Watered Down Copies of Imitations

Most of my life I've had an inexplicable fascination with the human mind. This has shown itself in many ways the most obvious being my desire to collect and share information with the public as a reporter. The other, is a vast appreciation of the arts, specifically music. It is with these points in mind that I am drawn to the communication practice of "file sharing."
The practice of file sharing has had a multitude of consequences on the music industry. They are both good and bad. First the good. File sharing has allowed millions of people to become exposed to many different genres all at the same time. I would venture to guess that young music fans in the file sharing generation are more eclectic than previous ones. Also, sharing allows independently produced bands to more effectively promote themselves. (This is also due in huge part to sites like Facebook and Myspace.) Some of the bands that I have discovered have been sent to me via mutual friends or even the occasional accidental download.
There have also been some negative ramifications. The argument that file sharing screws over musicians is somewhat valid but growing exponentially insignificant. Hearing how file sharing is unfair from the now infamous Lars Ulrich is laughable at best. However, the valid part of the argument comes from up and coming bands that have yet to find a market niche. It is easy for us to forget that musicians are still trying to make a living like the rest of us. If the argument holds any weight it would be in the fact that newer bands may find it all the more harder to be financially compensated.
And then....there's the worst consequence of all. As an owner of hundreds of CD's, I can say that some of my favorite artists are the ones who see the production of an album as a complete work of art. The pictures, the linear notes, the disk label, everything is part of a whole. The songs are only a fragment of the vision the artists wanted to produce. For instance, the latest Nine Inch Nails album entitled "Year Zero" is a concept album meant to depict a dystopian future of the U.S. if it were to be taken over by a religious/authoritarian government. Every song builds upon the whole, telling the story from a different groups perspective. The album artwork represents propaganda spread by this potential government, as well as showing pictures of war torn landscapes. My point is, it would be a vastly different experience to just download the popular hit single than it would be to listen to the entire album.
But even casual fans like the ones that might do the aforementioned aren't what bothers me. What bothers me is artists that are becoming frustrated with file-sharing fast paced infrastructure. Another unintentional consequence of file-sharing is that it can turn people's perception of music into just another easily attainable throw-away commodity. The market change also has potential to change the way artists do things. I would hate to see artists intentionally water themselves down in order to appeal to those who only download singles. This type of behavior has already generated a plethora of easily forgotten artists whose only claim to fame was pitifully copies what others have already done a piss-poor job of.
What keeps me going, even as I an avid listener partake in file sharing, is a trust in artistic integrity and the hope that I’m not the only one out there with my level of appreciation. I’ve always been fascinated by the human mind, specifically its ability to fulfill or denounce my expectations. The rest is only time.