by Scott Timberg
There has been much debate recently as to the ethics that govern the online music streaming marketplace. After the introduction of illegal piracy the music industry has been on an over decade long push to rebuild a legitimate business model that serves artists who create content. Several services such as Spotify, Rhapsody, Pandora, Beats Music, and Rdio have been offering near unlimited music access for a monthly subscription rate in return. Recent dialogue from some of the music industries top artists like Rosanne Cash, Taylor Swift, Radiohead, and many others have demanded that their music be taken down from streaming services and artists should be fairly compensated for the work they create. This comes as YouTube, the leader providing content for the online marketplace, recently announced the introduction of it’s first subscription based music service, Music Key which offers users an ad-free experience. The evolution of the internet and free content has challenged artists, reporters, and creators of all types in receiving fair compensation for the work they create.
It is important that artists such as Rosanne Cash take the forefront in creating conversation that raises awareness of this problem to the general public and legislators. Without artists who take a stand in front of politicians and law makers and demand the system be changed then there will be no reason for companies like Spotify and YouTube to change their business models to more favor the artists and creators they rely upon for revenue. In addition recently it was announced that streams from Spotify will begin to be counted towards Billboard Chart Rankings, based on this decision it is a safe bet streaming will be around for awhile. Good news is that there is room for an artist to negotiate out a more favorable deal with large streaming services, to think that as an artist the only way forward is to remove all your music from a streaming site I think as of today is a shortsighted move. If Swift had stuck around a little longer it is claimed by Spotify she was to have had upwards of $6 million in payout for the current year. If $6 million is an accurate figure than if you were Swift would you not collect your streaming royalties from any streaming site? Sure there is more money to be made selling your albums in a traditional way but why not collect both revenue sources? If Swift truly does get paid more from extra YouTube views then more power to her but I’m sure there are some consumers left out in the dark by her business decision.
Considering the streaming debate from a local level the implications of streaming on an artist’s career change drastically. Many local artists and ‘Baby Bands’ rely heavily on the support they receive from loyal fans in the form of merchandise purchase, concert tickets sold, and of course the money paid from fans to buy music. Most small acts view streaming as a way for their music to reach a larger audience which means potentially more fans who might attend a future show and buy a t-shirt, this is a fairly accurate assumption during the current music atmosphere. A local band will benefit from offering a vinyl cut of their new album along with a download card to an attendee of a show regardless if their music is already available online. If a fan is loyal to an artist they will want to support that artist in all that they do, it has been hard over the last decade for fans to form the genuine connections with artists that were enjoyed by generations past due to the turmoil experienced with the introduction of the internet. Cash comments on the cultural aspect of how the internet has changed society and readily accepts responsibility to act to try and do the right thing by making it clear that artists need support in order to continue to making content of purpose and meaning to our culture.
