How commercial radio really works...

🤖 AI Summary

No AI summary has been generated for this thread yet.
F

FLClubKidd

New member
Joined
Apr 5, 2002
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This was posted on another music website...the author asked that it get posted to as many music sites as possible to raise awareness of why radio plays the music it plays.

Years ago, labels would pay DJ's (under the table) fees to get their artists played...this was called "Payola". In the early 1990s, a law was passed to stop this. With that came the birth of Independant Record Promotion or "Indies"...they became the middle men. The Indies would represent certain labels and have deals with the stations, when a station picks up a song the Indie gave them, the indie gets paid from the label. So the label is not directly paying off the DJs, it's legal. This is why you will hear Kylie Minogue 400 times a day but will never hear a freestyle artits' new song on the air.

Here's a link to the story..it's 4 pages long but details exactly how the business works. Check it out and spread it wherever you can...we've gotta stop these men in Armani suits telling us what to listen to!!! BTW: KTU's owner "Clear Channel Communications" is mentioned....the owners of our Florida dance station is "Cox Communications". If there's a commercial radio station anywhere out there, chances are one of these two companies owns them!!!!

Here's the story:
http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/03/14/payola/index.html
 
Just The Facts...

Get your facts straight before you start to teach.

Nothing is worse than students being misinformed by misinformed teachers. That's the problem with today's education system.

Payola has been illegal for decades (like a lot longer than the 1990s.) And so has the "independant promoter" system.

In fact, the first law against payola was passed by Congress in 1960.

In the article, the author, Eric Boehlert states,
"In the 1990s, however, Washington moved steadily to deregulate the radio industry."
Click to expand...

Boehlert actually goes onto say,
"The secretive, and at times unseemly, indie system has been in place for decades. Rock radio pioneer Alan Freed was convicted in 1960 for accepting bribes in exchange for playing records. (What became known as the payola laws were passed as a response soon afterward.)"
Click to expand...

Next time read an article all the way through more than once, if you are going to discuss it. Make notes and highlight the points you want to address.

By the way, if you really want to know more about the seedy history of the music business, you should read the book Hit Men that he talks about. It is an awesome book. I am actually rereading for the third time.
 
So my dates were wrong...does that mean that the article is void and worthless? You're harping on the most meaningless part of the entire article..the dates. I agree, it should be read more than once and I apologize for having my dates screwed up....but seriously, get yourself a laxative before you explode!:shakinboo
 
Here's a recent article following the topic. I still liked the ABC report done not that long ago that reported it took between $150 - $300,000 to break a single nationwide. The WSJ as well as other publications have all covered this.

Music Industry Seeks Payola Probe

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/23/radio.payola.reut/index.html

LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) -- The recording industry from artists to major labels joined Thursday in a rare show of unity to demand tougher laws barring what they called "payola"-like promotion of music played on the radio.

They also called for a sweeping government review of radio industry consolidation.

Deregulation of the radio business and rampant practices that skirt 40-year-old anti-payola laws stifle competition, drive up music promotional costs and make it harder for new artists to gain attention, the artists and record labels said in a joint statement addressed to the federal regulators and Congress.

The statement was endorsed by a broad coalition of trade groups, led by the powerful Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which represents major music companies, along with several talent unions and the Grammy-sponsoring National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences.

But a spokeswoman for the nation's biggest radio station group, Clear Channel Communications Inc., which was singled out for criticism in the letter, dismissed the RIAA's complaints as "absurd." She insisted that decisions about airplay are driven strictly by research showing what the public wants to hear.

Federal law bars radio stations from accepting payments in exchange for playing particular songs on the airwaves -- a practice known as "payola" -- unless that information is disclosed to listeners.

Allegations of 'de facto payola

But the music industry coalition says the law is widely circumvented by broadcasters and independent radio promoters through business practices that "we consider a de facto form of payola." Artists, in particular, are hurt because under most recording contracts, promotional costs come out of their royalties, said Michael Bracy of the Future of Music Coalition.

In essence, payments are funneled indirectly to broadcasters from music labels through independent promoters, who ostensibly pay for advance playlist information provided by station groups but use their influence to get certain songs on the air, the coalition said.

"There is widespread concern in the music community about access to the public airwaves and the way independent promotion has evolved," RIAA spokeswoman Amy Weiss told Reuters.

"It's been 40 years since the government has enacted payola laws to address this practice, and it seems appropriate for the government to take a fresh look at this issue."

The groups also criticized broadcasting giants, such as industry leader Clear Channel, which owns 1,225 stations nationwide, for flexing their "sheer market power" in ways that can "make or break a hit song."

Since the radio industry was deregulated by Congress in 1996, Clear Channel and three other large station groups now account for 63 percent of the 41 million listeners who tune into "contemporary hit radio," or Top 40, program formats, the letter said. As a result, decisions about what songs get airplay have become increasingly centralized, it said.

But Clear Channel spokeswoman Pam Taylor said airplay is based solely on research into listeners' musical tastes, and that research is what the labels, through independent promoters, are paying for.

No tie between dollars and airplay?

"There is no relationship between dollars and airplay," Taylor said. "In the end, what matters is whether or not our programming works and we have listeners, and our advertisers, therefore, want to pay to be on the station."

She said the independent promotion business bemoaned by the labels is a product of the music industry, not broadcasters.

"It is blatantly absurd that they attempt to hold the radio industry accountable for the creation or execution of business practices that they control," Taylor said. "The money comes from them."

She also disputed the notion broadcasting consolidation has homogenized radio, saying cross-ownership often has led to a more diverse array of formats in a single market.

And she denied as "unequivocally false" assertions by the music industry that big, vertically integrated companies like Clear Channel, which own concert promotion businesses as well as radio stations, refuse to give airplay to artists whose tours are promoted by rivals.
 
Originally posted by FLClubKidd:
does that mean that the article is void and worthless?
Click to expand...
I said the subject was an important one, didn't I?

I also suggested you read the book yourself if you wanted more info.

I just hate when Johhny O's-come-lateley like yourself act like they were the first ones to discover electricity every time they read someting new.

Originally posted by FLClubKidd:
get yourself a laxative before you explode!
Click to expand...

Kidd, I got chunks in my stool bigger than you.

Now go back to the Club.
 
Orgntr1

My original post was never talking trash to him, it was steering the Kidd to direct knowledge.
 
Originally posted by Orgntr1:
Are you one of those Phucking men Armani suits or someshit to be picking on him like that?
Click to expand...

Are you missing a couple verbs in your sentance structure?

I know home schooling must have been tough in New Jersey, and I am sure things have not improved much since moving to North Carolina.
 
Orgntr1

And finally Orgntr1, you are a Club Freestyle moderator:

Shouldn't you be setting a good example for all members by not cursing in your posts and not provoking others...
 
Jason@atomic I don't like you attitute toward
people who are trying to give us information.

We spoke about this in the past.
I dont like to talk twice.

You want to hang here - you want to read our service.
No prob - thats why we created it & make it happen every day.

BUT if you want to come here and flex your "Big Knowledge"
in a way that makes others looks bad.. Then you will have a problem
with most of us. First one being me.

Look at Rhoq - he flexes Big Knowledge - but he wont disrespect
someone who 'dident know.'

FLClubKidd thanks for posting.
 
please read it again

Jack G

I suggest you reread my first post in response to FLClubKidd's thread.

It is not my fault that he could not take constructive criticism.

He lashed out as a result of my post. He took the offensive.

He was the antagonist.

Again, it is not my fault that he could not take constructive criticism. And that is what it was meant as... Constructive. I gave him valuable insight and advice.

He took it the wrong way, as did probably most that read it.

A lot of people don't like to be corrected publicly and he lashed out.

I merely took the defensive angle. And I am just better at retaliation.

But, there is no need to single me out when it comes to “attitudes” on this board.

You know, as well as I do, that a lot worse happens here, all too often.

PS – Jack: When you said, “dident know”, I am assuming you meant didn’t – the contraction of the words did not? Any way that’s not important.
 
Sorry seems to be the hardest word

FLClubKidd:

I want to publicly take this opportunity to apologize to you.

Instead of knocking you down, I should have helped raise you up, for others to hear you louder

You are one of the few here that does pursue knowledge, and when he finds it, goes out of his way to share it.

I am sorry that I resorted to such juvenile behavior.

And you were correct, I was being petty about the dates, but as I previously said:

Originally posted by me:

Nothing is worse than students being misinformed by misinformed teachers. That's the problem with today's education system.
Click to expand...

But please don’t take away the negative from this experience.

Learn from it. Learn from my mistakes.
And never stop your thirst for knowledge.
And please, never, ever stop wanting to share that knowledge.

P.S. Read the book Hit Men. Like I said before it is awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top