Music – The priceless commodity
As I started planning this article, a whole new debate has opened up concerning file-sharing and the effect it has had on the music industry. Pop star Lily Allen has recently chosen to voice her opinion at how illegal file-sharing is damaging the music industry and how it is harming the musicians that fall victim to it. Members of bands such as Radiohead and Blur (as part of the Featured Artists Coalition) have supported Allen’s anti file-sharing stance and are in support of a “three strike rule” scenario. This involves two warning letters for the first two “strikes” and then restrictions to the user’s bandwidth for the third (rendering file-sharing impractical).
Napster
In this article I wanted to look at the effect of illegal file-sharing and its influence on the value of music today. Lily Allen hasn’t been the first (nor will she be the last) to publicly voice her dismay. An infamous case of negative public opinion can be seen as far back as 2000 where Metallica’s Lars Ulrich took a stance against the now legal site Napster (in which he got publicly annihilated). I don’t feel that the artists should have such animosity directed at them because after all they are only trying to protect their content and it is this which brings them their income.
To fully understand the situation, it is important to look at all the factors surrounding it. I’ve chosen to start with why people chose to illegally download music and have detailed a few points below:
- It’s quick and easy
- Costs nothing
- Leaks before scheduled release
These are all good selling points on why you would chose to download music for free, however this is only beneficial to the listener. It is a one-way street. I would guess the average age of people who chose to file-share would be around 15-18. I’ve chosen this is because there is little disposable income available at this age and a high interest in popular culture. I find it quite strange to think about how the current generation has grown up not having to pay for music. How can you expect people to pay for something that they can get for free?
When bands and artists speak out about how file-sharing is negatively affecting their career, most people have little to no sympathy and feel that they are “in the right” to download the music for free. Many big names have come up with different ideas on how to distribute their music themselves (I will dedicate another article to this soon) and enjoy the benefits of being able to do so, with some doing it for free. However these bands have already established a fan base and don’t necessarily face the risks newer bands have placed on them.
Bigger bands choosing to give away their music for free opens up an interesting twist. This is all well and good for them (and also really cool for their fans!) but when the expectation then gets placed on a newer band to follow suit (when it’s not financially viable), it can be detrimental to their progression and livelihood. It’s not the big names (mostly bands that had success before the file-sharing era) that feel the effects of this the most, young “up and coming” bands have been put in a very strange and uncertain position regarding their musical/artistic future. As a member of a band myself I have found it quite striking that friends (those who are supposed to be a bands foundation support system) even ask for free copies of an album. A lot of the time new bands are funding the rehearsal and recording sessions themselves which can end up being very costly. If a band can spend their own money funding their music than why can’t music fans pay for the end result?
Not too long ago I asked a friend what the last album they bought was and they couldn’t remember. I then asked if they had listened to (or liked) any music recently and they said yes, however they chose to download it instead of buying it. The reasoning behind it was quite strange to hear:
“I don’t really buy music anymore, I’ve got more important things to spend money on”
They claimed how they would rather spend their money going out on the town rather than purchasing music. With some cd’s as cheap as a drink or two at a bar, it sounds like music just doesn’t mean as much to people as it used to. It would seem that the value of music today has lessened into that of a disposable commodity. It is no longer the special medium in which time is spent enjoying an album, giving each individual track the attention it deserves and earning the aural reward of doing so.
A thought that I hit upon in regards to what a “successful” album or song is these days made me believe that file-sharing and the internet’s effect on music has had a bigger impact than we may think. It may have changed how music is listened to, but it may also have altered our perception as to what music is “for”. As file-sharing makes everything instant with arguably no lasting value, there is a need to capture the listeners attention straight away which can influence record companies and the artists to approach making music differently. This can give the damaging option for listeners to overlook or not bother with music that isn’t instantly accessible to the ears (as this is what becomes normal). Has music gone from being a personal experience to being about continuous instant gratification?
In the early stages of the internet and long before iPods were invented, there would be a level of expectation for an album’s release. There would be genuine excitement at the prospect of hearing new music by your favourite bands, or hearing new music from bands that had received good reviews. It would be an event (long gone are the days of queueing up at your local music store at midnight! ). I believe this helped (amongst other things) contribute to what made music special and it’s pretty strange to see the absence of this in today’s culture. I don’t believe that many people look forward to an albums release because, in short, they don’t have to! The expectation has been boiled down to a “leak” with many people downloading and making their mind up on whether they like an album (or even a whole band) based on their first listen (if not the first track!). For each person that would buy an album after hearing a leak there are several more who will keep the downloaded files on their computer and not bother (as they technically already have it). This is a confusing dichotomy, because surely if you like the album and the artist you would support them by buying the product?
Due to this being a hugely broad topic (which offers many other points of discussion) I will finish this article here for now. There are many other aspects that are related to or are byproducts of the above and these will be discussed in future articles.
Leave a comment: What are your views on file-sharing? Do you file-share yourself? What do you think of the subjects explored in this article? What are your opinions on the current state of the music industry?
Like this post and want more like it? Why not subscribe?
I think its all about mind set. Obviously the technology that has came out where cd’s are no longer seen as a appropiate form of techology is definatly better, but it’s caused a whole wide range of problems like you say and its down to complete lack of respect for music and artists alike. Would you go into a decent well respected company and steal their products? of course you wouldn’t, but behind closed doors people obviously don’t have a concience and just dont care. If people were taught morals then everything would be different but because there isnt a policeman or a cctv camera watching them they can get away with whatever they want for free. This type of thing needs a complete crack down but its merly impossible to do so. So at this point you have to ask yourself. If this technology is doing more harm than good then is it really that good? Unless you can make people act morally then it will never be any good and will continue to cause the music industry more problems. The bands giving their music away for free really shouldnt do so as like you say it puts pressure on artists like you and me to give ours away for free. Being an artist myself of course I care about the music more than the cost but it doesnt do me any favours on my own living standards. You just have to hope there are people with the decency to buy our music rather than expect it for free.
To me, there really is nothing like waiting for a new album coming out and ripping off the plastic and having the cd in your hands; reading the album art front to back. I love it. I will download obscure songs, but I pay online for this. (Who wants to search through music stores looking for the Greatest American Hero song, just because it’s stuck in your head??) In that way it hugely convenient to download songs.
The argument can also be extended to youtube now also. I was really disappointed to see someone had uploaded Say Anything’s new album. It just came out and already its been ripped off :(
Sadly I don’t think it’s ever going to stop.
I know what you mean about YouTube, I think a part of why people choose do it is because the person that uploads the release first gets kudos from others and more views to their page. Streaming music isn’t AS bad but it should be the artist’s choice whether or not they want to do it. Today it seems they don’t stream their music because that want to, but as a form of damage limitation.