Week Seven 2/23-2/27

"Why the Pop Music Industry Is Built To Discourage Good Music"

     According to this article, there is not an economic deficit in the music industry as many have believed, but rather an issue in terms of justness and fairness. It seems like the famous are only getting more famous as we see how the 10 best-selling songs command 82% more of the market than they did a decade ago. As of this last decade with all the new technologies such as Spotify, Youtube, Shazam and Wikipedia which we are all oh-so-grateful for, in addition to being able to see what viewers like and listen to the most, they are also able to find out where they listen to it, how, and on which platform. Furthermore, computer programs can apparently now guess best-sellers. Yep, I said it. The "HitPredictor" which was founded in 2002 correctly guessed 48 out of 50 of 2013's hits. 

"There isn't a crisis of money in the industry — there's a crisis of equity."

"With numbers indicating what audiences want next based on what they already like, the business opportunities are near-boundless and risk-free. And the music is boring as a result."

     So basically what I gathered from this article was that the pop music industry is focusing on finding "new talent" that sounds like the already-existing. In other words, they are not looking for that "different yet good" kind of music that most of us listeners seem to believe they are searching for, they are literally looking for artists that sound like another already-successful one. For example, I think it is safe to say that the fairly new boy band 5 Seconds Of Summer (5SOS) sounds a lot like this other relatively known boy band that goes by the name of One Direction.... Haha. Now, with the many resources such as the "HitPredictor", the "big three" labels- Warner, Universal, and Sony, are basically able to take out all of the originality out of music as they choose to continuously "discover" the same kind of musicians/artists and with the contribution of radio stations as they play the same songs over and over. 

Source:
Why the Pop Music Industry Is Built To Discourage Good Music

Citation: 

Pollock, Matt. "Why the Pop Music Industry Is Built to Discourage Good Music." Mic. N.p., 24 Nov. 2014. Web. 26 Feb. 2015.

Week Seven 2/16-2/20

"The Music Industry Is Dying? Great"

     This article explains in detail how the demise of the music industry surprisingly works well for some musicians as a moment of liberating grace. Apparently it is still possible to make a decent living in this industry even with the unpredictability of the economy. It seems like music commentators have been making serious efforts to understand why the music business has been upended and what is going to come next. According to this article, music is one of the last culturally dominant "rich people's" games where those on top frequently "lose it all".

"That’s so twentieth century. When we were one cohesive society. Now it’s every man for himself. And either you pop your head through or you're irrelevant. Even worse, you can be famous and irrelevant."

"All that counts is the mainstream. If you're not attempting to be known by everybody, if your goal is the niche, it’s almost like you don’t even exist"

     Sure, this article may not be the most interesting and entertaining, but it has good information on the economic standpoint of the music industry. Apparently, there has been a disruption at the system level in the business. Supposedly, music is now foundering as a wealth enterprise or in other words, falling through. Musicians just aren't getting their numbers up to where they would like them to be or where they once had them. It is clear that even though these celebrities have tried coming up with all sorts of over the top stunts, it is just not enough and they are not where the industry wants them to be at. In the music industry, the "financial churn that helps democracy thrive" is still alive, but is among the current and former stars. I completely agree with the article when it says how it is so easy in this industry to lose support from institutions, audiences, and even fans. I say this because as a heavy music consumer, I have stopped supporting musicians I once was crazy for. And the crazy part is that, as easy as it is to lose support in this industry, it is just as hard to build an empire. And streaming sites such as Spotify and Youtube are not helping at all, in fact they are contributing to the big pile of problems faced by musicians. But hey... that's just the music industry for ya.

Source:
The Music Industry Is Dying? Great

Citation:

Poulos, James. The Daily Beast. Newsweek/Daily Beast, n.d. Web. 14 Feb. 2015.

Week Six 2/9-2/13

"Music Industry Exec Sees Vinyl Rise As More 'Fad" Than 'Explosion'"

     According to Rolling Stone, in the last year there was a 52 percent rise in record store vinyl sales. But it seems like the music industry itself is not as content as record store owners with this explosive comeback of vinyl records. This is because managers and record labels see the vinyl obsession as a fad, or in other words, just a "cool" phase that will blow over soon enough. Because managers and record labels have this outlook on vinyl sales, they are not making much of an effort to prop up the 15 or so record plants that are left in the nation. But then, as a result of that, pressing plants have not been able to keep up with the demand, and retailers have been awkwardly running out of vinyls a little too often. Furthermore, many big names in the industry such as Tom Corson, president of Sony-owned RCA Records, believes that although vinyls are great and something he considers an emotional investment in the music, they are only a small percentage of the business and will not make or break their year. 

"This sentiment of "we love vinyl but . . . " is common among top record executives."

"From a label perspective, it's expensive. You've got to ship it. There are environmental concerns,"


     I don't know if you've all heard, but did you know that this is the "hipster" era? Well in case you didn't know, now you know. It seems like the new, "cool", thing in this generation is to be infatuated with styles, trends, and objects that our parents would have used back in the day. Of course, there actually are young people who do like these "throwbacks", but I think it's safe to say that many are kind of just going with the flow and liking what's momentarily cool. That being said, I completely understand and agree with why managers and record labels are choosing to not go overboard with the vinyls because it is not a secure investment, since it is most likely temporarily. 

Source:

Music Industry Execs Sees Vinyl Rise as More 'Fad' Than 'Explosion'

Citation:

Knopper, Steve. "Music Industry Exec Sees Vinyl Rise As More 'Fad" Than 'Explosion'" N.p., 30 Jan. 2015. Web. 12 Feb. 2015.

Week Five 2/2-2/6

"Under the Influence of... Music?"

     Music is a big part of teenagers' lives nowadays. They listen to an average of nearly 2.5 hours of it per day, which is nearly 18 hours of listening to music in a week! But also these days, one in three popular songs contains explicit references to drug or alcohol use. The average teenager is exposed to around 84 references of explicit content each day, 591 in one week, or 30,732 per year. According to studies. they have long shown that the media does affect childhood behaviors. When children are exposed to smoking in movies, they are more likely to try it. The same goes for alcohol which has been discovered that its use in movies and promotions is also linked to alcohol use. 

"The study authors noted that music represents a pervasive source of exposure to positive images of substance use."

"Unlike visual media, music is a powerful social force that also taps into an individual’s personal identity, memories and mood."

“Music is well-known to connect deeply with adolescents and to influence identity development, perhaps more than any other entertainment medium,” said the study authors.

     Most teenagers these days have smart phones with easy access to music streaming applications, and if not, Ipods or mp3 players. So it's safe to say that adolescents in this generation are exposed to a lot of explicit content such as substance use, criminal activities, etc. But, I think we have always been aware of this. What's changed is that now technology is so accessible to people of all ages, so kids of any age can basically get their hands on explicit songs that mom and dad may have forbid. And although it's not necessarily always true, it has been proven that these explicit sayings in music or content on television does influence the behavior of adolescents. And that's what scares most parents.  The exposure nowadays is just crazy and out of control.

Source:
Under the Influence of... Music?

Citation:

Parker-Pope, Tara. "Under the Influence Of...Music?" Well Under the Influence OfMusic Comments. The New York Times, 05 Feb. 2008. Web. 05 Feb. 2015.

Week Four 1/26-1/30

"Survival of the Fittest in the New Music Industry"

     With all the new advances in technology, there have been many advances in the music industry. As a result of the plethora of technological advances, CD's are not a major marketing product anymore, an area where artists once profited a lot from. Because of this, artists have shifted to streaming services such as Spotify, SoundCloud, Pandora, etc. But, because these services offer services for little to no cost, musicians are now being affected negatively and struggling. Bands are now going against each other to try and win spots to gain exposure of their music, and basically to try to make any extra profits possible. 

"Garbage received a crash course in the new realities of the music business."

"I used to hear the word 'overexposure' more than I do now," says Dan Reed, music director of NPR's World Café. "In this crowded media market, I don't think there's such a thing anymore. Bands are vying for any spot they can where they can reach a sizable number of people. We're all working harder. The music business is no different."

     This article is very interesting because it centers around the band Garbage, who went kind of on a break and has been gone for so long, they have had to learn the ropes of how the music industry works today. It's crazy because they're not a new naive band, but it's as if they're starting from zero because they completely have to learn this industry all over again. According to the article,bands are now cutting more costs, touring more than usual and getting really creative to make up for falling album sales. Not to mention all the new technology that has come out in only the past 5 years, even more so in the past decade.

Source: 
Survival of the Fittest in the New Music Industry

Citation:

Browne, David. "Survival of the Fittest in the New Music Industry." Rolling Stone. N.p., 08 Nov. 2012. Web. 29 Jan. 2015.

Week Three 1/19-1/23

"The Changing Face of the Music Video and What We Can All Learn From It"

     Now, we are all well aware of just how much the music industry has changed over the 
past decade. So it should be obvious that if the music industry has changed so drastically, then it's safe to assume that the music video industry has as well, correct? Correct. 
     Over the last 30 years, music videos have been vital to the music industry and have been used as a tool for communicating an artist's message by joining music and visuals. 
     Although the music video itself existed before MTV, this television channel dedicated to playing non stop music videos was a major contributor to what became known as the era of music videos. 
     Due to this, the 1990s was the decade of high budgets and high impact music videos for artists who were looking to ramp up marketing. Unlike today, only downloading single tracks was not even a known concept, because everyone was purchasing albums instead. Also, today there just isn't money being spent on music videos anymore. It's as if there weren't even a budget anymore because most music videos are so simple, for example take a look at "Blurred Lines". 

"Music videos became a genre of video production in their own right, peaking with budgets to rival some small independent movie productions in the 1990s."

"who could have guessed even a few years ago that music videos would ever have been shot and directed by the performer? Justin Bieber, in his video “Beauty and A Beat”, did exactly that"

     I was very intrigued by this article and all the information it had on music videos from back in the day. It is very hard to believe that music videos were once such a major necessity to an artist, yet nowadays I think its's safe to say although many music lover and loyal fans still watch music videos, most of us music listeners do not. And the crazy thing is they are so easy to get a hold of. By simply going on YouTube, you can access any music video from any artist from any year basically. Yet many of us don't really take the time to do it, and it seems like we're okay with that. The fact that artists used to put so much thought and heart into their music videos back in the day such as the great Michael Jackson or Madonna, in comparison to today when Justin Bieber recorded parts of his music video with the popular adventure seeker's camera, a GoPro and he held it himself throughout parts of the shoot... It's just so sad to think about. 
     Of course there are many artists who do put just so much thought and effort into their music videos, it really is just not the most important factor in today's music industry. I mean, MTV barely even play music videos anymore except for like at 5 in the morning... when everyone is sleeping. 

Artist(s)	Song title	Director	Original air date	Production costs (PC)	Inflation-adjusted PC (2013)
Michael Jackson and Janet Jackson	"Scream"	Mark Romanek[2]	1995	$7,000,000[3]	$10,546,626
Madonna	"Die Another Day"	Traktor[citation needed]	October 22, 2002	$6,000,000[4]	$7,658,464
Madonna	"Express Yourself"	David Fincher[citation needed]	May 17, 1989	$5,000,000[5]	$9,260,403
Madonna	"Bedtime Story"	Mark Romanek [6]	1995	$5,000,000[7]	$7,533,304
Michael Jackson (featuring L.T.B.)	"Black or White"	John Landis[citation needed]	November 14, 1991	$4,000,000[7][8]	$6,742,243
Guns N' Roses	"Estranged"	Andy Morahan[citation needed]	December 1993	$4,000,000[9]	$6,357,061
Puff Daddy (featuring The Notorious B.I.G. & Busta Add MediaRhymes)	"Victory"	Marcus Nispel[citation needed]	March 31, 1998	$2,700,000[3]	$3,803,042
MC Hammer	"Too Legit to Quit"	Rupert Wainwright[10]	November 1991	$2,500,000[7]	$4,089,993
Mariah Carey (featuring Jay-Z)	"Heartbreaker"	Brett Ratner[citation needed]	August 16, 1999	$2,500,000[3]	$3,445,366
Busta Rhymes (featuring Janet Jackson)	"What's It Gonna Be?!"	Hype Williams & Busta Rhymes[citation needed]	March 12, 1999	$2,400,000[3]	$3,926,393

 source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_music_videos 

Source:
The Changing Face of the Music Video and What We Can All Learn From It

Citation:

Geffin, David. "The Changing Face of the Music Video and What We Can All Learn From It | Fstoppers." Fstoppers Photography News and Community for Creative Professionals RSS. N.p., 15 Aug. 2013. Web. 22 Jan. 2015.

Week Two 1/12-1/16

"Whats the Real Cost of a Major Deal?"

     Basically, all new rappers are "lighting up like California fires in the same spot" looking to get a major deal. Major labels offer services such as marketing, distribution, sales, advertising, legal, shipping and merchandising. This is why they take such a large cut of the profits although they do give a much larger budget to record an album. In contrast, independent labels are privately owned and take less profit from the artist's earning but also give a much smaller budget for the album. Major labels are typically known as the "mainstream/commercialized" artists as opposed to indie labels that are typically known to be "hipster/unique/underground" artists. 

"The problem is that new artists often get peanuts on their percentages in exchange for fame. Who wants to be a broke but famous star?"

"Take it from Courtney Love, who's seen both the good and the ugly side of major deals. "If a record company has a reason to exist, it has to bring an artist's music to more fans and it has to deliver more and better music to the audience. You bring me a bigger audience or a better relationship with my audience or get the f--k out of my way."

    I feel that major labels definitely work for the new artist who is focused on getting exposure and who does not have sufficient funds to do so. Independent labels are more for the artist that wants to reach a specific target audience to boost their fan base. Some artists start off with indie labels before moving on to major labels, although many choose not to because it is simply not necessary. 

Source:
What's the Real Cost of a Major Deal?

Citation:
Adaso, Henry. "What's the Real Cost of a Record Deal?" Rap.about.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Jan. 2015.