Yes I understand - hence it being a dilemma. But the point is the media has been negative for some time. Like since after the first festival. I think they have been looking for things to go wrong. And I would say the media has a lot of clout indirectly with sponsorship. With press like that no one is going to get sponsorship, whoever does it. Also the market is v bad - that is not stressed at all. Moby scrappped his travelling fest - and he had sponsors and a major label. It's easier for other cultural/musical events to get sponsorship because there's a defined market (I'm speaking in terms of the US). Electronic music is very nebulous. I mean Basement Jaxx don't have a US record deal anymore but won a Grammy! They don't mention either that a lot of people - professionals - voluntarily worked on the festival knowing the financial constraints and that May poured a lot of his own capital and resources into it. I think the city expected too much. You can say there is an element of naivity but even the most experienced event organiser would find it a challenge in those circumstances. They probably would have given up altogether. So, yeah, dilemma.....
> considering that it has gotten down to the public issue of the city decide > how to monitarily manage a public space then the business dealing around > the festival are open to public debate. > > if the article was simply 'movement doesn't pay people' or somthing > equally sensationalistic, i would agree. but it's a matter of public > policy now, so total disclosure time.
