Pay for Play

I don’t know much about the music business. This despite the fact that I’ve been IN the music business for more than 20 years. Now, admittedly, my position in the "biz" has been pretty small potatoes (singer-songwriter, made some CDs, got some airplay, that’s about it). But I’ve been involved in different ways and have paid attention to it closely for all of those years, and it still seems like a closed, black box industry to me.

There’s no transparency. Artists don’t know what’s in their contracts. Radio stations rely on shadowy "consultants" to make their playlists. And now we find that the record companies STILL, 50 years after the first scandals shook the industry, engage in payola.

We know this (officially) only because New York’s crusading Attorney General, Elliot Spitzer, took on the industry at a time when the FCC chose to turn a blind eye to what was going on.

What has developed?

"Sony BMG Music Entertainment, one of the top companies in the recording industry, agreed yesterday to pay $10 million to settle allegations that it bribed radio stations," the San Diego Union Tribune reported July 26.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20050726-9999-1n26payola.html

"The practice of giving radio stations "payola," or gifts in exchange for playing specific songs, dates to the 1930s and has been prohibited by federal law for the past 45 years. Still, Spitzer said pay-for-play, as it is also called, is "pervasive within the music industry."

"… The findings of Spitzer's 11-month investigation reveal the extent to which Sony BMG would go to get its songs on the air, then to cover up the true nature of the payments. The findings also show how heavily record companies rely on radio stations to play their music and help boost sales of the songs.

"…In another case, Spitzer uncovered an e-mail to a Hartford, Conn., radio station from a promoter for Epic Records, part of Sony BMG, that said: "WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO GET AUDIOSLAVE ON WKSS THIS WEEK?!!? Whatever you dream up, I can make happen!!!" The promoter was pushing to get the song "Like a Stone" by the rock band Audioslave on the air.

"Spitzer cited examples of radio station personnel getting what he called "bribes" everything from airfare to video game consoles to laptop computers to give airtime to Sony BMG's record labels.

"… According to 59 pages of e-mails and documents Spitzer uncovered, Sony BMG would often demand that a song be played a certain number of times a day, sometimes even specifying the times of day, for the radio station to be eligible for the payout.

"…Spitzer's investigation also found that Sony BMG:
*Hired independent promoters to funnel the money and gifts to radio stations.
*Used interns and others it hired to call in requests for certain songs to trick radio stations into playing them more.
*Bought chunks of advertising time, during which its songs were played to boost ratings in the charts. Such airtime was not differentiated from regular music programs.
*Paid radio stations to cover operational expenses in exchange for playing specific songs."
(LA Times, 7-23)
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-payola23jul23,0,4233398.story

This issue of independent consultants (promoters) is another scandal. I remember when we were trying to get a song on the radio we were told we "had" to hire a consultant who would then "work" the song. The problem is, of course, these consultants pay the stations to play songs. And if they don’t have the big pockets of the labels to fall back on—as ours did not—they really aren’t players in the game at all. We did get a few spins, but what chance does any indie band have in a system like this?

"In a practice once widespread, the promoters acted as middlemen paying radio stations annual fees - often exceeding $100,000 - not, they say, to play specific songs, but to obtain advance copies of the stations' playlists. The promoters then bill labels for each new song played; the total tab costs the industry tens of millions of dollars a year. Under the new rules, Sony cannot reimburse promoters for any expense for a radio station or contest winner."
NYTimes, July 26
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/26/business/26music.html

Notice: they’re paying the stations for advance copies of the playlist (riiiiiiiiiight), but they’re BILLING the labels for each song played. What a scam.

If you ever wondered why music and especially the music on the radio has gotten so bad in the last 20 years, this story explains a lot. The music industry has become a, well, to be polite, a manure factory. They look for marketable product, not talent, and package it to sell. And they have assumed that we will continue to buy the manure and like it, while they get rich. The artificial, disposable artists that have been paraded across TV and radio are often completely forgettable. But with the music industry’s tight control of commercial radio, as shown by this story, consumers have had to wade through a lot of manure to find anything halfway decent.

So all of you fans of unregulated business, I hope you enjoyed your Britney Spears, Good Charlotte, and Celine Dion. It was the best music money could buy. God knows if things will really improve, but this is a step in the right direction.

Justice Goodheart

One of the first things President Bush said about his new Supreme Court nominee, John Roberts, was that the judge has "a good heart."

Oh, that’s a relief. Good to know. And good to know that Bush is not relying on stock platitudes in making one of the most important announcements of his presidency.

I mean, what is with this president and cardiovascular systems? During his first campaign for presidency, he repeatedly talked about what was in his heart. And ever since then, for nearly every appointment he has made, he has said the person in question "has a good heart."

Maybe it’s just a quirk, a phrase that he really likes. Maybe it’s code for something. Maybe it’s just salesmanship. That does seem to be a big part of George Bush’s job, selling people things they are not at all sure they want. I guess if you say your product (nominee) has a good heart, people may be less likely to judge it/them harshly.

"Mr. Smith has a long and distinguished record of using child slaves to strip mine environmentally sensitive areas and then dump the toxic rubble on nursing homes … but he has a good heart." Well, he can’t be all bad, then, can he?

Ironic, isn’t it, that the man he chose to be second in power literally has a bum ticker? I wonder, has George Bush ever described Dick Cheney as a man with a good heart? (If so, critics of the president could once again claim that BUSH LIED!)

Anyhow, John Roberts. It’s a good pick. I can’t come to any other conclusion at this point. I fear for the future of this country with the continued tilt of the SC to the right, but really, that was decided in the last election. The Democrats have every right to raise questions and objections and oppose this nomination if they choose to, but it is almost a certainty that he will be confirmed.

And considering the larger picture, we could have done much worse. This is an intelligent man, held in high regard in legal circles, certainly conservative but not radically so. He’s no Bork, and from what I know of him, he’s not a Thomas or Scalia either, which were the two names Bush has always mentioned as models for his first SC pick.

I think Bush, knowing that his administration is in real trouble over the Plame case and the war in Iraq, wanted an iron-clad nominee, one that would at least have some degree of bipartisan support while still having solid conservative credentials. Roberts seems to fit the bill. This nomination is not as likely to create another divisive controversy that could further damage Bush’s standing, and it shouldn’t alienate his base either. Win-win.

He knows Rehnquist will be gone soon enough. Then, presumably after some of the current troubles have passed, he can nominate another Bork, Thomas or Scalia. Win-win.

And I’m sure that the moment he nominates Mr. Darth Sidious, he will declare that the nominee has a good heart.