DEBATE: Should Radio pay to play?

[Bob Loblaw]

In the new world order of everyone going for the money-grab, some Artists now believe that Radio should have to pay them for the right to play their music (much in the way Radio pay composers).

WaPo.com

"The issue here is simply, it's about fairness," folk singer [Judy] Collins told a congressional panel in August. "Radio is a multibillion-dollar business built on our creativity, our passion and our soul." Collins and other artists who rose to fame singing other people's songs say they must tour well into their golden years in good part because they never got paid for all the radio play their music received.

Or should Artists and Labels be paying Radio for the countless hours for free promotion we give them by playing their music?

Alfred Liggins, the outspoken chief of Radio One, the nation's largest owner of black-oriented stations, says it's the record industry that should pay radio for promoting their product, not the other way around (though there is a slight legal problem with that scenario, since that kind of financial relationship runs the risk of triggering payola prosecutions).

What say ye

[David Paleg]

I am not in radio anymore but if I were, I wouldn't mind a new car or some spending money courtesy of a record company.

[Tom Taggart]

I'm sure that Judy Collins and Don Henley (the two apologists for this RIAA soak-the-broadcaster movement) made considerably more off the sale of their records than I will ever see in my lifetime.

As a practical matter, most "performance rights" are held by the record companies who created the RIAA, and they will be the chief beneficiaries of this new tax on our operations.

[Dave Harman]

As the huge record company promotional budgets indicate, there is alot of value in the airtime a radio station donates every time they play a record. So maybe after we pay an artist for the music, we should send the artist an invoice for the airtime at current rates. I think that would probably work out ok for us.

[lastone]

Simple solution;

Boycott any artist that supports this....and see how fast this goes away!

[cgarison]

Every time I hear this I think reverse payola.

[Tom Taggart]

Kill the Eagles! (new album produced by Don Henley).

Lastone hits the nail on the head--if the Eagles album bombs because everyone pans it on air, and if their follow-up tour dies because we won't promote it, then the message will be sent.

Unfortunately, there probably is a Clear Channel angle in this. The CC stations will have promotional tie-ins, Live Nation (still pumping money into the coffers of CC principals) will be promoting the tour, etc.

Therein lies the reason this scheme has legs---the Clear Channels of the world can afford to pay performance rights--at least up to the point that their management bails out with their golden parachutes, and the stockholders get stuck--while small business goes under.

We will need to watch and see who votes for this. We can at least take down a congressman or two.

[Dave Allen]

I think the new Eagles album is only going to be available on-line and at Wal-Mart/Sam's. Maybe we should boycott Wal-Mart.

Get Hallburn on this.

[cgarison]

I think the new Eagles album is only going to be available on-line and at Wal-Mart/Sam's. Maybe we should boycott Wal-Mart.

Get Hallburn on this.

I would love to boycott Wal-Mart/Sams, but even in Philly, I find that I have to make a run to pick up essentials that are not carried at Wal-Mart's competitors. Makes me sick everytime I make a spin and drop $40.00 in Wal-Mart and $100.00 in Sams, but that is just the way it goes.

[The People's DJ]

Simple. Two words

F--k 'em!

[Bob Loblaw]

I would love to boycott Wal-Mart/Sams, but even in Philly, I find that I have to make a run to pick up essentials that are not carried at Wal-Mart's competitors. Makes me sick everytime I make a spin and drop $40.00 in Wal-Mart and $100.00 in Sams, but that is just the way it goes.

Please name three "essentials" that equivalents cannot be picked up somewhere else?

[Arp2]

Perhaps someone could start a broadcasters-backed licensing/representation organization that would represent artists and performers who realize and appreciate the tremendous value of free promotion of their work. A few years from now, should push come to shove, radio could stand ready to limit playlists to its own stable of artists that it has turned into "the big stars" through airplay.

(After all, if, as you hear all over the internet, there are hundreds of major stars still in obscurity because radio and record companies won't "give" them exposure and promotion when that's "what it takes" to make it big, then we'll have much to work with.)

It could be mutually-assured destruction, but history has shown the threat that comes from strength and preparedness is much more effective than whining and cowering....

[Jay Nunley]

Fuckin' A.

Most likely the labels will be sending a "you can play this for free" form with the CD-Pros (email for Play MPE and DMDS).

For some reason I liked it better when shit wasn't so complicated and there was a sticker on each shuck that said "If you play it, SAY IT."

[AmpedNow]

Of course radio shouldn't pay to play music... The last time I checked, radio airplay still determines the hits.

Case in point is the new Britney tune. It's a big hit if radio embraces it. But if PD's decide to have a Britney revolt for whatever reason, then it's DOA. Or at least not nearly as big as it could be.

Same goes for every other potential big hit.

With that said...

Perhaps broadcasters shot themselves in the foot by turning a deaf ear to small webcasters when SoundExchange first began threatening to price them into oblivion... And there still is no final solution settled yet. Many broadcasters probably wish that streaming would just go the way of the dodo so they can shut their streams down and forget it ever existed. They misjudged the situation and thought SE was doing them a favor by getting rid of potential competition. Surely they wouldn't come after radio after all the years of free promotion, would they?

Because they've lost the piracy war, they are trying to make up the difference through additional licensing fees anywhere they can stick them. And broadcast radio is a sitting duck for them to attack, even if it has been their golden goose.

On top of that, if HD Radio ever catches on, OTA broadcasters will be subject to DMCA regulations on top of everything else.

A brave new world, it is...

[Big Media]

Case in point is the new Britney tune. It's a big hit if radio embraces it. But if PD's decide to have a Britney revolt for whatever reason, then it's DOA. Or at least not nearly as big as it could be.

Oddly (or not), I constantly hear WKEE hyping the Britney video "Available on demand at WKEE.com" but I have yet to hear the song on Kee.

[Arp2]

Of course radio shouldn't pay to play music... The last time I checked, radio airplay still determines the hits.

And, with that being the case, radio should start paying to play music the very day after:
-- travel agents start paying to stay in hotels and take cruises
-- politicians start getting speeding tickets for their motorcades
-- doctors start paying for their own prescription drugs
-- bankers start paying full loan rates on their homes and cars
-- waitresses start paying for their meals
-- libraries start paying full price for books
-- foreign ambassadors and their staffs start paying their parking fines
-- pro athletes' friends and families start paying for their seats
-- pimps start paying their hos

Perhaps broadcasters shot themselves in the foot by turning a deaf ear to small webcasters when SoundExchange first began threatening to price them into oblivion....Surely they wouldn't come after radio after all the years of free promotion, would they?

As any good conservative knows, you fight every tax because a tax on one soon becomes a tax on all, including you.

[Zak Tyler]

-- pimps start paying their hos

alright thats where i draw the line... how am i supposed to feed my family if i gotta pay that bitch?

[AmpedNow]

As any good conservative knows, you fight every tax because a tax on one soon becomes a tax on all, including you.

It was also short-sighted on the industry's part, not figuring that it will cost them more in the long run.

It is conceivable that within 5 years, a strong web presence will be a prerequisite for any station to be a major contender, in any market size. This includes streaming, and a killer, interactive site.

The new phone-less iPhone announced by Apple today will have wi-fi capabilities.

This is only the beginning.

It is also conceivable that ad revenue will shift more and more towards the internet.

As for the main topic, the RIAA and these artists are woefully out of touch with tech trends. I would expect this stance from the RIAA, but these artists that support this move clearly have not thought this through... There will certainly be retaliation towards them by the industry.

And on the tech side: resistance is futile. The game changed for them 5 years ago, but they still haven't got the memo.

[cgarison]

-- pimps start paying their hos

alright thats where i draw the line... how am i supposed to feed my family if i gotta pay that bitch?

If you own a gentlemen's club in some areas of the US, you have to hire the girls to dance. In other parts of the country, the girl has to lease the pole for so many hours from the clubs owner and make enough in tips to covet the rental and then have enough to put food on the table.