Recently Emily White, an intern at NPR All Songs Considered and GM of what appears to be her college radio station, wrote a post on the NPR blog in which she acknowledged that while she had 11,000 songs in her music library, she’s only paid for 15 CDs in her life. Our intention is not to embarrass or shame her. We believe young people like Emily White who are fully engaged in the music scene are the artist’s biggest allies. We also believe–for reasons we’ll get into–that she has been been badly misinformed by the Free Culture movement. We only ask the opportunity to present a countervailing viewpoint.

A great read!

--------------------
I'm All Ears.

Yeah I like this guy. He's certainly thorough, but he's a compelling writer.

I think the next thing to happen will be when Kindles etc start really taking hold. Its happening already, I see them on the bus. When the more middle class writers start being cheated of this traditional way into a media lifestyle, they'll start to pipe up. And when thier blogs are full of 'I cant do this for nothing anymore' cries - musicians will say - 'where were you?'

Soon after thew film and t.v industry - music was the first since it was the easiest to compress and distribute.


The internet is nothing without content - personal details, or creative content. Thats all it really has to offer of any significance. That brings in advertising, the only real financial gain.

Youtube's like an online library of all music now. The other night I went to get a CD - and thought - hang on - is it on there?

How did that happen?

--------------------

Quote Chaconne:

---

Yeah I like this guy. He's certainly thorough, but he's a compelling writer.

I think the next thing to happen will be when Kindles etc start really taking hold. Its happening already, I see them on the bus. When the more middle class writers start being cheated of this traditional way into a media lifestyle, they'll start to pipe up. And when thier blogs are full of 'I cant do this for nothing anymore' cries - musicians will say - 'where were you?'

Soon after thew film and t.v industry - music was the first since it was the easiest to compress and distribute.


The internet is nothing without content - personal details, or creative content. Thats all it really has to offer of any significance. That brings in advertising, the only real financial gain.

Youtube's like an online library of all music now. The other night I went to get a CD - and thought - hang on - is it on there?

How did that happen?

---

Good post though I'd disagree about the last point. I think there's probably only around 10% of recorded music available on Youtube. If that.

--------------------
I'm All Ears.

Nice to see Stephen Street pop up in the comments.

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/richie-royale
http://www.mixcrate.com/richieroyale

Yes, a great read.

Andy

--------------------
When the going gets weird, the Weird turn Pro.

A very well written piece.

The only flaw is assuming that every track a person has on their iPod for 'free' they would actually have purchased had it not been available for free. If I see a stall offering free samples of a new food I might pick one up and try it even though it might not be something I'd otherwise bother with, whereas if they were charging for the sample I'd walk on by. The difference with music of course is that once you have it, you have a free feast forever or until you decide to delete.

Not disagreeing with the argument, just the maths. You'd really need to determine which music would have been purchased, and which wouldn't, before working out how much revenue has been lost.

--------------------

Just on that last comment from Glyn, isn't it more that he is saying "this is what you would have had to spend to legitimately have all that music" which is a slightly different (and better) argument to the one you said he raised?

Sorry that is a really cack-handed sentence reading it back.

--------------------
please make it all simple.

Quote GlynB:

---

You'd really need to determine which music would have been purchased, and which wouldn't, before working out how much revenue has been lost.

---

If you read the blog he is referring to, she admits to receiving loads of music from her boyfriend.

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/richie-royale
http://www.mixcrate.com/richieroyale

Quote GlynB:

---

A very well written piece.

The only flaw is assuming that every track a person has on their iPod for 'free' they would actually have purchased had it not been available for free. If I see a stall offering free samples of a new food I might pick one up and try it even though it might not be something I'd otherwise bother with, whereas if they were charging for the sample I'd walk on by. The difference with music of course is that once you have it, you have a free feast forever or until you decide to delete.

Not disagreeing with the argument, just the maths. You'd really need to determine which music would have been purchased, and which wouldn't, before working out how much revenue has been lost.

---

I'm glad I read your comment before reading the article,
because if they've made this utterly egregious schoolboy error, then they are probably either very dim, or deliberately being dishonest, and their article is probably a load of old balls.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

...and then I read it, and thought it was fairly well written (if a little verbose).

But we know all this already.

We need more pie-charts showing how much Google and Verizon and the rest make from every Lady Ga Ga file you steal. We also need more pies.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

The article is a very good read and the 'educate don't legislate' approach it advocates is highly civilized. Which is not to say that it could achieve its aim alone. The issue here is about achieving a cultural change across an entire generation. What is currently the 'young generation' has no conception that it is doing anything wrong. If you tell them that downloading content from 'free' sources that do not have the creator's permision to offer it they are stealing, which is a horrid abuse, they look at you as if you were mad. Yet changing the mindset of a generation can be done. For example, recently it was done in the UK for drinking and driving, discrimination and now, to a significant extent smoking. Yes, there are still drunk drivers, racists and smokers (I smoke). But their transgressions are no longer socially acceptable. Achieving those changes required various carrots and sticks, all being applied in concert over a number of years. Robust laws, applied with zero tolerance, certainly (and we still don't have those). But it was the way that society as a whole responded to those laws and the reasons for their being that changed the mindset. That needed respected prominent figures, artists and thought leaders to publicly back the reasoning. For the discrimination intolerance in particular. And it worked.

I don't buy this argument that "if it wasn't free then people wouldn't bother". Yes it is true to an extent but not to the extent some would have us believe. The proof is in the record buying habits of the previous generations. We DID spend money on buying music that we didn't necessarily know. I put my vinyl jazz collection together in the early 80s when it was relatively unfashionable, difficult to track down and hard to get good advice about what to listen to. Despite having little money to spend I bought a lot of records I didn't like very much whist searching for the ones I did. It was the only way I could find the music I craved. I didn't even keep the ones I didn't respond to but it never deterred me. 30 years later I still have the good stuff, which was mostly recorded before I was born and against which I still measure the quality of all other music. If people value something they will pay for it. If they are indifferent they don't deserve it.

So good essay. Commendable approach. No chance of being effective in isolation.

--------------------
Strictly project and just for fun

It is true that big money is ttp out of artists of all kinds and doing very nicely thank you. But i'd have to question whether much has really changed.

Back in the day very few musos ever made anything out of recorded music. Firstly, only a tiny proportion had a deal, so that left small runs for sale at gigs.

There seems to be this idea that because an independent artist can make professional quality product and find somewhere to sell it (the web), that they "should" sell it and if they don't there's something wrong. There seems to be this idea that "back in the day" everyone who picked up a guitar was skipping down Carnaby St with wads of large old fivers hanging out of their paisley or pinned jackets. It's bollocks. And there were no shortage of brilliant artists with mental issues taking ODs etc... It's nothing new, same as it ever was.

I rarely buy records, because to be blunt, the industy stopped seeling records. About the only place I can buy a record as an impulse purchase is in the five or six local charity shops. There's no main high street retailers, the supermarkets have the top 40 or whatever but I don't really wan't those.

It's true to say, and argue, that kids are happy to spend a fiver on a frothy coffee and some cake but not a CD But where can they buy this CD? Which btw are horrible little things imo but that's a bit beside the point.

You could argue that it's simple to buy online, and it is ish. But you have to bugger about and you have to give your card details and you can't pick it up and feel it. And I would argue that a record is not that type of product. I think that a record is an impulse buy and we wan't it "now" Like a coffee or a beer or a pizza.

People still love buying records. As i said there are five or six charity shops locally and there is always, without fail, at least one person flicking through the vinyls and CDs.

The problem as I see it is not that there's a part of town where looting is acceptable. It's that there are two shops, next door to each other; one shop sells bread for 50p a loaf and the shop next door gives it for free. And we are asking people to go into the 50p shop when they can walk ten feet and get it for free.

Our whole society is based around price and competition, save this and get one free for that etc... it's rammed down everyone's throats 24/7... we obsess people with the minutia of numbers every waking moment and then we ask that they pay for things that they can get for free?

Nah. If the business wants to sell records they have to start selling records again. At the moment they are trying to sell fresh air.

Good read.

Anyone with half an hour to kill, will probably find this one interesting too http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/meet-the-new-boss-worse-tha n-the-old-boss-full-post/ on the same site. Some well written bits on that blog.

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

I only own CDs that I have bought, I don't have any copies, and I have never downloaded anything without paying.

I don't think I am a raving nutcase.

Is it just me?

--------------------
Daniel Davis
Edinburgh Recording Studio Windmill Sound

Quote Daniel Davis:

---

I only own CDs that I have bought, I don't have any copies, and I have never downloaded anything without paying.

I don't think I am a raving nutcase.

Is it just me?

---

Surely there has been a scenario where a friend has approached you and said 'This artist is great, here's a CDR have a listen'? or similar.

So you say to them, 'No, give me the name of the artist and I will go online and download their material myself and pay for it' Really ? If you can say 'yes' to this scenario I'm afraid you're probably very rare! Everyone I know would just take the CDR and have a listen 'for free', later they might buy as a result, or not. I admire your integrity.

--------------------