Some good points but in many ways rather over-simplified.
He tries to make a case for brainwashing, through blanketing the market with a song. But that’s what record companies have done from the beginning. They would pay to get their songs played, and played more often in key radio stations across the nation. You’d turn on the radio in the 70’s, 80’s, 90’s and knew that within 20 minutes you’d hear at least three of the songs that record companies meant to be hits. Often most of the songs played fit that category.
Someone runs a language analyser for complexity and see a decline in the last 10 years. Yet, I can find a whole lot of hit songs from the 60's that are just as mindless and simple, including a lot of stuff from the Beatles. There were a few record label song writers that dominated the pop charts for decades.
Drum machines and synthesizers have been competing with sessions musicians and their instruments for at least 40 years.
There are new issues. Loudness. Pitch correction. Lables issues vs self-publishing issues. But many of the issues you mentioned have been around for over 50 years, just updated to today’s technology.
Bruce
Theories are not so much answers as questions, to be supported or undermined by experience & testing.
Source: Audiolab 6000CDT > Calyx 24/192 DAC
Amplification: Pass-design B1rev2 pre-amplifier > Neurochrome Modulus 686.
Loudspeakers: Proac Response 1SC
Cables/stands: spkr: MIT MH-750 biwire; IC: HT Truthlink; Target stands, sand-filled; Excel Cat6A 23AWG UFTP & 1attack.de Cat.7 SFTP.
Other: Balanced AC transformer to hydra mains distr; Bass traps & Acoustic panels; Isolation: Inner tube & roller bearings; 3xZyxel ES104A switches in series w/Vreg upgrades.