Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Government The Almighty Buck The Courts The Internet News

MTV: 2007 Borked the Music Industry 264

Sockatume writes "MTV thinks 2007 was the year the music industry broke, and provides a hefty pile of examples to justify it. Unsurprisingly, most of them revolve around the collapse of CD sales and the rise of digital distribution (authorised and otherwise). Be advised that many of the examples are the continuations or repercussions of old favourites (RIAA suits, the Sony rootkit fiasco)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MTV: 2007 Borked the Music Industry

Comments Filter:
  • by User 956 ( 568564 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:10AM (#21820404) Homepage
    MTV: 2007 Borked the Music Industry

    Ah, so that explains the hit song, "drup it like it's hut".

    "Vhen my peemps in zee crib, mun: drup it like it's hut! Sveedeesh Cheff be peempin on 4-fo's!"
    • by 2.7182 ( 819680 )
      Weird - MTW thinks the music industry shouldn't be on the Supreme court ? I agree, but I didn't realize it was on the table.
    • It's American (Score:3, Insightful)

      by WED Fan ( 911325 )

      It's alright, many of the /. readers today don't really know the term "Borked" and those that come up and post to say they do will have run to Wikipedia first to find out what it means.

      On a side note: Many of the things that /.er's complain about the government gettting mixed up in would have been slammed hard by Robert Bork. If he were on the court today he'd be telling Bush and Congress that neither have the authority to do a lot of what they have done.

      I think the use of the term "Borked" in the headlin

  • by eharvill ( 991859 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:12AM (#21820410)
    Just like in 1979, eh?
  • by maryjanecapri ( 597594 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:14AM (#21820416) Homepage Journal
    remember when MTV actually played music videos? don't they think that MIGHT have helped with the sale of music? and maybe the fact they now only play inane reality tv shows might have SOMETHING to do with the fact that music sales have dropped?
    • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:16AM (#21820428)
      Why should MTV care about the music studios? Sure, I, too, remember the time when the M in MTV was for MUSIC, but it's not their biz to keep the dying studios afloat. I mean, would you tie yourself to a sinking ship?
      • by Anonymous Coward
        "I mean, would you tie yourself to a sinking ship?"

        The people who made the latest Titanic movie did.
      • by sm62704 ( 957197 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:43AM (#21820768) Journal
        I, too, remember the time when the M in MTV was for MUSIC

        It's not M for music, it's one of those text message/license plate thingies; MT is an abbreviation for "empty" like sk* is an abbreviation for skate. It's "empty-v" as in "no vision". I remember the time when empty-V came on the scene and started confusing rap with rock and tried to fuck up rock and roll forever.

        Fortunately it was unsucessful as the empty-V decade (1980s) saw some great rock and roll, little of which got air play on empty-V.
        • I remember the time when empty-V came on the scene and started confusing rap with rock and tried to fuck up rock and roll forever.

          I was going to use my mod points on an insightful mod, but you're at +5 Funny.

          I'll be dating myself...heck, maybe even carbon dating...when I say I remember when "Yo, MTV
          Raps" was a late nite hour long show and not and entire fscking format for the station.

          Then the MTV2 was announced to get back to Rock and Roll, ya know, the 'original' format
          because of viewer apathy for MTV.

          Whoo

    • by encoderer ( 1060616 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:44AM (#21821090)
      If you're MTV, why would you care about "helping" the sale of music?

      The fact is, all those "inane" reality shows you deride are there because that's what the audience actually wants.

      MTV has a high churn rate, and that's be design. Quite some time ago, they had the decision to keep things "old & friendly" and thereby stick with their founding audience from the time they wore spandex and Jordache jeans in 1985 until they're old and blue-haired. Or, they could evolve every few years, and remain relevant to the teenagers of the day.

      And, to be fair, the decision has worked out pretty well for them.
    • by tulmad ( 25666 )
      So what you're trying to say is Real World killed the video stars?
  • by dsginter ( 104154 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:15AM (#21820424)
    The other day, someone commissioned me to do some data recovery on a hard drive with more than $700 in iTunes on it (no backup, of course).

    Generally, I do my best to avert my eyes during transfer of customer data but this was a little more involved and I had to verify the integrity of many of the files. With the customer's permission, I played a lot of the music and suddenly began to feel very old: I hadn't previously heard of most of the artists/songs that were recovered.

    I'm glad to see that the kids aren't taking the radio monopoly. In my day, we didn't have these mechanisms to stick it to The Man (not that there isn't a problem with having all these files locked up in DRM...)
    • by hal9000(jr) ( 316943 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:54AM (#21820822)
      I hadn't previously heard of most of the artists/songs that were recovered.

      What would help music sales, cd or otherwise, is a decent way to find the music people wants to hear. I like classical and spanish guitar. Just the guitar with minimal back round instruments. Try to find that! I was in a borders and a woman asked the sales girl for classical guitar. She pointed the hapless woman over to the classical section. I knew she would find what she was looking for (I was just there and there is not "classical guitar section"). I suggested she tell the customer to pick up some John Williams or Segovia, and the sales girl looked at me confused, and said they were over in classical. NO shit! I know that but the customer doesn't.

      Look, it's the digital age. If perhaps record companies spent some money employing people to music knowledge to classify music in a variety of ways, the less musically educated like myself, might actually find what I am looking for and, *gasp*, purchase it.
      • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:58AM (#21820840)
        The music industry and other industries used to pay well for sales people that knew the business.

        Then they decided that knowledge was not valuable and they could push music through mass market without any sales assitance.

        That worked for a while-- but eventually, a new crop of potential customers comes along and you have no contact with them.

        It's true of many industries. They decided they only want "top level" people and don't way to pay to train people up any more.

        They would use untrained labor or outsourced labor for the low level positions.

        Mistake.

        • by blhack ( 921171 )
          If you double space your comments, not as many people are going to read them. Double spaced lines give the illusion of size...when you have short, 1 line sentences couple with that spacing...the clash is just too much and its a pain in the ass to read because you brain will start trying to interpret it like a poem. Your post is NOT a poem (i hope) and therefore has no rhythm to follow.

          Yes, i work in advertising, and this is one of my pet peeves.

          Sorry.
          • My post is not a poem

            I say what I think and so I'm

            going to post today

            And post again another day.

            ---

            No idea why I double-spaced that post. I really do not consider a lot if people read or do not read. I post to get the thought out of me that must be out. Once it is out of me, it's life or death is it's own affair.
            We all have pet peeves... I'm a bit OCD about some things in RL so I understand why you had to post.

            Happy Holidays BLhack!
        • by tkrotchko ( 124118 ) * on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @04:37PM (#21824014) Homepage
          I call what you're talking about the "Radio Shack" effect.

          Many years ago (probably before most of you were even born), Radio Shack used to employ salesmen who actually knew about electronics. They could read a resistor color code, they could solder; heck when you brought in something to repair (from the "REALISTIC" brand), they would actually fix it in the store. As you might expect, this type of help commanded more than minimum wage.

          Some president of Tandy said "Gee, why am I paying so much for sales help. I could offer high-school kids minimum wage and save $millions this year!" which was true, but also eliminated a lot of reason people went to radio shack. So they fired the guys who could actually help you, and hired kids who could find the battery section if you helped them.

          So here's where the "Radio Shack Effect" starts... You have customers coming in looking for expert help that is now gone. It takes customers a while to catch on fully, and so over the next 6-36 months, customers don't come back. You're reduced the reason for people coming into the store for parts.. But not before the CEO just added to the bottom line of year 1. Never mind that years 2->forever will have negative growth... that's the next CEO's job to worry about.

          And by the way... for some unknown reason, Radio Shack could no longer sell electronics parts. Funny how that worked. So they got rid of the parts, too. I went in the other day looking for fuses; they only had a handful and suggested I go to "Home Depot". Ouch. Tell me again why people go to Radio Shack these days?
      • by BlueParrot ( 965239 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @12:21PM (#21821662)

        What would help music sales, cd or otherwise, is a decent way to find the music people wants to hear.


        Yea, I hate to SEARCH for music. It would be nice if I didn't have to SEARCH so much, like if there was a webpage which could help me SEARCH for music. Heck, you could even imagine a company making money by offering a SEARCH service of some sort. Like when people SEARCH for airline tickets travel agencies do the SEARCH for them. If there was only some sort of SEARCH company which could help me SEARCH for music in a similar way. Maybe if there was a way to combine SEARCH with ADVERTISING. Do you think anybody could make money that way?

        I'm still waiting for gTunes.

    • I thought iTunes let you redownload stuff a second time when you reauthorized a new computer?
      • by leamanc ( 961376 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:11AM (#21820906) Homepage Journal

        I thought iTunes let you redownload stuff a second time when you reauthorized a new computer?

        No. No re-downloading at all. A semi-recent development (with iTunes 7.x and up, I believe) is that you can pull purchased music off on an iPod on to another computer. But there is no re-downloading, no matter how you lost your files.

        • by Brigade ( 974884 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @12:57PM (#21821972)
          I don't know if it has changed, but about 2 years ago my computer's system drive took a nosedive (and the few iTunes Mp3s I actually bought went with it.)

          Just took a phone call, and they re-authorized re-downloading of my pre-purchased music. All it took was my account information (which didn't change) and about 10-15 minutes on the phone. I also seem to recall that that was my "one-time" that you can use in the instance of catastrophic loss in regards to iTunes. I personally loathe anything having to do with the Apple Philosophy, but their customer service was spot-on in this instance.
    • You feel old... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by maillemaker ( 924053 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:28AM (#21821002)
      Heh, I feel you.

      Sometimes I think, if new music and movies stopped being created today, but I could legally download all movies and video ever created prior to today, would I care that no more new content is being created?

      I don't think so.

      • Re:You feel old... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by stewbacca ( 1033764 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:48AM (#21821122)
        Guitar Hero III man. My kid can't get enough Scorpions, SRV, Foghat and Mountain. Has he even replayed the AFI song once? I don't think so. A little perspective is all most intelligent young people need to see their crop of music is pretty lame compared to the old stuff.

        I get the chance to instruct young people (18-24) for 16-week long classes a couple times a year, and I always bring up music debates for fun during our down times. With every class, good music that will stand the test of time falls on deaf ears. I often ask them, which song will still be listened to in 20 years, "Welcome to the Jungle" or "Insert Crappy One Hit Wonder Song Here"? Most of them actually think Fall Out Boy will have more playability in 20 years.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by sheldon ( 2322 )
          Hasn't this always been true?

          90% of the music I bought in the 1980s when I was a teen went to the trash.
          • Re:You feel old... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by jedidiah ( 1196 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @12:25PM (#21821696) Homepage
            This is of course what big content really fears.

            They are deathly afraid of "perfect digital copies" of works in
            the public domain. Without the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension
            (and others like it), companies that make up the MPAA and RIAA
            would have to compete against their old classics that could
            legally and freely be transfered by everyone across bittorrent.

            The net would become one huge version of WGN or TBS and it would
            all be perfectly legal...
        • >My kid can't get enough Scorpions, SRV, Foghat and Mountain.

          LOL, I don't know what any of those are.

          Boston, REO Speedwagon, Eagles, ACDC, Charlie Daniels Band, these are familiar to me. :)

           
          • LOL, I don't know what any of those are.

            Niether did my 11-year old son, until he started playing Guitar Hero. The damndest thing is I already own 90% of those songs, and he's never shown much interest. Now he wants to buy all the songs, to which I just show him I already own them all (mostly on vinyl...heh).

            Foghat and Mountain are kinda one-hit wonder-ish, but you don't know Stevie Ray Vaughn or the Scorpions? What are you, like 8? ;-)

        • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @12:42PM (#21821824)
          Every generation thinks its music is the best and the new stuff sucks. I think 80's metal is the best myself. I despise Boomer and Generation Y music. But that's just because I was a teenager in the 80's. Happens every generation.

          And even when younger people listen to older music, they HEAR it differently. When I listened to Black Sabbath in the 80's, I wasn't hearing Vietnam protest music (like my uncle heard it). And when a kid listens to MY stuff today, he hears it as "classic metal" (not the way I hear it).

          No one likes to think of themselves as out of touch and no longer young and hip. But it eventually happens to us all. Trying to fight it only makes you look pathetic (think Warren Beatty trying to rap in "Bullworth").

          • Every generation thinks its music is the best and the new stuff sucks. I think 80's metal is the best myself. I despise Boomer and Generation Y music. But that's just because I was a teenager in the 80's. Happens every generation.

            That's why I think Led Zeppelin is the greatest rock band ever...because I was a teen during the 80s...oh wait. Sorry, I hear your argument a lot, but the older one gets, the less likely he/she is to believe that music from his/her generation is the best, because he/she has a l

        • by plover ( 150551 ) *
          You're not the only one to notice the trend. xkcd [xkcd.com] made me laugh with this one a few weeks ago.
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:28AM (#21820464)
    ...with the occasional landslide. A bit like the glaciers melting.

    The music industry's old business model is outdated. Yeah, I know, if there was a "deadhorse" mod option I'd be modded into oblivion now, but maybe if we keep telling them long enough, they will finally listen.

    Now, I don't want the MI to die. No, really. I don't want them to go keel up and drown. Yes, we'd still find a way to get our music through the internet, we'd go to artist pages, pay them directly and download our songs. But what about those people who don't have the net? Music is part of our life, would you really want them to do without?

    Not that I'd miss American Idol nonreturnable stars, hyped today, forgotten tomorrow, but people want them and want those songs, they want those shallow, hollow feelgood crap. Who am I to dictate they should listen to good music?

    So what the MI needs to find, and soon, is some other revenue stream. Personally, I could well see them turn from distributors to marketing assistants. They have excellent connections to TV and radio, so why not become the marketing and PR people for artists who think they can't market themselves?

    Yes, that's probably less profitable than the current way. But this way is leading into a dead end, and the longer you run on it, and the faster you do, the more it hurts when you hit the wall at its end.
    • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:01AM (#21820616)
      Exactly.
      My company has an informal motto, Adapt or Die. Every 5 years or so we change directions slightly to keep competitive. Mainframe Service -> Sun Service -> Unix Development -> Application Programming no matter what the OS is -> Who know what will be next IT Project Management, Infrastructure Support... But the point is when technology changes so do we, When we feel that the area we are specialized in is dieing or we cant be competitive in then we move to a new area based on what we are good at to a new one that we have skill set to compete in and have potential to be really good at.
      The Radio Industry needs to do the same. What happened in the past 10 years or so is technology improved to a point where Music can be shared in perfect condition. In the when Copy Analog to Analog there is a drop in the quality, and every other copy will in turn be worse copy. So from Beginning to Early CD (When most people harddrives were not large enough to cary the information, and they havn't found a way to personally burn your own CD Cheaply) and Music Pirates were limited to rather big operations (At lest the size of a small company) so They could Fight them off and the Fines for Copyright infringement was just. But now technology makes it too easy to copy music, and people want to share music. The industry is holding onto the old ways of doing things... And the need for them in their fashion all may be outdated in a few years, where higher quality Audio recording technology improving and the current High Quality Stuff is dropping, and getting easier to use... So people can make their own high quality music themselves with the Radio Companies Now Musicians will actually need to make their money the old fashion ways Traveling to different locations and sing, and royalties on public/commercial performances of the song. Yes they may not be huge millionaires unless they are cream of the crop, but it is back to the people to decide what they like and dislike.
    • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) * on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:12AM (#21820664) Journal

      Now, I don't want the MI to die. No, really. I don't want them to go keel up and drown. Yes, we'd still find a way to get our music through the internet, we'd go to artist pages, pay them directly and download our songs. But what about those people who don't have the net? Music is part of our life, would you really want them to do without?
      I can understand your sentiment, Opportunist, but I can't agree that the shrinking percentage of people who don't have the internet would somehow have to do without music if the music industry were to die. I have walked around dirt-poor neighborhoods outside Sao Paulo and Lagos and there is music everywhere even though you couldn't find an internet connection or record store within a day's walk. Music connects people via other people, not via corporate intent.

      If the major-labels and entertainment conglomerates were to disappear tomorrow, radios would still be everywhere, including (especially) in the homes of the poorest. Instead of playing the latest hits from Britney Spears, broadcasters might have to find the music of local artists to play (or get their music from the Internet).

      So what the MI needs to find, and soon, is some other revenue stream. Personally, I could well see them turn from distributors to marketing assistants. They have excellent connections to TV and radio, so why not become the marketing and PR people for artists who think they can't market themselves?
      There's no way that will provide enough revenue to support the incredibly top-heavy structure of the current entertainment industry. It would be better if they just started looking for real jobs.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by peragrin ( 659227 )
        The music industry itself will never die.

        In American i buy music online from European bands directly. my friend buys his music right from the artists.

        For $500 you can set yourself up to make a few thousand cd's daily, ad in a website and an account at UPS or the post office, and mail away.

        The bands that take the time to sign cd's before stuffing the cd into an envelope generally have a much more loyal following, who will pay more for music they perceive to be good.

        the Music industry model is outdated. Mus
    • by sm62704 ( 957197 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:48AM (#21820794) Journal
      ...with the occasional landslide. A bit like the glaciers melting.

      Global warming is killing the RIAA? Yay global warming!

      if there was a "deadhorse" mod option I'd be modded into oblivion

      Naw, this is slashdot. +5, dead horse

      But what about those people who don't have the net?

      The only one I know not on the internet is my 76 year old dad, and he hasn't been a music fan since they stopped playing Willie Nelson on the radio. You might as well ask "what about those people who don't have radios".
    • "So what the MI needs to find, and soon, is some other revenue stream."

      I hear Mickie D's is hiring burger flippers...
    • So what the MI needs to find, and soon, is some other revenue stream. Personally, I could well see them turn from distributors to marketing assistants

      It's pretty clear that the useful members of the Recording Industry will wind up just fine when it all shakes out. Solid PR and Marketing people will remain, as will talented engineers and producers. Regardless of how music is created or distributed - people will pay money to make sure it sounds as good as it can, and to get the word out.

      The only people at r

  • by petes_PoV ( 912422 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:28AM (#21820470)
    In the "old days" it was necessary to provide recording studios, press plastic records, bribe DJs, buy good reviews and coerce musicians into making records to order.
    Nowadays, most of those functions can be bought-in by the artist themselves. Record companies are now recognised as a barrier rather than the "necessary evil" they once were.

    If their demise means more poeple start producing music, themselves, then good luck. As always, some will suceed and some will fail. However the failures will only fail because of their own shortcomings, rather than industry politics, greed, marketing and (lack of) promotion.

    If there's anything us normal people can do to help bury the record companies, just let us know

    • by jdickey ( 1035778 ) <jdickey@@@seven-sigma...com> on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:32AM (#21820730) Homepage
      It's not simple, but it's straightforward.
      1. SUPPORT LOCAL MUSIC. Go to concerts/pubs/etc., buy self-produced CDs.
      2. Buy from non-label-affiliated, artist-friendly Web sites, not fronted by megacorps. Google is your friend here, even if you're not buying from them.
      3. When permitted by the artist or by "fair use" in your jurisdiction, share samples with friends or play a few tracks you're partial to for them. Word of mouth has been the greatest aid to supporting musicians since music was invented.
      4. Write to your local radio station (in the US, undoubtedly ClearChannel, alas), as well as to their advertisers. Tell them that you support independent music, and won't be buying overpriced Big Label CDs any more. ClearChannel might not notice, but chances are much better that your local grocery chain or even some non-music-industry large advertisers *will* make adjustments if they've got a couple of thousand unique letters and emails coming in every week.
      5. Listen to and support independent Internet radio stations. Their costs are going up way beyond orbital, thanks to the megacorps and the Bush-league "Copyright Royalty Board". While you're at it,

      Yes, it means we, the fans (customers), have to put in some effort. We're going to have to break old buying habits, and actually pay attention. That's the price of living in a world where you're a customer, not just a consumer. Remember the famous quote by Jerry Michalski: a consumer is "a gullet whose only purpose in life is to gulp products and crap cash." We can do better than that. If we're going to move beyond being told what to listen to, what to think, by the megacorps, we HAVE to do better than that. visit http://www.savenetradio.org/ [savenetradio.org] and stay informed. Fellow Americans, write (not email) your Senators and Congressperson to remind them that you care about this - and when they vote for bills like the Internet Radio Equality Act, write them thank-you notes. Congressional staff *notice* when a few hundred (or thousand) non-fill-in-the-blank letters come in on an issue... that's votes talking.

      Remember, the megacorps are counting on the likelihood that you won't do anything, that you'll just continue to "crap cash" on schedule - THEIR schedule. They're counting on the "I'm too busy" or "I'm only one person" naysayers to tamp down enthusiasm, and let them carry the day.

      You are personally, individually, solely responsible for the world around you. If you don't like the way things are being done, get involved. This is one relatively easy, open, effective way to start.
      • Actually a score will usually do it. I previously ran interactive for the People's Choice Awards. It's not the Oscars, but the audience still numbers in the millions. We got no more than a couple hundred emails from the fans who voted on the award winners. The number of people who actually write in to any "authority" on any given subject is rather small. So you don't need thousands to influence the "authority."

        We did modify what we were doing if a score or more indicated a trend. In one or two cases,
      • SUPPORT LOCAL MUSIC. Go to concerts/pubs/etc.

        One thing that absolutely sucks about this concept is that if you are not into getting wasted drunk, these places are not as fun.

        I used to like to get wasted drunk, and there are other (currently illegal) things that would be less harmful to my body and society as a whole, but they are not allowed in most every local music establishment in the US.

        Local music will boom once MJ and other drugs are legal again.

      • by OakDragon ( 885217 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @03:50PM (#21823560) Journal

        Go to concerts/pubs/etc

        Is this off the root directory?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Opportunist ( 166417 )
      Not quite.

      Now, the MI isn't stupid and has long realized that the need for expensive studios and their distribution isn't really the big selling point anymore. So their other angle is it: "With us, you get to number 1".

      And face it, that's how it is. No artist on this planet has the necessary ties to radio, TV, music newspapers and magazines. No artist could possibly create the hype.

      That music quality plays no role anymore can easily be seen in the charts. Take a look at whatever random moment you want to an
      • by Sique ( 173459 )
        But how is this situation different from say the age of the tea house music or the Vienna Waltz or the 20ies Musicals? 95% of everything is crap. You just notice it today for today's music, because yesterday's crap music is already forgotten.

        I remember in the 80ies a host on a local radio station saying: "Today you can become a sing star with a voice which would cause you to fail the ballett casting." And he was probably quoting a radio host from the 60ies who in turn had it from a prewar conferencier.
    • by Jason Levine ( 196982 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:45AM (#21820782) Homepage

      In the "old days" it was necessary to provide recording studios, press plastic records, bribe DJs, buy good reviews and coerce musicians into making records to order.
      Nowadays, most of those functions can be bought-in by the artist themselves. Record companies are now recognised as a barrier rather than the "necessary evil" they once were.


      I almost completely agree. I think that the big record companies as they are now are unnecessary. However, I don't think we'll see record companies go away completely. Instead, they'll change into part-record company/part-ad agency. An artist will sign with Record Company X to promote their new music. The record company will be able to recommend places to record, etc, but the artist won't be contractually bound to use those services. (At most, the record company might get a kickback under the table for promoting those services.) The record company also won't take ownership of the copyright on the music. What the record company will do mainly is promotion. They will arrange for the radio airplay. They will get articles in magazines about the band. They will arrange for the band to play on the hip new TV sitcom. Whatever it takes to get the band's name and music out there, the record company will do. And if the band doesn't like how the record company is handling promotions, they can dump them and sign up with a new record company. (Similar to how any company can dump their ad agency and go with another one.)
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Luscious868 ( 679143 )

      Oh please. I laugh out loud whenever I hear this assertion. Please list all of the musicians and bands who've made it big without the assistance of one the studios at some point in their career. Compare that to the ones who did. That's what I thought.

      Even with all of the technological breakthroughs, if you really want to make it big in the music industry you still need the studios to promote the hell out of you because there so many other companies and businesses out there today actively vying for your at

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ajdecon ( 233641 )
        Which matters if the end goal of the artist is to "make it big", in the sense of a nationwide presence and the top of the charts. But a lot of the musicians I know or encounter have a different goal: "do well enough to quit the day job." Which many of them have managed, through a combination of paying gigs, CD sales online and at those gigs, and free or cheap song downloads.

        You have always needed a label to be a "big star", but it's only recently that you could actually make a living on your own, and that
      • by SETIGuy ( 33768 )

        Oh please. I laugh out loud whenever I hear this assertion. Please list all of the musicians and bands who've made it big without the assistance of one the studios at some point in their career. Compare that to the ones who did. That's what I thought.

        You are assuming that it's important for musicians and bands to "make it big" which further leads to the assumption that there is something rare or unusual in the amount of talent that most "big" artists have.

        The counter argument would be that musical talent is far more common than you think and that people's entertainment needs could easily be served by artists that haven't "made it big."

        Somehow humanity survived for thousands of years without a steady stream of music superstars whose products were

    • In the "old days" it was necessary to provide recording studios, press plastic records, bribe DJs, buy good reviews and coerce musicians into making records to order.
      Nowadays, most of those functions can be bought-in by the artist themselves.


      This is an incredibly naive attitude that I see gaining in popularity lately. It's no different than saying "in the old days, you needed to buy a computer from a major manufacturer. Nowadays, you can build one yourself."

      Sure, maybe you can, but the vast majority of pe
  • Good riddance... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by skarekrough43 ( 862746 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:44AM (#21820526)
    Either you learn to evolve and thrive or you die naked cold and alone.

    They've resisted the changes because the money's so good. Even when it's still as bad as they claim it to be, there's still a lot of execs and Producers and underlings driving BMW's.

    It's no longer the 70's and they can't sit in the back room snorting blow and not expect everything outside of their little party to have changed.

    They should have backed iTunes more vigirously instead of having to be hauled into the 21st century like a 2-year old that doesn't want to go to bed. They should have backed a DRMless format. They should have coupled with a tech source to make the benefits of an offering where the DRM would be acceptable to the listener. The should have comprehended that the entertainment dollar is now split between them and video games and the internet and everything else.

    • by LilGuy ( 150110 )

      It's no longer the 70's and they can't sit in the back room snorting blow and not expect everything outside of their little party to have changed.

      I don't see why not. Laws are changed every day by lobbying Congress to change the rules to favor business over the people. This is will end up another case of more of the same. Congress will come around and enact new legislation to prop this industry up just like so many others.

  • would be sad.
  • by superwiz ( 655733 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @08:53AM (#21820578) Journal
    Ok, I make my fair share of spelling errors in my posts, too. But shouldn't the editors... ummm edit?

  • Not only are (many) consumers circumventing the record companies, the artists are also. It is an almost trivial matter now to self-publish your own material. If your stuff is good, you'll get the buzz, and that will take care of the marketing on it's own. What else does an artist need from a label that they can't do on their own?

    Notice that more and more bands are stepping away from the big-name labels? Because they are becoming increasingly irrelevant, perhaps?

    That may be part of the reason Jay-Z decided t
  • by downix ( 84795 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:18AM (#21820684) Homepage
    If, in '98, the recording industry had worked with pioneers such as Napster, rather than trying to close pandoras box after everything had fled, this would be a very different story. Rather than utilizing the internet for promotion and a sales channel, using the net to drive forward disk sales and band tours, they opted to try and hammer it down. Fear of the unknown, and fear of lack of control remains their sole cause for this. I'd pity them, and their eventual extinction. It is evolve or die time, for the RIAA and soon the MPAA, and neither one looks willing to accept the evolution, baby.
  • It's funny (Score:4, Interesting)

    by uxbn_kuribo ( 1146975 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:45AM (#21820776)
    Some of the stuff in the article had nothing to do with piracy, even though that's the implication: * Kelly Clarkson's album was BAD. Terrible. * Jordin Sparks is NOT talented. * Radiohead ignores the fact that one would imagine that even if their album sucks, alot of people would still get it for free. People have a higher tolerance of crap when it's free. * Island Def Jam's layoffs are likely a result of the slower economy. The record execs are one of the last groups that still piss money away on excess. * How did the Madonna deal have anything to do with music? Does she even sing anymore? * Yeah, gg music dude. "The music industry has no technologists." It's only been 8 years now, you might wanna consider that. That's like saying you company doesn't believe in telephones, or thinks that taking pictures of the artists will steal their souls. In fact, the entire music industry needs to get with the times. * Nine Inch Nails is still around? Huh. Music has stagnated, the fanbase has risen against that crap that they shove down our throats. It's funny, because country music is bigger than it's been in years--- the genre has evolved where teeny-bopper pop and "rock" music have failed to do so.
    • People have a higher tolerance of crap when it's free.
      Hmmmm. I still can't tolerate the Plain White T's cd my son bought me for Christmas.
  • And we care because? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @09:54AM (#21820826)
    Who cares what MTV thinks, thanks to themselves they have long ceased to be relevant. These are the people who deluded themselves into thinking they can define the trends and along with the music industry inflated their egos on short sighted thinking. Now they are struggling to be relevant. The net has changed the game, MTV and other music channels can no longer create talentless and manufactured hits. I guess thats good for music.
    • Who cares what MTV thinks, thanks to themselves they have long ceased to be relevant to anyone with more than a 15-second attention span.
      There, fixed that for ya.
  • TV? (Score:3, Funny)

    by slapout ( 93640 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:10AM (#21820902)
    Remind me again...what does MTV have to do with music?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Mex ( 191941 )
      They've been trying to kill it since 1980, so I suppose this article is just a progress report.
  • MTV: 2007 Borked the Music Industry
    I think it was supposed to say: MTV: 2007 Borged the Music Industry.

    "We are the RIAA. Lower your lawyers, and surrender your lawsuits. You will be assimilated. Your wealth and intellectual property will be added to our own. Resistance is futile!"
  • MTV's underlying premise is that the music industry's success is measured by how much money it makes. If music isn't making money, then it's "broken". I think this attitude is a large part of why the record industry is losing so much business.
  • bad music? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by xRelisH ( 647464 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:17AM (#21820932)
    Maybe it's just bad music in general? With wonderful hits from "Soulja Boy" and other songs like "Hey Bay bay" with such diverse lyrical content, is it a surprise that the music industry in the US at least is taking a downturn?
    • Somebody is buying this crap though. Ahhhh, the joys of capitalism.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Kelbear ( 870538 )
      Heh, actually "Soulja Boy" is exactly the product that most of the people here on slashdot are advocating.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soulja_Boy [wikipedia.org]

      He recorded his song and posted it on the web, got popular with people, published independently, and was only picked up by a major label after he'd already established himself on his own.

      I concur, I hate the song too, but it's not a viable example of how the music industry pops out bad music, it's an example people liking music that I hate.
  • Is it just coincidence that 2007 was also the year that "Crank That (Soulja Boy)" was a huge hit? Maybe it's fun to dance to, but it's also the most musically and grammatically illiterate tune I think I've ever heard. It makes Salt N Pepa's "Push It" sound like a Mozart opera in comparison.
    • Music across all genres was better 15 years ago, just like your Salt N Peppa analogy proves! Seriously, check it out for yourselves. Write down all the genres you can think of, and they were ALL beter in 1990. Send me a list and I'll provide examples. I can't even stand rap or hip hop, but in comparison, that late 80s stuff was pretty damned good. But then again, that late 80s stuff actually had music laid down in the tracks.
  • by FauxReal ( 653820 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @10:55AM (#21821156)
    I find it strange coming from the company that originally built itself on new and interesting music. Who later killed off Yo! MTV Raps & Headbangers Ball, Barely reports any music news, turned it's main station into Reality TV Central, shuffled all it's music to MTV2 and then started cutting videos from there as well, ignores most independent artists and panders to crass commercialism & manufactured pop-music giants. Seriously... maybe they had a small role in killing music buy changing it from an artform to a cheap plastic commodity.
  • piracy had nothing to do with the nose-dive experienced by CD sales.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      It's funny too.. In 2007 I bought more CDs than ever since leaving college. This year I bought about 25 different CDs. The only difference is that none were big names from any major labels. I bought from CDBaby, from sales at concerts and events, from music links to independent sites.. Any mainstream/established artists I picked up from iTunes... E.g., Dylan, U2, Linkin' Park (yeah yeah, it was a moment of weakness)...

      So maybe the big labels declined, but my guess is that the smaller houses are growing...
      • I guess your singular experience shows that sales of pop music cannot possibly be due to piracy?
        • well. yes.. Though I may dream otherwise, I've come to the conclusion that I'm horribly average in my tastes and lifestyle. I'm depressingly representative of the masses. Yes, like millions of other people, I may think that I'm edgy, a rebel, a misfit, but in reality (and statistically) I'm just like everyone else. So when I say that I started to buy from independents, started to buy from local artists, there's little doubt in my mind that millions of other people are also doing the same thing.
          • You may very well be an average person on the whole, but your music tastes are not mainstream. Not unless your iPod has 50cent, Britney Spears and anything else they regularly play in MTV (when they play music).
            • I don't think so.. I think it's precisely because my musical tastes are *not* Britney Spears, 50Cent, etc.., that the major labels are declining. If I ask my co-workers and friends and family, none of them (except for the teenagers), listen to them. The labels may think they're serving up appropriate fodder that the masses will consume, but they're not.. They're targeting a demographic that has other interests at this point and almost neglecting the massive demographic that I am in.
              • >If I ask my co-workers and friends and family, none of them (except for the teenagers), listen to them

                But that was always the case. When have the music tastes of teenagers and ..err.. 'your demographic'.. aligned? Music profits, album sales, for the most part, have always been driven by young people (u-25).

                Anyway, I believe CD sales are down across the board, not just for pop.
    • by X.25 ( 255792 )
      piracy had nothing to do with the nose-dive experienced by CD sales.

      Even if it did, it was minor.

      I've stopped buying CDs ages ago. I'm not downloading music either.

      I basically, managed to buy most of the music I needed. I have no interest in what is being called 'music' these days.

      Sorry, but in the 80's and 90's, we had reason to buy music. It was actually good. These days, music (that is being pushed to us, or advertised) is mostly total shit.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by danielk1982 ( 868580 )
        >Even if it did, it was minor.

        I don't think so. Pop music was always driven by the under-25 demographic, which also happens to be the most price-conscious. It makes sense that when a relatively risk and price free method of gaining music became available, this demographic would jump on that to the detriment of CD sales.

        >I've stopped buying CDs ages ago. I'm not downloading music either.

        You told me your singular (irrelevant) experience, so I'll tell you mine. Out of all my friend's kids, not one asks f
  • Record company quote from TFA.

    There's no one in the record company that's a technologist. ... It's like if you were suddenly asked to operate on your dog to remove his kidney. What would you do?

    I'd probably hire a veterinarian.

    Seriously, they couldn't afford some "technologist" consultants? My high school band director (who probably makes less in one year than the average record exec makes in a week) was telling us about digital downloads in 1992. We all thought he was nuts. I mean, it would take days to download a single WAV file from a BBS at 14.4k...

  • Problem is greed. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Wednesday December 26, 2007 @12:08PM (#21821580)
    There is still a lot of money to be made.
    But they have made the "official" channels very painful in their lust for the last dime of profit.

    For example, this morning during my 25 minute drive to work, one of the radio stations never had a song on. I kept switching to it because I like the style of music but never got a song. They wanted money so much that I ended up not listening to any adds for more than the 3 seconds to determine.. yup.. still no songs. If I could count on 30 seconds of ads and then another good song- I might actually stay through the ad. but once the ads start, I know it will be a few minutes so I skip on over to other radio stations.

    Same thing for TV. We've gone from 8 minutes of ads to 20 minutes (some times 22 minutes) of ads per hour. And we can skip the ads by touching a button. They have to be insane to think we are watching the ads. Sell fewer ads for more money. Have shorter ad blocks so we won't leave.

    The music industry has a great potential for a lot of people to make six figure salaries. But that's not good enough for them. So they keep pushing until it becomes so unpleasant that we go elsewhere.

    I can easily spend an evening on YouTube or watching DVD's (Mission impossible season 2 for christmas so another 20 hours there without commercials).

    If they are the most expensive entertainment possibility, they are the most likely to be cut.
    • I am surprised the Public radio model has not caught on more widespread throughout the country. Here in Minnesota, Minnesota Public Radio has a great contemporary music station that doesn't have any commercials and plays a huge variety of music. They play a lot of local music, and have a lot of in studio performances. It really is a music lovers station and plays a really great mix. I don't by any means like every song that they play, but music is always better than listening to a commercial and it keep
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by jweller ( 926629 )

      this morning during my 25 minute drive to work, one of the radio stations never had a song on. I kept switching to it because I like the style of music but never got a song. They wanted money so much that I ended up not listening to any adds for more than the 3 seconds to determine.. yup.. still no songs. If I could count on 30 seconds of ads and then another good song- I might actually stay through the ad. but once the ads start, I know it will be a few minutes so I skip on over to other radio stations.

      That absolutely drives me nuts. There must be an unwritten rule that in the morning, people want to hear a room full of DJs tell dick jokes and make small talk about whatever was on TV last night. No music, or maybe 1 crappy song in between a fart soundtrack and a phone interview with a celebrity promoting there latest piece of shit TV/movie/album/book/diet/etc. Call it the Howard Stern effect if you will.

  • didn't real world kill the video star?

    MTV hasn't played music in well over a decade.

    If anyone killed the music industry, it's MTV.

What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey

Working...