Britain could you suggest taxing one of the outlets for your product.

Perhaps a tax on theatres and music venues? Perhaps a tax on written music scores and violins?

Perhaps a tax on those "superstars" who are paid excessively ... oh, nerve touched there I reckon ...

[AMBxx]

Re: Oh the irony ...

It's 'only in Britain' because a lot of other countries have already been daft enough to implement.

[Mishak]

Only in Britain could you suggest taxing

Well, it's been raised in Britain, but it's not from an official (government) source.

[Dusty Notes]

What about the people in the software world?

This techy tax should go towards a fund for the unsung people in the software development world that this DACS 'non-profit' rely on for ripping off each others work.

How about an eating tax to be applied to supermarkets to create a fund to help support the restaurants that are struggling with the pandemic?

And an alcohol tax for the pubs and clubs that are also struggling.

[Arthur the cat]

Re: What about the people in the software world?

Let's shake it up – a tax on the arts to buy beer and pizza for people writing software.

[ibmalone]

Re: What about the people in the software world?

An open source fund would make more sense!

Thinking of buying a new development laptop, 3% of a neat £1500 comes out at £45, am I any more likely to use this to do whatever it is they think I should be paying for than with a £30 Fire Stick / Chromecast / Roku? Do we have to pay it on our server and storage purchases?

Anyway, this problem is largely sewn up now, access through mobile devices and smart devices means most people are using streaming services for legal access (or semi-legal in the case of youtube videos). If producers aren't getting paid enough then that's the door to knock on. Or maybe do it out of general taxation, after all, I sometimes overhear buskers without paying them and no device was involved there.

[jake]

Re: What about the people in the software world?

More likely you'll see a tax on people working from home to pay the owners of all that office space who aren't getting paid anymore, and more tax on fuel to pay all the poor gas(petrol) station operators who have been missing revenue this last year. These have actually been suggested here in the Bay Area.

Bridge tolls are going up, partially because we've had less traffic. I kid you not.

And don't forget schools ... Schools are funded according to how many students they have had in the classroom recently. Not enrolled, mind, but the language actually states "in the classroom". Guess what happens when a pandemic ensures there are no kids in the classroom?

[nintendoeats]

Re: What about the people in the software world?

The bridge toll makes perfect sense. Bridge costs f(X) to maintain, where X is the number of cars every year. Unfortunately, f is not a linear function: even if the bridge has nobody going over it, there is still expensive maintenance and inspection that must be done (not to mention recouping the cost of building it, which is completely independent of usage).

It's pretty intuitive that if fewer people are using a fixed-cost resource, the cost to each user must go up.

[Howard Sway]

"luvvie levy"

Sony Operating profit 2020-2021

games and network services division : $3.17 billion

music division: $1.74 billion.

BMG : boosted its annual profit by 34 percent to $1.77 billion

Netflix : made $542 million in profit on $6.64 billion in sales in the fourth quarter 2020.

I gave up looking any further at this point. I think we can all see where this "luvvie levy" really needs to come from if the artists feel they're getting a rough deal. More than enough money is being made.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: "luvvie levy"

There is no point in looking at profits, because these are artificially low for tax purposes.

[Dave314159ggggdffsdds]

Re: "luvvie levy"

Why do people believe these insane conspiracy theories? Obviously that's complete nonsense, given even a moment's thought.

[Anonymous Coward]

FOSS

I think a "techy tax" would be far better employed supporting FOSS! Think of all those people who have contributed software that underpins many of these devices and networks for little or no return.

[elsergiovolador]

Re: FOSS

Developers should lobby that companies should be paying royalties from use of their code and that the complete transfer of IP wouldn't be legal, e.g. the worker should keep minimum 1%.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: FOSS

Ummm Free Open Source Software.

[jake]

Re: FOSS

Exactly. Free.

I didn't contribute expecting to get paid ... although a nickle for every instance of TCP/IP which contains code that I wrote would certainly be nice, to say nothing of the myriad of patches I've contributed to the Linux kernel, BSD, GNU and FOSS in general over the decades :-)

[Aladdin Sane]

Re: FOSS

Free as in speech, not free as in beer.

[BlokeInTejas]

It's basically a demand that the gummint pay them for failing at their hobby (it must be hobby, because if it were work they'd be getting paid).

What we need is lions. Fierce, hungry lions. That'd fix this particular problem, and might work well in other areas, too.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

>What we need is lions. Fierce, hungry lions

At least that would provide entertainment, Luvvies vs Lions at Wembley

[Andy The Hat]

Presumably we will have to impliment "knawing fees" and "roaring subsidies" in case somebody impersonates a lion? As part of their job, lions would also be entitled to tax rebates on hair care and dental work ... or am I getting confused with "Twats From Essex"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Three lions on his shirt!

[John Brown (no body)]

might work well in other arenas, too.

FTFY

[Aladdin Sane]

Also, I think knives are a good idea. Big, fuck-off shiny ones. Ones that look like they could skin a crocodile. Knives are good, because they don't make any noise, and the less noise they make, the more likely we are to use them. Shit 'em right up. Makes it look like we're serious. Guns for show, knives for a pro.

[elsergiovolador]

A fiddle

We all know that money will never end up in artists' bank accounts.

Seems like an interesting fiddle.

- Find a disadvantaged group of people that public may feel sympathy for

- Keep screaming how that group is treated so badly

- Create a fund where the tax payer money will be siphoned into

- Get your mates to help themselves to it, but make sure anyone else is excluded

- When the money runs out and the disadvantaged group finds out, run a PR how that group of people is ungrateful and never satisfied.

Rinse and repeat.

The above is just my personal opinion. I am not suggesting something like this would actually happen.

[ShabWeasel]

Re: A fiddle

Hold up - that's the Conservative manifesto....

[nijam]

Re: A fiddle

> Hold up - that's the Conservative manifesto....

And Labour. And the Unions. And... oh, your can fill the rest in for yourselves.

[Pete 2]

Sauce for the goose

So if we are all to be taxed on tech purchases because some "creatives" prefer to spend their days on the sofa waiting for their agents to call, then how about a tax on their performances to pay for all the people who write FOSS - that all those artists undoubtedly use for free while they are on the internet all day?

[Abominator]

Perhaps if they can't make a living and they don't like it, they should go get a dull job like the rest of us that pays the bills rather than taxing everybody else.

Talk about leeches. Suffer for you art if it means so much to you. The rest of us have our own problems to deal with.

Here's an idea. Perhaps have a super tax on on all the successful artists to pay for the less successful.

[martinusher]

Most content is worthless

Sorry, Its not the content creator's fault. Its just a fact of life.

Relatively few artists / musicians / what-have-you are able to make a living doing what they do. Its a lottery where talent and success aren't necessarily related -- some get rich, some scrape by but most, like the rest of us, need a day job. Subsidies and grants tend to go to the well-connected and getting and maintaining these becomes almost a job in of itself.

I wouldn't dream of charging for the stuff I create. But then I know how much its really worth.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Most content is worthless

Agreed, though with of course the distinction between worth and value. My BF is an artist - a pretty good one. But he knows it's next to impossible to make a living doing what he does...so it stays a hobby.

That's how it is for most creative types. Very few actually earn a living writing, performing or creating. At best it's something you can do in your spare time that might get you a little extra beer money, but not to live on.

Curiously the market seems to be widening. On the one hand you have musicians getting paid $100,000,000 for the rights to their music, and on the other you have people selling their albums made in their bedrooms for $5 on Bandcamp. At least now amateurs can get their work seen/heard, but it's harder than ever to make it your full time job.

[Robert Grant]

Re: Most content is worthless

It's not that surprising. Take away tech that allows quick distribution of content and almost every artist becomes a local impoverished entertainer. Add the tech back and suddenly anyone can be heard/seen, but it becomes a winner takes all scenario, where popular people are more likely to remain popular, and unknown people have a harder time breaking in.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Most content is worthless

Relatively few artists / musicians / what-have-you are able to make a living doing what they do."

A mate of mine was in a band. They supported some very big names back in the day, but never made it themselves. He owned all the gear, amps, speakers and whatnot. He went into the rental business and made more from that than performing.

The old adage about the guy selling shovels in a gold rush. Most miners will fail but the people selling the gear are guaranteed to do well, if not as well as the successful miners.

[JWLong]

Royalties

When accountability is finally brought into the entertainment industry and the already collected royalties are properly distributed, this money issue will become a non-issue.

Until then, NOPE - aint' going to happen.

[TDog]

Kindle

Every damn book on my Kindle has been paid for. So why should I pay the beggars again? Oh, of course. Three of them came from project Gutenberg.

[ShadowSystems]

Re: Kindle

Exactly this. A million times this. The primary source of the media I consume is either the ripped audio from CD's I've already purchased, Ebooks I've already purchased, or the free audio books for the blind; I've spent decades collecting & ripping music so I could listen to it where, when, & on whatever I damn well pleased; I've either purchased Ebooks by the thousands, downloaded free books from sources like Project Gutenberg, or paid for podcasts of authors I like (Welcome to Nightvale, I love you!); I've either purchased audio books (like the boxed set of the Welcome to Nightvale collection), or the source of which is free because my taxes already paid for it; so what & where *exactly* do you propose to tax to further enrich all those artists I've already paid for?

"But what about all those movies & tv shows & videos on Hulu, Netflix, & Youtube that you binge watch?" Sorry, no. I don't watch them any longer because I'm blind & the canned laugh tracks aren't amusing when you don't have the visual clues as to whatever it's being played to enhance. When all you hear is car chases, gun fire, explosions, & "damsel in distress" screaming on a seemingly endless loop, you quickly realize there isn't anything worth bothering with (much less paying for) any longer. "But there are awesome shows about..." Stop right there. They might be interesting if you can see what's going on, but when your only means of consumption renders it all into a single dimensional dumpster fire of unintelligible crap, you wind up finding your entertainment elsewhere. Like audio books, Ebooks, & music. For which I've already paid.

If I were sighted & still consumed media like the rest of society (tv, streaming, etc) then sure, I'd pay for those resources, but since I don't do the first I also no longer do the second. But you want to tax me as if I don't already have a personal library from which to consume, and that's the part that makes me wonder.

TL;DR: Your tax idea sucks. I've already paid for my library, I'm not going to pay you again.

[xyz123]

Basically this would only go to multi-millionaires and billionaires that own theatres.

They're the ones pushing for this behind the scenes.

Wouldn't surprise me if Andrew-Lloyd Webber wanted his fingers in this pie.

[xyz123]

OK introduce this tax.

But i want a tax on the radio waves wasted when shitty TV is on. Also a 50% tax payable on theatre costumes that goes to System Admins.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In breaking news, restaurant owners demand a tax on all kitchenware that is then paid to them, because people are *gasp* cooking at home!

[Anonymous Coward]

Pay?

Maybe if they had an Entertainers Hunger Games channel.

Maybe then….

[IGotOut]

Follow the money

So no money in streaming?

"In total, that meant the majors’ recorded music divisions collectively turned over $2.26bn from streaming in the fourth calendar quarter… which equates to $24.8m per day"

https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/its-happened-the-major-labels-are-now-generating-over-1m-every-hour-from-streaming/

[Andrew Barr]

No more tech for Luvvies then

Sounds like they have shot themselves in both feet as they probably haven't realised how much tech is used within their own industry, and now it will cost them more with the money they haven't got!

[Evil Scot]

Two Links that sum up my attitude.

Please click to donate 0.0001c to him...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE4lpSFNFUE

as for the big names well...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vqbk9cDX0l0

Do my best to support these underground artists. I have the CDs and, i am cutting my own throat here, the T-shirt.

Icon. He found this better than teaching.

[tekHedd]

"Distribute it to the creatives"...

The cynical editor in my head is hard at work with this one, replacing "writers and performers" with "Sony" etc.

I love how, when I perform an original piece of music in a public place with my band, Taylor Swift gets a little bit of the money the bar made that night. :P Love you Tay but that's MY 0.04 cents, thanks.

[Aussie Doc]

Optional sensible title here

Well, I have broadband at good speeds so I'll obviously simply download all my pirate stuff, poop in a policeman's helmet, deliver it to his wife etc etc etc.

Maybe, on the side, I can continue to run my video/graphics business from home as well.

Whilst listening to <some pirate title album or other>.

Muppets.

[Mark Wallace]

Why tax tech?

Some people eat while listening to music, and some people sit down -- so why not tax food or chairs?

Hell, why not give ALL your money to pop singers? They're obviously the most worthy people in the world -- I mean, can you name one who hasn't won the Nobel Peace Prize, or come up with a medical advance that's saved millions of lives?

[jake]

Re: Why tax tech?

I think you'll discover that most places have entertainment taxes, occupancy taxes, and food (in restaurants) is most certainly taxed.

However, this isn't about pop singers. It's about industry executives and other shareholders. If you have never read Janis Ian's rather excellent commentary on the subject, do yourself a favo(u)r and check it out. Read the follow-up, too.

Suggestion: Get a cuppa, and find a quiet place where you won't be interrupted before starting in on it. It's longish (for this sound-bytebit addicted modern world), and quite densely packed with large doses of reality.