You hear a lot of people talk about the slow demise of the recording industry, that digital music is killing CD sales, and that free music is destroying record labels. While this may be true, The record industry has been "dying," since day one. Even in the 20's at the height of record sales, the recording industry felt it was being threatened by the newly discovered radio. Yes the radio made music free to listen, but did it completely wipe out the industry? No. The recording industry got what it wanted a few lawsuits later. In 1999, the recording industry faced a big scare with the creation and diffusion of Napster, an online service that allows one to download and upload music for free. Yet again, a few lawsuits later the recording industry scared people into buying music again.
Today, many people still download music for free through illegal services, whether it be a file sharing service, or a torrent. But, is the industry really suffering, and do people really care? In Tim Worstall's article, "Did Napster, Torrents, File Sharing, Kill the Record Industry? Who Cares?," He answers just that.
The truth that Worstall points out is that the masses really have no concern for their effect on the recording industry. People want their music fast, easy, and cheap if not free. Consumers only care about what they're consuming and how they consume it. There is little regard for the producers of anything in any industry, but especially in media. What about the well being of business, their employers, their wages, or the value of the individual? Are loyal music lovers just inhumane, media junkies willing to trample over the recording industry?
Large music corporations have indeed struggled throughout history, but they always seem to come back despite the diminishing market for music. Worstall's article addresses a very valid issue. I agree that most mindless consumers care nothing about the producers of what they are consuming, but what about the other side? In the community of music lovers there are people out there willing to purchase music because they know they effect that each purchase can have. It is imperative to keep record labels and distributor companies afloat, and on top of that allow the local record stores to thrive in their communities. Worstall mentions Sony, and EMI, whom without the music industry would not be what it is today. However, the truth is that independent music lovers view these companies as corporate sell-outs only out for your money. Music lovers love the little guy. They love the small, personal record labels staying true to their roots. Worstall approaches this issue with a very business-like mindset. He writes as if it is the people's fault for the downfall of music. Even I know that in business the customer is never wrong.
My answer to this: Music needs to become more marketable. If the big companies want to survive they must meet the needs of their consumers, and use a more personal approach to how they market artists an labels.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/02/21/did-napster-torrents-file-sharing-kill-the-record-industry-who-cares/
What an interesting metaphor for ALL the media -- everyone wants news (and even books) cheap online. An independent bookstore I'm speaking at points out that independent bookstores return 58% of the money spent into the community; chains put in something like 20% into their community, and on-line retailers put exactly 0% into the local community. Wow. Your thought that the solution might be in how things are marketed is REALLY intriguing!!!
ReplyDelete