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.
