Everyone knows it's a strange -- and particularly difficult -- time to be a band or a record label. Album sales tanked because of illegal downloading, folks aren't as interested in going out to see tours like they used to and nobody has much of a plan on how to reverse those losses. Well nobody has a sustainable plan. Labels, bands and fans have embraced the era of the Internet and all the gimmicks that come with it: Silly videos, fan mobilizations on the 'net and a slew of mostly throwaway nods to social media all desperately vie for your attention.

AFI -- singer Davey Havok, guitarist Jade Puget, bassist Hunter Burgan and drummer Adam Carson -- launch their latest album, Crash Love Sept. 29 from Interscope into the ball of confusion that is the modern music industry. You know what? They're just as sick of the way media, from music and arts to publishing and television, are dumbing everything down in the information age as you are. Puget took some time to speak with Aversion about how he and his band mates are faring in this brave, new, media-oversaturated world.

One of the running themes in Crash Love is the public obsession with other people and celebrities in the information age, correct?
Jade Puget: I guess it's less of the obsession and more of the type of people that are being obsessed on. If people were obsessed with Gandhi, that'd probably be beneficial for our society. The type of celebrity, the kind of icons that we have these days, they're hollow and devoid of substance. That's really where the problem is.

AFI seems a little more removed from the constant Internet presence that so many other bands favor. Is it important for you to maintain a little mystery about your band rather than disclosing every minute detail of your lives?
JP: We come from an era where the mystery is an important part. Not just us, but the bands that I like, or the singers and artists that I like, I like that aura of mystery. Now, it's like you can do that, but it's sort of to the detriment of your band. If every other band out there is giving people what they want, which is content or access or all these other things and you're not, that can really work against you. At the same time, you don't want to totally whore yourself out and give everyone every detail of your life.

Do you think people actually want all those details, or is it being force-fed to audiences?
JP: I think people do want that, at least people who grew up with these kind of social networking sites. It's easy to judge that and be like "In our day, it was better." This is all some people know, if you grew up with the Internet in your house. I didn't grow up with it, so I can see both sides of it. It has become that people expect that and want it

I'm a technology nerd in many ways. It's not like I try to turn on my computer and am like a grandma who can't figure out how to work it. I use all these things and I've used them all for many years through all the different evolutions of the sites and the Internet media outlets. I don't necessarily see them as evil as they're made out to be.

Do you ever feel like we're sacrificing substance because of our appetites for constant and immediate coverage of everything?
JP: I was doing an interview with this T.V. station that had just done an interview with TMZ, and they were talking about how news outlets, even respectable news outlets, news has been moving more toward breaking stories. That's what's becoming important because things are so immediate now. It's all about breaking news because everything is so instantaneous, having the news the quickest becomes the most important thing. At the same time, you're sacrificing content. You're sacrificing substance. It doesn't really matter what that breaking news is. It doesn't have to be anything important, just the fact that you're the first to get it. Our whole society is sort of moving to this instant access, but there's no real inherent substance to it.

Do you feel that music is following that trend, opting to be gimmicky and shallow rather than lasting, simply to attract easy attention?
JP: Lyrically, a lot of this record is about that, whether it's musically or culture in general, whether it be literature or movies. For instance, I went into a book store yesterday, and I was looking for a book to take on the road, and I swear to God, 70 percent of the books in the book store are a retread of the Dan Brown book, The Da Vinci Code. Literally half the books in the books in the book store in the fiction section are Da Vinci Code retreads! It's amazing. That's sort of what our culture in general has become. It's become retreads of stuff that's only popular because "If that guy did it and it worked, I'm just going to do that, because it will probably work as well." If you go to the movie theater, same thing. You look at a lot of popular art, Davey collects art and he sees a lot of that, where one person will have a style that's sort of unique, and everyone will jump on that and do half-assed retreads of that in hope of having the same kind of success. It's kind of where we are right now. It's kind of sad.

Are media producers and artists underestimating audiences or just giving us what we want and therefore deserve?
JP: If we put up with it, then we do deserve it. If people are happy with a Da Vinci Code retread, and they are happy with some band that's a third generation (copy) of some band that wasn't very good to begin with, and you accept that, then that's what you deserve.

At the same time, do you ever feel as if some artists tend to make stuff that isn't as unique as they'd like to think it is and is easily ripped off by copycats?
JP: The stuff that gets ripped off is the stuff that's the lowest common denominator, because that's what palatable to the average person. Nobody's going to (rip off) some totally obscure chaos noise record. That might be artistic, but it's never going to be successful. Nobody's going to rip that off because that's not going to make anyone any money. What's getting ripped off is Creed or something like that, because that is what people like, so you're getting third-generation Creed and any other number of bands.

For as popular as AFI's been in the wake of Sing the Sorrow, there aren't too many bands that have even succeeded in coming close to approximating your sound.
JP: I'm not trying to preach like we are the most unique, forward-thinking band in history and therefore I'm able to criticize everyone else. We come from a place where we are trying to at least stay true to ourselves if anything else and not emulate what's happening or what's hot or what's going to sell. We just try to make music that we're proud of.

Isn't that the only way to have a career that withstands trends?
JP: I would think so. AFI's been around 18 years now and we're about to release our eighth record. We've been able to have a career doing this. It at least worked for us.

Because you're in a band and are celebrities of a sort, and, therefore part of the process that is the media, do you think you're a little more tuned into these issues than the average Joe on the street?
JP: I think maybe I am more than, say, Davey, because he's so disgusted by everything he makes a point not to know about anything. He's an extremely intelligent person, but he doesn't want to know about so much stuff, because he knows that if he learns about something, he's going to be disappointed by it. I can't blame him. I, on the other hand, like to know what's new and what's happening and what's going on.

AFI's roots go back to the hardcore and punk underground. Why do you think a lot of bands that come from a similar place are a little more hesitant to broaden their sound and explore new ideas like AFI has?
JP: When you talk about underground genres, that's where we came from, hardcore and punk. A lot of those are so enclosed they don't encourage growth and experimentation. If you're in the punk scene, for instance, you're labeled a sellout if you do something that explores melody. I listen to a lot of electronic music, and a lot of those genres are really narrowly defined. You can't step out of them. If you're an EBM or a trance artist, you can't do anything else or else your fans are going to be like "What are you doing? This isn't EBM!"

Is it just a case of bands being afraid of alienating their fans and risking their career?
JP: In many respects, I don't blame them. If you're part of some of these scenes, these subcultures, it's a huge risk to break out of that mold. We did it a long time ago, and we got a lot of shit for it over the years. Every record we put out, we get a lot of shit for because we never do the same record over. I think if you're willing to take the shit and are willing to take the chance that you're going to fail and people are going to hate you and hate your music, then I think that's worth it.

Bands who mutate their sounds often complain that their audience is one album behind them. Do you ever get that feeling?
JP: Our fans are so varied. Some of our fans are like seven records behind us! You can't really try to please anyone, because when everyone wants something different, there's no way to please everyone. You just have to please yourself. Even before I was in AFI, when they put out a crazy hardcore album, people said they were selling out. It was this crazy, fast hardcore punk-rock record. No matter what you do, there's going to be a contingent of people who don't like it. You're better off doing what's artistically valuable.

It seems like if you're main goal is to please as many people as possible, you'd just give up on music and be a politician.
JP: That goes back to what we were talking about before. That's what a lot of people, a lot of writers, a lot of musicians, a lot of filmmakers are in the business of, which is trying to please as many people as possible. That's part of the problem.