Who fares better in the digital age? Is it the producer or the consumer? Can it be both?
This is literally the dilemma of the future. The fate of capitalism hangs in the balance. With the advent of the Internet and now the whole hearted seizing of it as the information medium of choice, what will happen to the exchange of funds that is necessary for commerce? The internet is basically a free medium. Pay for a connection and you’re there. Sites that require a subscription hardly prevail and while some do, it’s with a niche audience.
Which brings us to the music industry. The internet has, undoubtedly, strengthened the arm of the independent musician. A band can now reach out much farther than ever before and their music is heard much more widely. That said, there is no exchange of funds involved. It’s free to join Myspace and upload your songs. It’s free for another user to listen to your songs.
And then there is illegal downloading. And hacks leaking new, unreleased tracks. This is bad for both the music industry and the struggling indie artist. No one, except the user, or fan, gets what they want.
It’s interesting the way the mind works. Because going online is free, people think everything on it should be free. The information you read, or listen to, or watch is still being produced by someone, even though you read it, hear it or see it on your computer. Stealing cd’s, magazines or dvd’s occurs much less widely. Why? Because it’s wrong and illegal. It goes against capitalism and the law. The nature of the internet is free, its different, and so new models need to be set up to encourage the fair exchange of money for product. The question is how.
But back to music. I often harp on my friends for “stealing” songs but i also understand why they do it: because they can. And it means they have $15 more dollars in their pocket. Maybe if the music industry was abolished and albums were $5 and the money went directly to the artist, people would pay. MAYBE. But i doubt it. Especially because NOBODY wants a cd, all they want is an mp3 file. And how do you pay for something that is so tiny and hard to comprehend, especially since you’ve been getting it for free for so long?
The opinions out there on this are interesting. Some make sense, some are hard to believe.
David Byrne of Talking Heads fame says the internet provides small artists with the means to get their music heard and bought. He also says that small musicians, because they make a larger percent of the money when they sell an item, can make more than a major pop star on a big label. I think that’s a stretch.
Trent Reznor from Nine Inch Nails agrees.
Elton John is more thoughtful with his opinion. He thinks the internet holds artistic vision down. “Hopefully the next movement in music will tear down the Internet,” he says.
Corey Deitz of About.com says the music industry is an a “hysterical tailspin.”
Neil Young also bring it back to the artist, and the product the artist creates. He said the internet allows people to hear unreleased versions, tracks the artist doesn’t want them to hear. He turns the issue into one of control.
Lastly, the RIAA of course thinks the internet is causing harm. They aren’t making any money.
