Completely agree on the point that Kickstarter won't work for many very new artists, but the "digital panhandling" notion is anmisrepresentation that unfortunately seems to have spread through the crowd funding environment. Perhaps the communications from some artists support this perspective, but the more valid comparison is to pre-ordering than begging. Consider that every project to be funded (as separated from the more charitable "campaign and donation" terminology, often used without distinction) sets up a future transaction, through which the fan receives a product. They order now, pay later, receive just a little after that. This is not donating money immediately to some intangible end. It's a shame that the image of this route to revenue seems to be spreading, because for many artists it's a perfect way to gauge interest in a project and raise advance funding based on that interest, rather than signing away rights to those of your creations that some middle man decides to gamble on. If fans increasingly see crowd funding in a negative way, it could cut off a promising alternative path for artists with a limited but supportive fan base. As for Reznor, he came up in the boom days of $20 CD sales and milking fans for all they're worth, so has already made his money. Flipping between business models on a whim is a luxury most artists just don't have, so his opinion is of limited practical application.

Spot on. As someone heavily vested in utilizing social media, I still cringe when I see them touted as a single shot solution to whatever challenge an industry is facing. Social platforms are channels and tools, not solutions in their own right. They can be powerful in deepening relationships with fans and better understanding what they desire, but will go nowhere without an overall direction that works alongside other marketing initiatives. Treat anyone who tells you otherwise with the greatest of suspicion.