djchameleon

ahh okay but whoring for views turns into more iTunes sales.

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

Urban Hat€monger ?

Maybe I'm missing the point here but when did allowing your kids to perform or sing become a bad thing?

Just because one song went viral?
Anything can go viral, it's just in this case it's a song.

It's not like this Ark music factory are like a proper record label or anything. I doubt they could exploit any of their 'talent' even if they wanted to.
They're just some small time business making music for kids to sing.
They didn't have anything to do with this going viral, it was just a lucky break for them because it seems everybody knows who they are now.
I would imagine they make the most of their money from the writing of the songs & making of the videos rather than actually selling any of their music.
I bet nobody could name another of their 'artists' without looking at their site.

Sorry but I don't see how allowing a kid to sing in a video is morally objectionable just because there's a one in several billion chances of it going viral.

__________________

djchameleon

In the eyes of some people child performers are always a bad thing because when they become an adult they will suffer psychological problems that's the new train of thought nowadays.

It's actually called the Drew Barrymore Syndrome. They think it will screw up a kid's life forever if they perform and they will most out on their childhood.

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

Urban Hat€monger ?

But they're not performers though, they're just kids that want a go at singing & being in a music video.
There have always been companies around that provide this kind of service, it's not exactly a new thing. And none of them have had any sort of exposure as this one has.

Going to a small company & paying to be in a video is nothing like being signed up by a record label and being expected to turn a profit and tour the world.
This is a freak occurrence, if you're going to stop a child doing this using Rebecca Black as an example then you may as well never let them out of the house or do anything because the odds your child becoming known around the world for appearing on one video & receiving death threats are far more than being run over by a bus or something.

__________________

EvilChuck

The 'if' is very important though, how is it not!?

Lets say I have a child who wants something for £250 at the end of the month.

I earn £1000 a month, £500 of which goes on the monthly bills. I spend a further £200 during the month on the grocery shopping, another £100 on petrol, plus another £100 just on general stuff that my family and I need.

That all totals an expenditure of £900, leaving £100 for my child's thing. Obviously, I cant afford it right now. But three months down the line, with the same income and expenditure, all of a sudden I'd have £300 for my child's thing, and CAN afford to buy it for them.

Are you saying in this instance that you wouldnt buy the thing that your child wanted? (Within reason of course, as I said in the post quoted by pooka. I'm not advocating buying your child everything they ever ask for).

Ben Butler

My post had my opinions in them and common sense. Yours didn't have any facts in them, just a pathetic overreaction to something completely blown out of proportion by the media.

EvilChuck

So I should do what to make my posts better?

Ben Butler

Just be a bit more open minded, rather than jump on the bandwagon about everything.

djchameleon

I personally wouldn't buy my child that even if the money was available. It's not enough to get them the thing they want. That 300 could go towards either savings or another bill. There is always another bill somewhere.

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

EvilChuck

I was being facetious.

What do you mean it isnt enough? The 300 would be more than enough, and would be coming from disposable income. Obviously its your perogative whether or not you'd choose to spend your disposable income on your kids (I personally would for what its worth, again within reason [I feel I need to specify every detail in my posts in this thread, just to make sure there is no confusion which I feel there may have been]).

Your implication that I have no financial responsibilties and therefore have no understanding of how the world works was way off base as well, and given the fact you know nothing about my life now or in the past, was a little bit disrespectful IMO. I work hard, pay my way in society and to my family, as well as cover my own costs, and use the rest of the money I earn to live my life how I want to. I am not from a rich family, I still have to budget for things, money doesnt just fall into my lap.