I had typed out a response where I refer to the second two paragraphs of my reply above and elaborated on them, but a more interesting thought occurs: what is a sugar-only media diet? How does it differ from any other 'media diet'?

Let's say you'll only ever keep watching if a film begins with an explosion. Surely, if this how the audience behaves, then every film produced will quickly converge on beginning with explosions.

But if every film begins with explosions, maybe you become tired of all the explosions. Eventually you'll come to associate an explosion-heavy start with mediocre formulaic films, and your behaviour will reverse: maybe you'll now refuse to watch any film that begins with explosions.

Surely it's all just an endless cycle of fashions and counter-fashions, culture and counter-culture? The studio gives us what we crave, and we eat it all up until we're sick and want something else, and then some avant garde artist gives us something else, and if it works and is popular then all the studios steal it and the cycle repeats?

In as far as art isn't 'productive' per se - ars gratia artis and all that - to what end should you suffer through art you don't enjoy?

That's certainly one way to look at it. I see it a little differently. With video games, for example, when I had to buy a game to see if I liked it, I'd mostly just buy the big hits that a lot of people liked or smaller games that got wide critical acclaim. But with a subscription gaming service, I can try out any game on the service without paying an additional fee, so I'm trying a wider range of games in genres I don't normally play. I've found some real gems I wouldn't have even considered previously if I'd had to buy them first to really get to know them.

The radio was like that before streaming services. Don't know if you like country music? Just pop on the country station when you're alone in your car and try it out. If it doesn't work out, switch to hip hop or classical, or alternative. Worst case, you wasted 5 minutes of your time while you were driving anyway. Best case, you have a new genre of music to explore!

That said, I'm don't have ADHD and am heavily skeptical of anything coming from big corps, so I already aggressively tune out most things, so maybe it's not that easy for others.

See, were this true, my mother (who didn’t have the internet at all) would have a fine appreciation for country music and dancing. Because those were mostly all she had while growing up; she had plenty of time to learn appreciation for both.

Obviously she didn’t. My father in turn never picked up a love for the beetles nor reading. So, while appealing to our lamentations about “kids these days”, your hypothesis is flawed.

People, even in times of media scarcity, still developed loves and hates. Evolving your tastes is much more intentional than just not having a choice.

You’re misreading what I’m saying.

I’m not saying: You’ll like anything if you give it time.

I’m saying: There are things that you may not initially like, which you will like if you give it time. Which means that if you never give anything its proper time, you’re likely missing out on things you may have otherwise learned to appreciate.

IMHO this is especially true for classical music, which is generally less approachable than pop music.