I spent the morning writing this out in response to a video clip that is timestamped below:
I don't know how the music industry works or what determines which venues you're allowed to play at and how you get distribution etc., but in my view a small handful of individuals who insist on making a difference in disrupting the status quo can at least afford to do so in the long-term (~10 years) by saving in #Bitcoin early and often, and betting on themselves and their own tastes in music or in any other art form.
I do think that social platforms like YouTube and Instagram have helped tremendously in discoverability and finding artists that I would not have found otherwise, but I think the financial support side of things comes back to old school art patronage and individuals who save their own money expressly for this purpose. For me it comes back to 1,000 True Fans by Kevin Kelly or the idea of superfans who do most of the heavy lifting. I think that #Bitcoin is a necessity for this to happen broadly, and that eventually hundreds or thousands of people saving in Bitcoin and sponsoring precisely the kinds of art that they personally want to see in the world will make a huge difference.
That lack of aspiring patrons / Bitcoin-savers is what I think is currently missing in terms of why we aren't seeing a more level playing field in terms of opportunities for financial success in the arts. There simply needs to be more potential patrons with money to spend that they want to dedicate to supporting the arts at an intensely personal level. The more abstract that gets (i.e. relying on institutions or group-think or collectives instead of your own idiosyncratic taste), the less effective the patronage becomes. I go back to Zero to One: What would you do where, if you weren't the one doing it, it wouldn't happen at all?