"Bon Jovi tells The Sunday Times Magazine, "Kids today have missed the whole experience of putting the headphones on, turning it up to 10, holding the jacket, closing their eyes and getting lost in an album; and the beauty of taking your allowance money and making a decision based on the jacket, not knowing what the record sounded like, and looking at a couple of still pictures and imagining it."
"God, it was a magical, magical time, I hate to sound like an old man now, but I am, and you mark my words, in a generation from now people are going to say: 'What happened?' Steve Jobs is personally responsible for killing the music business." http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=635420&affid=100055&silentchk=1&wa=wsignin1.0
I find this line of reasoning, while quaint, extremely self-serving. It's gotten a lot of publicity, far more than it deserves, but in reality, I find the message borderline dangerous.
The practice of bundling content together, and forcing consumers to buy bundles, takes the power AWAY from the content creators and AWAY from the consumers. The only people that benefit are big business.
The music industry has been a bubble. Just like the tech bubble and the real estate bubble, they have artificially inflated their worth by attempting to exercise complete control over all distribution models. This is why piracy is so scary for them, and they have been dragged, kicking and screaming, over to models that allow the consumer more freedom, and more choice.
When a consumer has disposable income that they want to spend on entertainment, the very act of forcing consumer to buy more expensive bundles increases risk. You never know what you're going to get. You might like one or two songs and hate the rest, but since the bundle is your only option, you have to fork up the cost for the entire thing.
It is because of this very risk that pop idols have made obscene amounts of money, but indie music creators have struggled to get by. The "old money" big wigs put all of their marketing effort into creating pop stars, spend all of their money to get you to buy the bundle that they want you to buy. Since it is a high risk proposition, you as a consumer are only going to be willing to buy the ones that are "safe," that is to say, the ones that they tell you to buy.
It's a positive feedback loop. They put all of their marketing into one basket, and you as the consumer, when evaluating your options, purchase that one, since going with others is more risky.
iTunes, and other digital distribution stores have freed the consumer from that cycle. You can now buy WHAT YOU LIKE. The risk to you is low, you get to try before you buy, and the barriers to entry are much lower. The result is that people tend to spend MORE money, not less. But the caveat is that the pop-stars get LESS money, and more money goes to indies and smaller content creators. The wealth is more evenly distributed. The "old money" big wigs lose control of deciding FOR you what you will buy.
This is vastly superior to the old model for both content creators and consumers. The losers are the middle men. The publishers. And they've fought long and hard to prevent that from happening, but they are losing. The sheer volume of piracy forced them to agree to models that they detest, but even though the music industry is alive and vibrant, their cut, their margin is smaller.
Too bad. Let the money flow from the consumers to the content creators. Stop stifling innovation, stop trying to control us.
Of course Jon Bon Jovi doesn't like the new model. He was made filthy rich from the old model. It's not about the "magical" experience of buying some random bundle of songs that you only like 1/6th of, it's about buying 100% of the songs that you like.
And besides, Pandora and other streaming music stations have completely replaced that "magical" experience of hearing something new. In fact, I'd argue that they are vastly superior in every way. You just choose the type of music you like, and it will find all manner of songs that you might never have been exposed to.
Our kids have it much better than we did. Out with the old money hats. RIAA, MPAA, go stuff it. Adapt rather than stifle.
This model is far more effective. And allows for far more distribution of wealth. Now THAT is magical.
Bon Jovi has very little credibility on this. He happened to "switch" to Country music (with some really shitty and clichéd songs) right around the time Country became the only genre that still sells albums, so obviously he is all about the money.
ReplyDeleteA good rule of thumb I have learned over the years is industries that criss-cross with glamor and fame have horrible business models. You can see this in music, movies, and book publishing. What you said about the music world also applies to the others.
I still don't understand why a terrible movie that's been out for 3 months costs exactly the same to see at the theater as the blockbuster that came out last week. How can an industry decide that supply, demand and product quality have nothing to do with pricing?
Ironically, this phenomenon still goes on in the digital music world. Initially, Itunes and everyone else decided almost all songs should cost the same, regardless of type, genre, age, quality, popularity (aka demand) and so on. Recently they've wised up and introduced more tiered pricing.
To me a better model of an artist is Kid Rock. He doesn't sell on Itunes because he doesn't like how rigid they are, and he routinely encourages his fans to just steal the music "if they have to" cause he just wants to be heard and play at more concerts. If you look at what concert tickets go for these days, its strange to me more musicians don't go the same route. Some of the best musical geniuses out there like Girl Talk only make money from performances.
Solid points, I agree wholeheartedly. Especially about the fact that this issue crosses over into many other industries. The gaming industry as well, though not to the obscene degree that you see it in music, movies, and books.
ReplyDeleteThough, I think the gaming industry, being as "connected" and forward thinking as it is, will adapt faster (it already is) than the others, which are ancient models clinging to the old ways.
Stop pontificating and get back to creating.
ReplyDelete