Payola 2

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Kurt Albershardt <kurt@nv.net> wrote:
>
> "This is not a pretty picture; what we see is that payola is
>pervasive," Mr. Spitzer said, using a term from the radio scandals of
>the 1950's in describing e-mail messages and corporate documents that
>his office obtained during a yearlong investigation. "It is
>omnipresent. It is driving the industry and it is wrong."

If payola is so prominent, why do labels have such a terrible time getting
new music out on the air?

I miss payola. Payola really helped to get program directors to take
risks on new material that they otherwise would never have touched.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Kurt Albershardt <kurt@nv.net> wrote:
>
>> "This is not a pretty picture; what we see is that payola is
>>pervasive," Mr. Spitzer said, using a term from the radio scandals of
>>the 1950's in describing e-mail messages and corporate documents that
>>his office obtained during a yearlong investigation. "It is
>>omnipresent. It is driving the industry and it is wrong."
>
>
> If payola is so prominent, why do labels have such a terrible time getting
> new music out on the air?
>
> I miss payola. Payola really helped to get program directors to take
> risks on new material that they otherwise would never have touched.
> --scott
>

In the old days, payola was employed by the lesser knowns when the larger companies had the talent
and didn't need to pay stations to play their stuff.

Now it is reversed, the lesser knowns cannot compete with the Big Four and the money/gifts they
throw around to get their stuff played over and above the lesser knowns, aka independent and smaller
labels. The Big Four know the stuff they're hawking is of questionable quality, but the "need" of
the bottom line of their behemoth conglomerate mother fuels the impetus to coerce stations to
feature their material.

If the Big Four would just get the clue and go into the clubs around the world and hear what people
are actually listening to, the musical landscape would be much different -- and cost a whole lot
less in development fees (currently around $3 million USD) to bring a band/artist up and put them
before the audience (you and me).

That is why they buy up smaller labels in a cyclical fashion every ten years or so, so they won't
have to do this kind of work. They let the independents find the people then buy them out, not
always a cheap solution.

The fact that they have to pay program directors to play their material should be an indication to
these Big Fish that what they think the people want to hear is not a reflection of the truth of the
matter.

But, it is also fair to say that as long as there are bands/artists who are willing to compromise
artistic integrity (assuming they have any to begin with) for the sake of fame and
popularity/airplay and touring (and perhaps even a fortune if they're smart), we will be stuck with
the reality of rather bad music pouring out of our radios and blaring at us when we go into the
record store looking for something with substance, meaning and longer lasting appeal than one play
on our platters.

--fletch

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Why would payola be a problem? It's silly to worry about under the current
FCC environment.... guess they will just have to buy up all the radio
stations so they can get their CD's airtime... Why would you expect them to
pick music based on it's artistic merit.... Clear Channel obviously picks
based on the politics of the music and musicians.

Rgds:
Eric

"Kurt Albershardt" <kurt@nv.net> wrote in message
news:3kn3shFtqmctU1@individual.net...
> Payola 2: Why it matters
> <http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2005/07/payola_2.html>
>
>
> What is the significance of the Payola settlement? Why was this even a
> legal matter? There are 3 keys to this event:
>
> 1) Federal law prohibits broadcasters from accepting secret
> payments or anything of "substantial value" in exchange for airplay of
> a specific song; (I'm not sure about airplay of a specific artists).
> Its clear the broadcasters violated that law;
>
> 2) Broadcasters are granted a license to use the public airwaves
> -- there are specific standards they must maintain, in order to
> maintain that license and keep that privilege (and it is a privilege,
> not a property right). Anything fraudulent, misrepresentative (even a
> failure to disclose) violates FCC governing practices and standards, as
> well as legislation. Again, a clear violation;
>
> 3) The FCC is the primary agency charged with regulating this,
> but like so many other Federal regulatory agencies, they have been
> asleep at the switch. This is a political issue;
>
> This is not like, as has been suggested, supermarkets selling shelf
> space to food companies, or Barnes & Noble selling book racks to
> publishers. That's because the supermarkets and B&N's owns their own
> shelves; They are private property, free to be used as their owners see
> fit.
>
> The airwaves, on the other and, are the publics'; Broadcasters are
> merely given a license to use them for the benefit of the public. If
> they can make a buck doing so, that's all the better -- but do not
> think that ClearChannel or Infinity or any other broadcaster over the
> public airwaves has a specific right to dispose of the public's
> property at their own discretion.
>
> Here's a few select quotes from the settlement announcement:
>
>
> "This is not a pretty picture; what we see is that payola is
> pervasive," Mr. Spitzer said, using a term from the radio scandals of
> the 1950's in describing e-mail messages and corporate documents that
> his office obtained during a yearlong investigation. "It is
> omnipresent. It is driving the industry and it is wrong."
>
> The Attorney General's findings alleges that the illegal payoffs for
> airplay were designed to manipulate record charts, generate consumer
> interest in records and increase sales:
>
> "Instead of airing music based on the quality, artistic
> competition, aesthetic judgments or other judgments, radio stations are
> airing music because they are paid to do so in a way that hasn't been
> disclosed to the public," Spitzer said at a press briefing.
>
>
> The Washington Post noted:
>
> "With the recording-industry settlement, Spitzer has again
> uncovered widespread wrongdoing in an industry primarily regulated by a
> federal agency, in this case the FCC. Previous Spitzer investigations
> into misleading stock research in the brokerage industry and abuses in
> the mutual fund industry were widely seen as an embarrassment to the
> Securities and Exchange Commission, Wall Street's primary regulator."
>
> The FCC should be similarly embarrassed . . .
>
>
>
> Sources:
> SONY SETTLES PAYOLA INVESTIGATION
> <http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/jul/jul25a_05.html>
>
>
> Office of NYS Attorney General Eliot Spitzer
> July 25, 2005
> <http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/jul/jul25a_05.html>
>
> Evidence: Internal Industry Pay-for-Play Memos
> <http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/jul/payola2.pdf>
>
> Discontinuance Order
> <http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/jul/payola.pdf>
>
>
> Radio Payoffs Are Described as Sony Settles
> JEFF LEEDS and LOUISE STORY
> NYT, July 26, 2005
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/26/business/26music.html>
>
> Sony BMG Settles Radio Payola Probe
>
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR200507250
1624.html>
>
> Firm to Pay $10 Million to End Role in Spitzer's Ongoing Inquiry
> Dean Starkman
> Washington Post, Tuesday, July 26, 2005; Page D03
>
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/25/AR200507250
1624.html>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<psychodave.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:
>I appreciate Spitzer trying to do something about modern radio. I know
>some broadcast guys in my local market. I've asked them to do things
>as simple as identifying the artist before or after playing their music
>(like the old days). They just look at me like a dinosaur.
>
>Moreover, I hate going to the CD shop and humming a few bars to a clerk
>with purple hair. "Like, have you heard this one man"? Again, the
>dinosaur look.

This is the best argument for RDS that I have heard yet.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <dc6des$t0v$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com writes:

> >Moreover, I hate going to the CD shop and humming a few bars to a clerk
> >with purple hair. "Like, have you heard this one man"? Again, the
> >dinosaur look.
>
> This is the best argument for RDS that I have heard yet.

Yeah, but I don't want to be on the road with a driver who's trying to
read the display on his car radio and then writing down the title of
the song and name of the artist.

The good thing about payola is that the song gets played so often and
is always announced, so the BUY ME information is permanently etched
into your brain.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:14:23 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote
(in article <znr1122396348k@trad> ):

>
> In article <3kn3shFtqmctU1@individual.net> kurt@nv.net writes:
>
>> "Instead of airing music based on the quality, artistic
>> competition, aesthetic judgments or other judgments, radio stations are
>> airing music because they are paid to do so in a way that hasn't been
>> disclosed to the public," Spitzer said at a press briefing.
>
> Most of the radio stations that I listen to play music by who's coming
> to town. There's always a mention of the club or concert venue. I
> suspect that the "payola" here is coming from the club rather than the
> record company since mostly they're small artists not on major labels.
> But for major label artists, club appearances and their promotion are
> often substidized by the label.

Then there's companies like clear channel who won the radio station and the
venues. Do they own any record companies yet?

Ty Ford




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com