Virtual band Gorillaz’s debut album turns 20 years old today (a fact I’ll try to forget immediately), and in celebration the group will perform the usual anniversary celebrations: re-release albums, sell new merchandise and, according to NME, which sells NFTs.
This news has Broken me.
At this point, it’s pretty clear that NFTs are a thorny environmental problem – while it can be difficult to calculate exactly how bad they are in terms of carbon emissions, the picture doesn’t look good. Overall, seeing the deluge of NFT news, it’s easy to excite people about participating in a market that is actually hurting the world: “Okay, Brand, I hope this marketing stunt was worth it to set the earth on fire to stab? ” Turns out it’s not as much fun if someone you actually like it does, especially if that singer is even earlier made an entire album about ecological destruction
I don’t want to come off if I try to cancel Gorillaz or say it’s bad for artists to make money. Artists definitely need to be paid more for their work, and I’m all for them trying to come up with new stuff to sell to fans who are willing to pay. But NFTs come at a cost that is difficult to justify, and when I see a band that I seemingly ignore, I’m on a Melancholy Hill. And I am not All alone – there have been numerous other fans express their disappointment on Twitter. It probably doesn’t help that their environmental album was called Plastic strand, And they are reportedly working with a company called Superplastic to sell the NFTs Life is coming your way quickly.
If you’re an artist, here’s one Song 2 repeat:
The NFT market has grown,
As eight figures auctions have shown.
The total price is
A worse climate crisis
For art you pretend to be the owner.
– Limericking (@Limericking) March 15, 2021