Slashdot Mirror
Major Broadcasters Hit With $12M Payola Fine
Gr8Apes writes with a just-breaking AP story reporting that the FCC is wrapping up a settlement in which four major broadcast companies would pay the government $12.5 million and provide 8,400 half-hour segments of free airtime for independent record labels and local artists. The finish line is near after a 3-year investigation. An indie promoter is quoted: "It's absolutely the most historic agreement that the independent community has had with radio. Without a doubt, nothing else comes close."
... is how Clear Channel and the Big Five are going to neuter this so that they technically comply but don't mess up a good thing.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
The fine was nothing, considering the scope of the industries involved. But the air-time for independent broadcasters should be a cool twist.
At the very least, it'll be fascinating to hear how the broadcasters will transition to the 'punishment' broadcasts...
"This is wacky bob and the fizz signing off - up next, it's a half-hour of something we don't want you to hear, and we don't get paid for. So, um, enjoy!"
Ryan Fenton
And far too late. Fine them out of existance.
What about "music" nerds? How come it always has to be about "computer" nerds? Can't we be inclusive and support all the nerds of the world?
Large broadcast companies probably have paid a higher price in loss of listenership, as their tired, weary, and limited playlists have driven more and more people to alternatives such as iPods, MP3 players and satellite radio.
Sure, go ahead, fine them, order them to allocate time to new acts, that's a small loss they can see on their balance sheets in comparison to the difficult to calculate loss of listenership.
$12.5 million and provide 8,400 half-hour segments of free airtime for independent record labels and local artists
A paltry $12.5? Isnt it great when a company gets fined less than it probably made by committing the offense. Its called a cost benefit analysis, basically if crime pays they commit the crime. 4,200 hours of independent/local music sounds good though. I wonder who gets to pick who gets the time.
Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
Now the night shift will have something to listen to...during their half-hour lunch "hour" anyway.
What?
Why aren't the Music Labels who are offering the payola being fined as well? If the police see a drug deal, both the buyer and the seller will be arrested. How is this any different?
Why should they pay the government $12.5M to the government? Has the government been harmed?
Please don't expect me to believe the government pissed away $12.5M investigating this case (unless they did it from their offices at the Maui Hilton). If the industry pays the money then it should be used for some related worthy purpose, not to fill the coffers of wasteful government agencies.
1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
I do remember reading articles related to the NY settlement that stations were paid or coerced into playing her album. Too many bands are foisted upon us and most listeners don't even realize it. Still long term I doubt it will have that much impact, the record companies will come up something similar that fits in the rules.
Hell, CDs are still essentially price fixed, and how long has that been going on?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Huh? Ever heard of that dial thing on your radio? You don't need the government to step in and change the programming, just put down the Slurpee for a second and change the station. It's really no wonder ClearChannel et al are taking over the entire market when people can't be bothered to vote with their dials. There are still lots of alternatives, find them while they still exist and support them!
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
You mean we may now actually have some musical variety on the airwaves?
generally defined as radio stations accepting cash or other consideration from record companies in exchange for airplay.
I thought that radio stations paid the record companies a license fee in order to broadcast their music? Can somebody in the industry (or with knowhow) clarify how this works?
Yeah these jerk off major broadcasting networks need to play more independent music! Wait...independent artists want to be featured on mainstream radio. I guess the new way to be original and independent is to be, quoting many "independent" music listeners I talk to, corporate whores to commercial radio. Contradiction...too...strong....
Yeah but you gotta give props to this guy: "In a statement Monday, Commissioner Michael Copps said pay-for-play `cheats radio listeners and will not be tolerated.' Radio, he said, is `supposed to be our pipeline to exciting, local undiscovered acts -- not more nationalized pablum from big media companies.'"
That's "Commissioner" as in FCC Commissioner. So hey, maybe the feds are on the right track for once.
No.
"but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
I worked for a brief while in the music industry and can tell you that this won't mean a thing. The airtime that will be devoted to independent labels will get sucked up by independent imprints and offshoots that still very much bow to their corporate overlords. There are quite a few "independent" labels out there that are run by someone in the A&R department at a major label. Consider it their "hobby" record label. However, quite often they have agreements whereby the major label that the "independent label" owner works for has first rights to signing any bands that the "independent" label managed to dig up. Labels like this are just another cog in the machine, and I assure you this is where the majority of that airtime will be going...
This guy's the limit!
This is perhaps the most exciting news that I've heard in the past month, if not substantially longer, with regards to the media. It actually made me sit back and think "wow..." in near disbelief.
:)
Slashdot runs articles on the MPAA and RIAA all the time. I personally could not be happier that independent artists are going to get some mainstream airtime, and I hope it inspires a change in the way that people choose to consume content - perhaps learning the value in seeking out lesser known artists instead of spending their cash on whatever happens to be pushed through more commercialized channels.
One of the benefits of technology and the Internet is that they lessen the gap in quality of product (for lack of a better term) and exposure that can be achieved between enthusiasts and large well funded commercial entities. This is an excellent opportunity for the best of these artists to be recognized through alternate channels.
It is absolutely news for nerds. Best of luck to all those who benefit from the free airtime
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Thank you, Whiny Nerd. Of all the Spice Nerds, you are my favorite.
-- Yours in Nerdness,
Anonymous Nerd
...indie bands being heard on mainstream radio stations so that they can be "discovered" by major labels and have their music stripped from them in exchange for exhorbitant amounts of money and their very souls.
I would prefer to have to keep searching for unknown indie music groups rather than have them fed to me, thank you.
Living With a Nerd
Now, "Internet radio" is something else. They have to pay per play not only to the composers but to the record labels, and they pay handsomely. Of course, the artists still don't get anything but at least we're being protected from the horrors of radio over the Internet.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Let me get this straight. The recording companies are illegally paying off radio broadcast networks to get exposure for their music. At a time when the number of listeners to broadcast radio is in decline. At the same time, they're trying to kill off Internet radio, satellite radio, and trying to strong-arm their main on-line distributer - Apple. Oh, yeah - and don't forget lawsuits against their customers. Either the heads of marketing in the recording industry have large short positions in their own company, or else there's a serious need to start drug testing.
[Insert pithy quote here]
You are absolutely correct. I stopped listening to broadcast radio several years ago. In fact, it was the moment I hooked up my stereo to a laptop and began listening to Internet based radio. All the music you want, none of the fscked up talking. Its cheaper than XM, better than the cable company alternatives, and has much more choice.
At this point, I'm happy to report that I no longer know anything about any of the local radio stations.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
The LA Times had some more details in their article yesterday:6 ,1,2865175.story
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-ex-payola5mar0
The relevant part:
"In a separate agreement, the radio companies have agreed to set aside 8,400 half-hour segments of free airtime over the next three years for local and independent artists. The segments would have to air between 6 a.m. and midnight."
I know this is going to be considered a troll - I listened to Air America when it was on Sirius, and I don't want to disparage it, but how come they can pay to be carried on certain radio stations, and record labels can't pay to have songs from their artists carried on radio stations?
Don't get me wrong, I want to listen to the independent labels and artists, I want to get wide exposure to new (to me) music, but frankly if we live in a free market, don't we need to accept the bad with the good?
Stupid sexy Flanders.
What's with the "just breaking" crap? I read about this in this mornings SF Chronicle!!! The paper kind... you know... the kind that they printed last night?
This is perhaps the most exciting news that I've heard in the past month
This is perhaps yet another example of the old boss being the same as the new boss.
So, we have media cartels that through payola, DMCA, and copyright do whatever they want, and now the government comes in and says. "We've been nice to you, now you have to pay some extra protection so something bad does not happen to you".
The media cartels are still there. Payola just got temporarily more expensive. DMCA is still here, and nothing is different.
I would much prefer if there was an actual free market. The entertainment business has gotten absolutely horrible, where entertainment is the lowest priority, and legislation and money is the priority today.
I remember when bands could fill up football stadiums in the 70s, 80s, and early 90s. Today, its tough to sell out a 10,000 to 20,000 venue, and when that happens, its an older band playing their greatest hits from a decade or more ago.
All of this crap has stifled creativity. I don't think creativity is down in the human gene pool, I think the ability for creativity to come out is practically illegal.
Don't get too high on the hype. If the people I know are any indicator there are two types of music listeners, and one is about 10x more popular than the other:
Leaving generalities behind, I honestly think that people will not necessarily change what they like simply because a popular radio station has to play some alternative music. In fact, I think you'll find that people actually do prefer Britney Spears squealing out a couple of crappy songs to anything alternative in some cases. The truth is that for far too many people, music isn't music for music's sake. It's a means to a goal, it's an end in some form. They have a stake in it other than the enjoyment of it itself.
Every now and then you'll get a band like The Beatles or Led Zeppelin that can innovate and still remain popular, however, it's not usually the case. In most cases the public gets exactly what it craves: bland repeat crap from the same five artists because they can't wrap their brains around anything new or different. At least this public, this generation. Maybe I'm just too cynical and the people I hang around are dullards that don't appreciate different music. But it sure seems like that's the majority of people from my angle.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
I would love to see this payola was reported on the record companies taxes and to the stock holders.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I'm sure that the media conglomerates will also just use existing local band shows to satisfy some of the hours required by the settlement....
However,
Our local san Francisco CC station KITS (Live105) has one of those shows, but actually they are already a better station than most ('fighting for alternative rock' is their current slogan)
I think the SF Bay Area has more musical diversity than most places....
besides KITS we have KFOG (eclectic) and the college stations (the mighty KFJC, KSJS, KSCU and KSZU) and our weird, fringe broadcasters (KKUP, KALX, KPFA, KPFB).
indie rock, just as it's 80s predecessors college rock and punk in the 70s and underground music in the 60's has had a large impact on music in the past few years and as usual, the mainstream outlets have tried and will continue to fail to subvert and commoditize it because these movements thrive (esp like punk) by going against the mainstream. Kids will never (I hope) accept corporations telling them what is cool (except maybe apple).
Just because an indie label has a distribution deal with someone like sony/BMG doesn't mean that they are no longer indie...it works the same way in the indie film world.
-I'm just sayin'
Me paying you to play my song is advertising. Me handing you money under the table to play the song, then you claiming that you're picking the songs 'you like best' or that 'the audience demands' is fraud, deceptive advertising, and probably tax evasion.
No one's saying they can't pay to have their songs played. We're just saying they can't lie about doing so.
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
Ever notice how many acts start on smaller labels, prove their value, then get snapped up by the majors? This deal will undoubtedly result in the big companies adopting independent labels as de facto "minor league" holding areas. The focus for Sony et al will be on how to manipulate the allocation of the time reserved for independent labels to favor the "independent" labels that feed Sony.
I wouldn't be surprised to see artist contracts for the independent labels that designate a favored path for contract buyout---"sign with Sony Junior (an independent label) and if your contract is bought out by Sony, you'll get an additional 5% of T-shirt sales!"
Premature optimization is the root of all evil
March 5, 2007, 2:52PM
Stations agree on anti-payola settlement
I saw this at 7:00 a.m. CST.
What is this "Chron dotcom" you link to? What's wrong with the New York Times or LA Times or the Dallas Morning News or Adweek or any of the other 365 articles that Google News lists?
News for nerds... from the witless. Jesus H. Christ, people!
OK, now that the rant against the witless link is over, 12 million? That's only four million for each of the big 4. Chicken feed, chump change, part of their operating expense. It's only a PR ploy. Nothing to see here, move along...
Business as usual. FCC looking like it's doing its job, when IT AIN'T!
More importantly and perhaps less on topic, in a thread a couple of days ago some folks said that the major labels were the ones who sort the wheat from the chaff in music, and that is entirely correct. Correct, but wrong. It's correct because of payola, which is wrong.
The broadcasters themselves should be the ones who bring you the "good stuff". And there should be a hell of a lot more than four of them.
And we need a new slashdot, too.
Are there any others people can recommend on the internet? There also is a local Jazz station, but reception is spotty.
It's all useless, though, since Broadcasters would admit to no wrongdoing. Let's have some punishment, people!
bah.
Large broadcast companies probably have paid a higher price in loss of listenership, as their tired, weary, and limited playlists have driven more and more people to alternatives such as iPods, MP3 players and satellite radio.
Sure, go ahead, fine them, order them to allocate time to new acts, that's a small loss they can see on their balance sheets in comparison to the difficult to calculate loss of listenership.
They'll now have 2 targets to blame their losses on - piracy (MP3s) and FCC actions.The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Welcome to state radio, comrades. Up next, our government mandated indie music selection!
I too believe that the majority of people don't care about their music. The reason "oldies" stations work? Most people appear to get "stuck" in their listening habits somewhere between 16 and 25, and then only listen to their "comfort music". Rarely are new tracks, much less actual new types of acts, added to their repertoire.
It's why there's so much trash on the radio now (besides payola, etc). The marketers have figured out that spoon feeding the same tripe to the young immature and uncritical listening audience allows them to churn "new" artists as needed maximizing their profits.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Not only is there no real punishment for these corporations, the linked article is itself an indicator of a deeper problem: it is carefully written so as to avoid painting any of the businesses as illegal actors where adequate, democratically-arrived-at remedies ought to be applied. There is no simple and clear declaration akin to what one /. poster wrote: "The recording companies are illegally paying off radio broadcast networks to get exposure for their music." nor anything as short and simple as the /. headline in this thread, "Major Broadcasters Hit With $12M Payola Fine".
I'm not trying to suggest this is new; during the run-up to the Iraq war the stenographers at the New York Times repeated government propaganda to far worse effect (Common Dreams, PDF excerpt). I'm saying that we do ourselves a disservice by letting our contempt dull our shock because we need to point out when corporate leaders behave illegally and we need to tell the corporate reporters when punishment is minimized ($12M is referred to as a "large cash settlement" despite no single payout greater than $4M) and buried (the list of corporate settlements is buried in the piece).
Digital Citizen
The segments would have to air between 6 a.m. and midnight.
So, 11:30PM to 12:00AM on Monday night it is, then! (Seriously, that's not much of a requirement; after 8PM or so, radio listnership absolutely plummets because the rush hour drive is done and practically everyone is home. I can't tell you what's on then, because I never hear it, but on the local rock station where I used to live, they used to run this Lovelines-type call-in-about-your-penile-boils show from like 11PM on.)
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
is that a lot of those songs that you thought got played a lot because they were popular among your peers were just played because somebody slipped the DJ a couple of fifties. To me, the point isn't that "indie" music didn't get airtime; it is that the Top 40 wasn't based on what kids liked to listen to but what product the record labels had under contract that they needed to make their money back on. There have been a lot of crap songs on the Billboard 200 over the last 30 years; payola is at least a partial explanation.
With podcasting and MP3's and so forth the only excuse you have for not finding independent music to listen to is your own laziness.
"Lack of technical competence coupled with the arrogance of power, as usual, leads to no good end."
Wow, that was rather dumb.
Even more so that OH NOES they had to pay a 12 million fine... Yeah, I'm sure clearchannel is crying all the way to the bank over that. 120m, they might notice. 1.2 billion would be an actual fine and a reminder to not fucking break the law.
But 12m? Oh well, I guess we'll just have to ask Sony to "advertise" their music a bit more next year.
"Indie" is a phrase that was hijacked by the mainstream just as "alternative" was. Nothing to see here, move along.
I think your reasoning is right, but your conclusion is wrong. In my opinion, your first group -- the independent-thinking people that actually like music for its own sake -- is at least as influential as your second group -- the sheep. There is something of a ripple effect, with one independent thinker influencing a circle of people who are just trying to be cool (on the leading edge, out of the mainstream, whatever), who in turn will influence others.
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
sun 2am? this is news for nerds, now we will have good listening for late night code binges. that aside what is the big deal even if there is some kind of colusion, radio sells a service, the attention of listeners. dont pretend this is not their job, they pay you with music and you give attention to ads. the sydicated researched playlists make it easier for them to "buy" listeners. if you really dont like their music hurt their product by not being part of it. there are enough options now that mp3 players, sat radio, net radio, etc are blooming. my preference is as of recently last.fm to discover music and emusic.com to keep the good stuff. these can combine with many options for your personal playlist. several hits from the radio that i like i have found on emusic i really recomend it. if you dont want boyBand.nextHit(); dont run the command. for my next code binge i plan to stuff my emusic collection onto mp3 player and hit the school computer lab until 2 or 3 wed night. if you cant hit the local cd store and buy some local band or personal favorite and find a cd player you are running boyBand.nextHit(); you are not entitled to good free music.
Speaking of searching for new indie music, anybody interested in a [to be clear: free] invitation to the members-only indietorrents.com? I've earned quite a few (through keeping a good ratio there, being nice, etc.) I just have stockpiled. It's a tracker dedicated to beautiful music made by hardworking, (mainly) DIY musicians keeping themselves far and away from the RIAA Radar's pulsewaves. The added benefit of never having to worry about a lawsuit for anything grabbed or upped on the tracker is very nice. Also of note is that the admins of the site are respectful to any indie label requesting their material not be allowed... it's a win/win/win situation any way you slice it. My email is temporarily "displayed" in my "bio", shoot me one and I'll respond with an invite.
Since I've been a member of the site, I've been able to eliminate 95% of my listening to RIAA-represented label material... and stop my monetary support for anything of that sort altogether. I'm not suggesting this will happen for everyone, but honestly, there is enough good independent stuff out there to render mainstream stuff a thing of the past. Unite!
Yeah but Internet radio (as in independently owned) may be going away too. See the other article on arstechnica about it. It could turn into a subscription based service to recoup for the increase. I believe it applies to stations that only broadcast indie (unsigned stuff). Let's hope not.
Turn based strategy game that runs over XMPP. Phalanx
I'm a local musician and would like some of the free air time.
Anyone know how this can be done?
Tech Public Policy stuff
the DJ has nothing to do with it. Payola is run out of the major chains directly as a profit center. Simply assume that EVERY song played on a radio station part of a chain is a commercial some RIAA label paid for. And that the same will continue to be true, all that will result is more creative ways to get around the anti-payola laws and FCC regulations.
Tech Public Policy stuff
an "indie" label subsidiary to one of the major record labels?
If you don't, there probably is NO way for you to get any of that time.
Tech Public Policy stuff
And I think that treating radio as being obligated to promote culture is wrong. The only responsibility a non-public radio station has is to its stockholders.
Just what Britney Spears needed -- more bad news for her career!
Number Two: [clears throat] Sir, strictly speaking, 12 million dollars will not go very far these days. Virtucon alone makes over 9 billion dollars a year.
Dr. Evil: Really? Okay then... we hold the world ransom for 1... hundred... BILLION dollars!
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
...you've just been added to my list of "stupidest comments ever" on Slashdot.
Seeing as how you don't seem to grasp the basic premise, let me share it with you. Much as I'd like to, we can't jail a corporation for a VIOLATION OF THE LAW (you seem to be missing that point as well) so we've come up with another approach. It's what's called a fine. The purpose of it is to be punitive. Admittedly, I'd love, for personal reasons, to see the Mays boys of Clear Channel et al sent to federal PMITA prison until hell freezes over, Apparently this court didn't have the balls to do that, or simply revoke their licenses (which in this case would be pretty much a corporate death penalty), thus the fine.
My complaint isn't that the fine is going to the government but that it's WAY too small, considering the size of the broadcasting behemoths we're talking about.
Sunday morning around 2am-ish
What! Are you crazy? Have music on from indi artists when the clubs let out on a Saturday night? What are you thinking? How about after Sunday night when everyone has to recover from the party for the Monday morning job. Try Monday and Tuesday Mornnings around 2am-ish instead. Late Friday and Saturday nights are not the time.
The truth shall set you free!
I remember when bands could fill up football stadiums in the 70s, 80s, and early 90s. Today, its tough to sell out a 10,000 to 20,000 venue, and when that happens, its an older band playing their greatest hits from a decade or more ago.
While I agree with like 99% of what you said about payola, that's an exaggeration. I spend a lot of time doing concert promotion and production, and even in a small market (mid-size college town), I have seen shows around 10k fill up without major difficulty. You're correct in that long-running bands have a large advantage, but you can sell a 10k show for plenty of artists.
They don't even try to hide it. The Police get back together, and suddenly every old song of theirs from the 80s is played repeatedly in San Diego. There's so much good music out there, but they won't ever play it - probably because of payola. Radio Sucks!
Hell, CDs are still essentially price fixed, and how long has that been going on?
The FCC has jurisdiction over broadcasters. Unfortunately they are not in any way connected to enforcement of retail CD prices. Sorry, you will need someone else to tackle that issue, manybe some Fedral Trade Comission perhaps.
Personaly I vote against the high prices with my dollars. The industry has started to notice, but blame the lacks of votes for high priced CD's on other things becides high prices. They claim CD sales are down and blame iTunes instead of high prices.
The truth shall set you free!
Huh? Ever heard of that dial thing on your radio?
Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to get airtime for a local band? There are limited licenses given in a local radio market. The problem is there is no alternative except talk radio. To afford a station, you need listerership. To get listnership, you need popular music. Without listenership, you don't get advertising dollars. There are no stations that play local bands in any major market. Talk radio won't play it, the Clear Chanel stations won't play it, and the Church sponsored Christian station won't play it. Voting by spinning the dial doesn'g get you to any canidates not on the ballot.
The truth shall set you free!
If they're just still breaking the law after 50 years, why would you think they're going to find a legitimate alternative?
It's been a long time.
>>I'd love, for personal reasons, to see the Mays boys of Clear Channel et al sent to federal PMITA prison until hell freezes over >This comment speaks for itself (though you might consider adding it to your little list). I have no clue who the Mays Boys are or if they should be on the air. Fortunately, free speech hasn't become an legal offense ... yet.
If you don't know the difference between on the air personalities and the chairman of the board and upper management at Clear Channel, I would hardly consider you qualified to comment. And if you don't have a clue how important it is to keep close tabs on those who use the public airwaves for private gain, especially given how influential they are in shaping public opinion, then let me put it in a word I'm sure you'll understand:
Baaaaaaa.
If they think that this news is going to make me start listening to Clear Channel, they've got another think coming.
You're using her as bait, Master!
LOL, what dumbass modded that informative?
Daylight saving time begins on that night in much of the US and Canada. Some other parts of the world have also probably adopted the new start date of March 11.
Summer still begins on June 21 in the northern hemisphere. Sheesh. March 11 isn't even Spring yet.
Quick, mod me funny!
Spread out the $12.5M and 4200 hours across all 1653 stations that they own, and it comes to less than $10,00 and three hours of air time each. It's a slap on the wrist, which is what usually happens with "We didn't do anything wrong, and promise we'll never do it again" consent decrees. It sounds like a lot until you consider the size of the companies involved here.
I was thinking along the same lines. I'm don't get why this payola thing is illegal. If I understand it right, in TV some company produces a show, let's say Firefly. The producers of Firefly go door to door selling their product until a network picks it up. The network pays the producers for their product and then charges money to advertisers to cover that money plus some profit.
Radio doesn't pay to the producers, instead it charges them to carry their product. So basically they treat musicians as another category of advertisers. This may be unsavory but why is it illegal? I must note I'm not from the US so I have no background on this.
+Raider of the lost BBS
you mean _american_ internet radio. [as in originating from america, playing american-owned music]
I highly doubt the two streaming stations I listen to will disappear because of this, mostly because they don't pay royalties to any evil labels in this country.
And for your car?
Now my car does not have an "iPod dock" (better known as an AUX input). Not to mention I don't own an iPod, nor do I have enough music on CD's to fill the damn thing anyway. I like having some form of music during my commute; and with my inability to pay $16 for a CD, excepting rare occasions, I don't have a huge selection of music to work from. No, I'm not going to futz around with iTunes et al. either. I just want something I can tune to and have a fairly random collection of music within a genere I enjoy. It would be even nicer if it included new stuff on occasion, and local news/traffic. Unfortuneatly, all of the stations which are within range of my commute, and in generes which I enjoy are owned by ClearChanel. It would be nice to think that this ruling is going to make things better, but I know better. The Federal Censorship Commission (FCC) is just slapping the big guys on the wrist to placate the plebes, then it will be back to business as usual.
Though, to prove that I am a hipocrite, I do subscribe to XM. I finally got sick of 55 minutes of commercials/idiots talking and 5 minutes of one of the same damn 4 songs per hour. Ya, I could buy a CD a month for the same money, but this avoids the need to hunt for stuff I'll like.
Necessity is the mother of invention.
Laziness is the father.
This makes me think about the internet before Yahoo, Altavista and ye olde search engines came along. Usenet forums were abuzz with the dozens of new sites popping up every day and later-on almost hourly, and it began to be very difficult to know what was out there. And don't get me started on that gopher crap. Anyway, you may have an idea about what you want, but you need a starting point to look for it. I somehow managed to get my fix of alternative music when it was underground and really alternative, same for industrial and noise. But the vast majority of people don't have the time or inclination to spend time on that. Forget about the fast-food mindset, there are simply too many choices of everything to keep up. I may have two or sixteen hobbies, there will always be something I may like but simply not have the time to pursue beyond a quick browse-over.
So how will you know what you want when you don't have the time to research? You go to some hub and browse a little and hopefully something will catch your eye. Remember kids, there are six and a half bloody THOUSAND MILLION people alive in the world at this moment, around three hundred million on the US alone. Some of them are bound to have different things in which to spend their time ;)
+Raider of the lost BBS
It might be a good idea to qualify "broadcasters" with the type. I thought the article was about NBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX as the four major broadcasters until the words "record labels" appeared on the fourth line down (I'm using 1024x768).
"Radio broadcasters" would be a much more accurate term than "broadcasters."
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Last I checked, KLBJ still had wonderful coverage of local music in Austin.
Like what I said? You might like my music
It's the same process. If the distributors, publishers, and producers are all under one roof, it's a monopoly, and there's no room for anyone else at the inn. Not to mention that the airwaves belong to the people, not a corporation, no matter what they might think. (Of course, some corporate lapdog will point out that a corp most certainly does own that slice of frequency since they "paid" for it, they only paid for the right to use it for a limited time, with strings attached)
It's illegal for the same reason any racketering endeavor is illegal.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
And of course, you're wrong. Radio spectrum is a limited resource. The FCC leases it out to businesses under the condition that it will be used in ways to benefit the public interest. If it isn't, the license gets pulled.
After all, I am strangely colored.
Wow, A good non-Clear Chanel station. I looked up the profile. It is a good read. I hope more stations like this make it on the air. Too bad one of their stations is not near me.
http://www.emmis.com/profile/story1.aspx
The truth shall set you free!
> So basically they treat musicians as another category of advertisers.
In that case, they haven't been fulfilling the obligation of disclosing to the public that the content in question, the music, is advertising. TFA goes into this, stating that the FCC has a requirement that a radio station announce that it has been paid to broadcast a song, if that is indeed true.
This isn't just an American thing, for example, in French magazines, when an ad is designed to look like content, there is always somewhere a disclaimer that it is advertising (sometimes not that easy to find it, of course).
This whole thing is useless.
12.5 mil is a sneeze to these guys. It will barely pay for the cost of the 3-year investigation. It's the FCC saying "Hey guys, we're done, but we don't want to admit we paid millions for this investigation. Can you pay for us?"
4200 hours of independent programming? Great. Cue 4200 different stations all owned by the same guys playing 1 hour of "independent" material gleaned from wholy-owned subsidiaries of the same companies that got busted, and that 1 hour will be from 2-3 AM on a Sunday.
The whole thing is a make-work project that won't change a damn thing. No fine that actually means something, no meaningful changes... nothing. But everyone can claim something special was done, nothing will change, and in 2 or 3 years the same thing will happen again.
This isn't even bread and circuses for the masses, this is crumbs. I don't call shenannigans, I call pathetic.
If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
Perhaps I'm simply ignorant or naive, but I fail to see why anyone has a problem with modern-day payola. A lot has changed since the early payola scandals of the 50s, and pay-for-play deals between radio stations and the music industry aren't what they used to be.
Back in the days when DJs controlled which songs played on the radio, and when radio itself was seen as a public service, it made a perverse kind of sense for record labels to ply DJs with drugs, booze, women and money in an attempt get certain songs played on the radio. More airplay equates to increased record sales for the labels, making pay-for-play payola a powerful and lucrative lure for both record companies and DJs. As long as radio is perceived as a public service, payola in any form ends up looking like a bribe, and a 'dirty' bribe at that.
Today though, a lot has changed in the radio industry. Tapes, CDs, iPods, satelite radio and, most importantly, the Internet have made the old public service arguement moot. In addition, DJs don't call the shots anymore at most radio stations, making modern payola much 'cleaner' than it once was. Nowadays, record labels don't need to offer the full battery of sinful inducements to get their songs played; cash is probably sufficent for most execs. And, when you think about it, why shouldn't it be? Pay-for-play payola is really nothing more than simple advertising, and what's wrong with that?
If you take the sordid elements out of payola, does it really make any difference if it's Record Label X paying for three minutes of airtime to play their song, vs. Joe's Hardware store hawking hammers with their three minutes? By definition, advertising is paying for th promotion of a product or service. If Record Label X pays thousands of dollars to buy a 30-second spot suggesting you buy a particular album, how is this different from the same record label paying money to simply play a song? Where does the public lose in this scenario? Who supposedly gets hurt? Keep in mind that the independant record label issue is a red herring. Small, independant labels suffer most when payola schemes are secret and hidden, as they are today. If payola is above-board and open, if we treat it like advertising, independant labels get the same opportunities to buy airtime as the major labels now have. Keeping payola underground just raises the bar to market entry as it forces smaller labels into playing the game the way the major labels play it, ensuring that only the big boys with large wads of cash have the means to strike secret deals to have their songs played on-air. Five decades ago, payola scandals hurt both radio stations and the record industry, largely due to the public's perception that payola cheated the public service aspect of radio. Today, it's our out-dated perception of radio as a public service that causes the most harm.
Payola has always been a problem for commercial radio, and today's settlement isn't suddenly going to change the economic conditions that create the payola problem in the first place. As long as airplay increases music sales, we'll always have payola. And, contrary to TFA, a $12 million settlement isn't going to do a single thing to improve the playlists of large commercial radio stations.
People that enjoy music that fits needs, be it popularity, etc
Maybe I'm just too cynical and the people I hang around are dullards that don't appreciate different music. Maybe the Maybe is unnecessary.
Clearly this is an "organized" crime, why not a RICO prosecution which would enable much larger fines and many of the executives involved an opportunity to get to know some of the finer Federal institutions?
These cash-only fines do NOTHING except encourge everyone involved to up the ante to cover future fines (if they even need to -- $12.5 is probably a quarter-days advertising PROFIT for all the entities involved).
These arrogant corporate pricks need to get the kind of life-alterting punishment the rest of us get from the government; even if it is a fine, it needs to be substantial and PERSONALLY payable by the executives involved -- to the extent that the agency collecting it both collects it from the exec's assets (confiscating and/or selling assets as required) as well as monitoring the exec's income for 10 years to insure that they are not compensated by the corporation (making the corporation and its officers criminally liable for any compensatory payments would help, too).
Comeuppance FTW!
It amounts to ~ $7,200 per station. How many song plays can a record producer buy for $7200? Probably not very many. The stations should at least have to fork over more money than the payola they received!
What you read is very aggressively worded to kind of prompt the average user (who initially might be unknowledgeable about torrent technology) into being a contributing member (in the very least keeping a decent share ratio). Actual policies aren't nearly that strict. You're given a bunch of time to actually get your ratio respectable, on the order of gigabytes downloaded. Basically try to take a penny, leave a penny and you'll be fine. You get a "warning" followed by a "banning" for breaking certain rules, but it is pretty hard to get a warning for low ratio, unless your ratio is
They are very keen on insta-deleting anything that might be unsafe in this way or in other non-intuitive ways (i.e. unsafe work is sampled by safe artist, a single song on an indie compilation ends up getting sold to a major label along with the band's services, etc.) Just take the invite, I have plenty. The rules are easy to follow, and it's a successful community.
I agree, 12m is not a steep cost to do business in this arena.
It reminds me of those insider traders that got caught and made to pay fines that amounted to small fractions of their profits.
"I forgot my mantra."
I'm not sure if your question was rhetorical or not, but your point about Cryptomnesia is valid in that I can envision it becoming a standard for RIAA-represented labels making outrageous claims about stolen property (I mean, that's WHAT they DO). Also from what I can tell, this phenomenon doesn't seem to happen too often. If it does happen, I reckon it would be pretty hard for the big labels to go ahead and listen to every piece of independent music out there and judge for itself if a lawsuit would be prudent (from their point of view).