A fresh look at the media industry and how trends affect independent artists. A hodgepodge of ideas about entertainment and technology.
Spotted on: Billboard
The first official news has hit the wire. Radiohead has signed with ATO Records to distribute In Rainbows in the US, with a release date of January 1, 2008. XL Recordings is distributing the album in the UK.
Considering this morning’s post, I wanted to break the big news, as it was released today.
Spotted on: TechConsumer
This has been all over the internet this morning. I was forwarded the link above, so TechConsumer gets the nod. Here’s the official statement from Radiohead regarding the recent sales reporting of In Rainbows, first reported by comScore Inc.
Let’s look at it from a different angle.
Consider that no one but the band’s organization has accurate sales totals, and they are not required to release those figures. While comScore may have a powerful system to approximate results, it’s still speculation. Fans don’t care how many albums the band sells, they’re buying it for the music. So why is the industry racing to release information that the ‘experiment’ is a ‘failure’, and why is the media scrambling to report sales totals for In Rainbows?
If In Rainbows proves to be a success (and I predict the band will make more money for themselves then they did on Kid A), then platinum artists don’t need major labels to promote them anymore. Major labels are scrambling to show the experiment doesn’t work to protect their interests. Their marketing machine propelled Radiohead to the spotlight, and now the band can generate media frenzy on their own. If this works for Radiohead, it can work for all artists with millions of loyal fans.
Thanks to the overwhelm of media coverage on the album, Radiohead doesn’t need to spend a penny on promotion if they choose. Once an artist reaches iconic status, they need no entity to propel their career, as long as the music is quality (and the reviews of In Rainbows are glowing). This kind of free publicity eliminates the need for huge marketing pushes. Without multi-platinum artists to buffer the bottom line, major labels are nothing more than upper-tier indie labels with massive back catalogs. Thus, the need to publicly show that the method doesn’t work. The reporting of In Rainbows isn’t about album sales or revenue, it’s about keeping mega-stars on major label rosters.
This story does not represent a shift in the music industry, it represents a shift for mega-artists. Once an artist has broken into international stardom, they no longer need the promotional muscle of major labels. The echo chamber of media almost guarantees releases from superstar artists will be plastered all over media outlets, with the hopes of generating readers, viewers, or web hits. The major label business model does not account for artists leaving the label after they are mega-stars. That’s where the major labels became major in the first place.
However, In Rainbows has little or no effect on the rest of the industry, as there are not many bands that can be compared to Radiohead in terms of success. For the 95% of artists that have not had a decade of major label development and promotion, Saul Williams‘ new release (produced by Trent Reznor) is the one to watch. Released with an option to buy or download at a lower bit rate, his sales figures are a measure of what is available for a mid level artist using this tactic. Of course, Saul Williams’ Q Score is much lower than Radiohead’s, so we haven’t heard much about this.
The story here isn’t Radiohead’s actions around In Rainbows, but rather the power they have to cause huge ripples in public conversation without the major label that broke them. Regardless of the amount of money made, In Rainbows shows that superstar acts can release an independent album and maintain their media spotlight.
The sales figures are a red herring for the real issue: Major labels have lost their ability to be the only avenue for mega-artists success, and these artists represent a huge part of their revenue.
Lately I’ve notice that there are musicians and artists that are tuning into this frequency, so here’s something for you to consider:
The future for musicians looks like more than just great recordings and live shows. The opportunities that the internet provides modern artists is available to everyone, and thus its potential is diluted. One powerful tool in creating buzz around your project or career is to get noticed. And one way to get noticed is to generate interest in who you are, and what you’re saying. in other words, creating and maintaining a conversation with your audience.
Pop culture can overwhelm us with the personal lives of famous people, and annoy us to no end with the antics of celebrities. Billboard has an excellent article on the effect of this kind of marketing on the careers of the ultra-famous. Keeping themselves in the public eye is a critical element to the careers of these top tier entertainers. Even bad press is good press for them.
For the independent artist, this same technique can yield different results. We can expand our scope and reach by generating attention for who we are, and what we have to say. Marketing a personality is nothing new. Here’s an article from Time Magazine in 1978, looking at the same methods and issues we are discussing today.
Once you have fulfilled your artistic vision, and you’re putting yourself out there, the make-or-break factor in success becomes notoriety. While having ten thousand friends on Myspace seems like a powerful promotional tool, does it really measure anything other than the number of people that landed on your page and clicked add me?
One of the most effective tools for creating a buzz for yourself, your project, and what you’re up to is blogging, and blogging often. If you are anything like me, you spend at least some of your week surfing the internet and consuming content. You have sites that you visit regularly. Consider that what keeps you coming back to a site is the steady stream of new and interesting content. Content that speaks to you.
A healthy career is grown through a fanbase. Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, Prince, and Madonna are able to free themselves from major labels and even give away their music because their fans are loyal, and people are tuning in.
While it may seem like the forward momentum is slow, steady and regular content on your project webpage, blog, or social networking page is critical to bring people back. And the more time people spend on your sites, the more interested they will be in supporting your cause.
I am guilty of not providing a steady stream of information on my blogs at times, and it impacts my return traffic, and the hype around my own projects and Polyvibe. I am preparing to condense this blog with my personal blog, providing the same great content with half the work. Like Uncle Scrooge says, work smarter, not harder.
For any artist who is committed to bringing viability to their career, having a powerful voice, and keeping the conversation going are critical elements to success.
I invite you to comment on this post with your opinions. If the waters ripple, we’ll talk more about creating a cult of personality, the results people are seeing from this kind of grassroots marketing, and methodology that can be implemented to increase your results.
In getting a picture of what’s next for the music business, let’s take a moment to look at reality right now. There are a few reports from mid-2007 that CD sales are way down (15% from the first half of last year), while digital sales are up over 48% (If you find any more recent industry sales reports, I invite you to post them as a comment to this post).
CD sales are dropping, set to be a small fraction of overall sales – and sooner, rather than later. A recent survey of high school students showed that there is a downward trend in music downloading in that age group. This is the next generation of music buyers. Perhaps their actions are pointing to something.
The Freakonomics blog posted an editorial recently with analysis of the record industry by five people who ought to know. Koleman Strumpf, an economics professor at the University of Kansas, had this to say:
“If file sharing hurts record sales, then albums that are more heavily downloaded should experience lower sales than comparable albums that are less downloaded. But, after controlling for the role of popularity, we found that downloads had little effect on album sales.” He wrote a whole paper on the subject, if you want to find out more.
In other words, file sharing is not the source of the drop in album sales. A powerful insight like this is the last word on file sharing for me (although not for the RIAA).
Audioholics.com posted a great editorial on whether CDs are approaching the event horizon of obsolescence. They include a buffet of statistics showing that while physical sales are slumping, digital sales are growing with velocity.
As the digital music market overtakes physical sales, CDs will become less available (relegated to major chain stores like Wal-Mart). We can see this shift with the demise of? Tower Records. When people can get all the music they want without going to overpriced record stores, they will. This trend has yet to infect mom and pop record stores, like Orlando’s own Park Avenue CDs, and since most of these stores are seen as boutiques rather than purveyors of the lastest industry tripe, most of them will likely survive (don’t forget that most small record shops deal with smaller and indie labels, and used CDs and vinyl).
People are still buying tons of music, and if digital music sales are any indication, music will continue to be a commodity. Although most commentary is still focused on what major labels can do to revive sales, the real issue is becoming what can artists do to empower themselves in this new realm.
People are exposed to a larger variety of sounds than ever before. Demand for music has skyrocketed, while profits are shrinking. The idea that music has lost much of its monetary value in the current market is a two fold effect: the novelty of file sharing and mega hard drives, and the price difference between a digital single or download and a CD.
We live in an era of convenience, and audiences consistently choose the format which is most user friendly (think audio tapes in the 80′s). The shift toward digital libraries has been predicted for years, and even with DRM, digital is already the industry standard. I’m still surprised that such a well-known and predicted phenomenon can cause such panic among executives. It’s almost as if upper management in the record industry has been ignoring the experts.
The quality of the music is a major factor in sales when people have access to massive catalogs, too. Hip Hop is a great example of this trend. Collapsing under the weight of violence and misogyny, some hip hop artist still enjoy huge mainstream and underground success. And the cause of this slump seems to be the choices made my industry executives over the last ten years.
The reality is this: The fate of major record labels has nothing to do with whether or not musicians will be able to create fulfilling careers, absolutely nothing. With unlimited access, people aren’t compelled to buy any album unless they absolutely want it.
And in case you wanted to know the secret to success in the music business in any climate:
Make Great Music!
