 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Today's Record of the Day soundclip | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Send this email to a colleague Send us a comment on this track. Get your music heard by thousands in the music industry: contact us, address below. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| London Gigs of the Day | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Monday 16 April 2012 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Headlines | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Business | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| News and Features | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comment, Opinion and Analysis | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Digital | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Radio, Television, Publishing and PR | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TV
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RADIO
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Artist and Music Features | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| And also | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Job opportunities | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Showbiz and News | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Albums
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Live
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The bigger picture | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Edited by Liz Stokes and Paul Scaife - 020 8520 6646 Please respect the amount of work that’s put into this newsletter by not regularly pirating it. One-off forwarding is acceptable but only if we are copied in. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To unsubscribe, click here Post music for possible inclusion to PO Box 49554, London E17 9WB or upload to our Soundcloud dropbox | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Terms & Conditions - By reading this email you agree to our T&Cs | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (c) 2012 Music Today Ltd Record of the Day is a trading name of Music Today Ltd, a company registered in England under registration number 4546152; registered office: 4 Green Lanes, London N16 9NB | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monday, 16 April 2012
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
RotD exclusive: Jeff Smith, head of music at BBC Radio 2 & Radio 6 Music, celebrates 10 years of 6Music
It was back in the late '90s when I first visited a little office in the BBC’s Henry Wood House and heard and saw what a small team of music producers and researchers were doing.
The team were listening to and digitising session tracks from the BBC archive. I was visiting them as the then head of music for BBC Radio 1. Part of my remit was to help develop a music policy for one of three new digital (DAB) only networks. One network would be a black music station, one would be a speech and drama network built on the BBC’s archive of classic comedy and drama and one would be developed based on the popular music sessions archive.
It was clear from my visit that our original vision of an album oriented rock station, plugging the gap between Radio 1 and Radio 2, might not be where it was going.
The research into the archive hadn’t delivered the traditional adult oriented rock radio set of artists but instead a treasure trove of alternative rock and pop from the likes of Siouxsie and The Banshees, XTC and Nirvana. These were artists recorded for various BBC Radio 1 session programming over the years.
As producer of Radio 1’s Evening Session from 1990 I’d been responsible for commissioning a few of these sessions and I could hear how a smarter pop radio station built on these musical foundations could evolve. In fact in 1991 when Mark Radcliffe deputised as presenter on that show we talked about building on the Evening Session and his show Out on Blue Six to establish what we loftily then described as “an intelligent pop music radio station”.
I returned to the BBC in 2007 as head of music for Radio 2 and 6 Music and found the station building a reputation but not exactly clear on what it was. We focussed the station’s music policy on music with an “alternative spirit”. This means that on 6 you’ll hear those more established artists who still lean towards the alternative in what they record - including their classics and deep cuts - alongside those newer artists who are building careers on those foundations.
For instance alongside XTC you’ll hear Field Music, alongside Siouxsie an artist like Anna Calvi and Nirvana’s influence is building new alternative rock bands like Howler, all supported in daytime music programming and across the network by 6. We’re also building more on the genres we cover so you can hear an Orb classic juxtaposed with SBTRKT or a deeper Bill Withers cut alongside that of Michael Kiwanuka .
I think that policy is typified in the live music moments that are my highlights of 6 Music's first 10 years. Those highlights were when we helped arrange for heritage names to work with their musical progenies or admirers i.e. Heaven 17 and LaRoux, Gary Numan and Little Boots, Paul Weller and Adele. These are the most difficult things to get together but they can also be the most exciting.
6 Music is very lucky to have a very creative and passionate editor in the shape of Paul Rodgers. Our week of celebration in Maida Vale and the South Bank is the latest manifestation of his vision of the station and continues Paul’s latest initiatives that include 2012’s monthly “6 Music celebrates…” features.
Paul intends to continue these through the year and I think these ideas and other new concepts that we have to take 6 Music beyond our London and Manchester bases will help increase the awareness of the station and digital radio in general into 2013.
We know 6 Music listeners also consume digital music services (subscription music, blogs etc) with the station often giving them their cue to discover music in other ways. We intend to keep them doing that by further embracing ours and their digital future as we re-imagine radio for the future and continue to be the UK’s biggest digital-only music station.
Finally I should add that in our first ten years 6 has also made its own and substantial contribution to the BBC sessions legacy with a unique commitment to broadcast over 300 new sessions by musicians every year. These sessions then take their place in the same vault that gave birth to the station and help it continue its work celebrating the alternative spirit in music.
Monday, 5 March 2012
Record of the Day message
This blog is temporary while our main site is being fixed, which should be this week.
DOMINO RECORDING CO, INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANT
Domino is seeking an International Assistant to join their team. The job is to provide support for the int’l marketing campaigns. This includes the management of digital tools like video and music files, helping with the production/stock needs of partners around the world, the organization of marketing support tools like merch, print ads, banners and the collection of sales data for marketing reports. The successful candidate should ideally have experience working inside a record label or a similar creative music environment, preferably in the areas mentioned above, and a strong understanding about the Domino label and artists. The position is based in our London office. CV’s to internationalassist@dominorecordco.com
Based: London
Based: London
Cutting Edge assists R2M in sale of its publishing catalogues to BMG.
Leading music publisher Cutting Edge has expanded beyond its established music for media business to assist the owners of music publishing catalogues with the operation, administration and exploitation of their assets.
Cutting Edge managed the operation of the R2M catalogue on behalf of R2M over an 18-month period, and more recently assisted R2M in the successful sale of its music publishing and related assets to BMG in February 2012. During this period asset NPS was stabilized and increased.
Cutting Edge can provide deep industry expertise to the owners of music publishing copyrights in addition to providing access to the company’s exploitation avenues and opportunities in media. By maximizing both administration accuracy and catalogue exploitation Cutting Edge can help improve revenue and catalogue value.
The R2M catalogue contains a range of international hits from the past four decades including songs recorded by Jim Croce (“Time In A Bottle”), Faith Hill (“This Kiss”), Tupac (“California Love”), Neil Sedaka (“Laughter In The Rain”), The Fifth Dimension (“Up, Up and Away”), The Carpenters (“Solitaire”), Zapp, REO Speedwagon, Enrique Iglesias, Britney Spears, Celine Dion, Shalamar and S-Club 7. R2M also owned Country and Gospel music
catalogues as well as rights to Germany’s classic band Die Toten Hosen.
Cutting Edge is one of the world’s leading publishers and providers of music services for media music having recently worked on films including “The King’s Speech”, “Drive”, “The Woman In Black” and “The Grey”, with international brands including Barclaycard, L’Oreal and Nestlé and on commercials for Vauxhall, Blackberry and American Airlines.
The Cutting Edge Group has offices in London, Los Angeles, New York and Louisiana.
Cutting Edge managed the operation of the R2M catalogue on behalf of R2M over an 18-month period, and more recently assisted R2M in the successful sale of its music publishing and related assets to BMG in February 2012. During this period asset NPS was stabilized and increased.
Cutting Edge can provide deep industry expertise to the owners of music publishing copyrights in addition to providing access to the company’s exploitation avenues and opportunities in media. By maximizing both administration accuracy and catalogue exploitation Cutting Edge can help improve revenue and catalogue value.
The R2M catalogue contains a range of international hits from the past four decades including songs recorded by Jim Croce (“Time In A Bottle”), Faith Hill (“This Kiss”), Tupac (“California Love”), Neil Sedaka (“Laughter In The Rain”), The Fifth Dimension (“Up, Up and Away”), The Carpenters (“Solitaire”), Zapp, REO Speedwagon, Enrique Iglesias, Britney Spears, Celine Dion, Shalamar and S-Club 7. R2M also owned Country and Gospel music
catalogues as well as rights to Germany’s classic band Die Toten Hosen.
Cutting Edge is one of the world’s leading publishers and providers of music services for media music having recently worked on films including “The King’s Speech”, “Drive”, “The Woman In Black” and “The Grey”, with international brands including Barclaycard, L’Oreal and Nestlé and on commercials for Vauxhall, Blackberry and American Airlines.
The Cutting Edge Group has offices in London, Los Angeles, New York and Louisiana.
Sunday, 4 March 2012
Steve Machin's comment on Channel 4's Great Ticketing Scandal
Steve Machin of Stormcrowd argues that whilst Channel 4’s Great Ticket Scandal raised some interesting points, it also missed out large chunks of the bigger picture…
Bringing an arsenal of investigative techniques to bear, Dispatches sought to expose what it had clearly predetermined was the dark side of the hitherto opaque and mysterious world of the concert industry - ticket sales and resales. The sense of entitlement and expectation that fans can show, rightly or wrongly, regarding an act and their tickets is startling and Dispatches exploited this highly-charged topic to create what it portrayed as a sensational scandal. But while the programme did uncover what appeared to be genuine legal concerns around some aspects of the descriptions of the resale market, I would argue that the sensationalist approach that it took overall failed to give an accurate representation of the complex economics of the 21st century ticketing market.
Rockonomics - In order to understand this, we first need a quick (and simplified) overview of rockonomics. Economists talk of supply and demand, yield management and mitigation of risk - do these principles apply to the sale of tickets? Absolutely. The promoter acts as an initial speculator, buying the performances (and related services such as venue hire) hoping that they can make a profit on the total cost of the gig or tour, by selling sufficient tickets at the right prices. The promoter assumes risk from the performers.
The perceived demand impacts upon supply variables - ticket pricing, the number of tickets made available, and the size of the venues. The better the tour can predict demand, and price tickets accurately against fans expectation of value, the more effective the yield will be in returning a profit on the risked capital.
What risk? A question asked by the programme was “how hard is it to predict how successful a comeback tour by Take That might be?” It was raised precisely to undermine the notion that there is any risk in promoting concerts. While some tours are inherently more risky than others, one only has to look at the annual returns filed by Live Nation to see razor thin margins where even a small amount of increased risk could significantly impact upon the business.
Risky Business
So how do the promoters reduce their risk? By selling tickets at prices that are low enough to ensure that sufficient attendees provide a return on investment, and that price, for some of the tickets is below market value, while for others is above market value.
It is a common complaint that “music or concerts cannot be reduced to a commodity and traded” - I am no apologist for the areas of the resale market that were exposed as legally challenging from a consumer protection viewpoint, nor do I make any claims as to whether it is right or wrong to trade tickets - that is not the subject of this piece – but what is clear is that tickets ARE traded like commodities. That is in part because there continues to be a consistent disparity between the market price of a ticket and the published face value at which it is first sold. Not all tickets are created equal, and over time the value of each ticket will vary - see a recent article by PRS for Music for a good review of the economics of ticket discounting - the “front rows” get traded while there are still seats available "at the back"
The internet has simply made it much easier to buy and sell most products, everything from iPods to insurance and all points in between. Tickets are no different and with arbitrage opportunity available the internet allows buyers and sellers to easily connect and transact at market price - leading to the creation of an additional layer of speculation - fans who buy more than they need, and professional brokers investing in buying tickets purely to resell - the cold harvesting of tickets.
The whole truth
The Dispatches investigation wanted to ensure that this programme was car-crash television of the highest order. In doing so they did not tell the whole story about many of the points that they covered.
1 - Fans learned that a significant proportion of tickets sold on ViaGoGo and Seatwave are not sourced from individual fans looking to sell tickets that can no longer be used - the notion of being exclusively fan-to-fan is a misnomer as many tickets come from brokers and box-offices. It is worth noting, as Dispatches failed to mention, that Seatwave states clearly on its website when tickets have been made available directly by the box office.
2 - We also heard that on some tours, ViaGoGo and Seatwave are provided tickets directly by the promoter to sell at the best price possible. The presumption was that tickets are always sold at astronomical prices above face-value. In reality, tickets are often sold on exchanges, or other discount channel sites at significantly below face value. The cold truth is that exchanges can provide access to a cohort of demonstrably price insensitive customers who are willing to pay a premium to acquire tickets closer to the event date.
3 - More surprising was the evidence that staff at ViaGoGo has purchased tickets from primary vendors such as Ticketmaster to resell using the company’s own “internal seller” accounts. There is a significant difference between market clearing price (which is generally considered a good thing economically) and an exchange making the market under false pretenses.
The public rage on twitter during the broadcast was aimed squarely at the exchanges and promoters, and assumed (as Dispatches suggested) that artists or their management are not aware that tickets are allocated to exchanges. Speaking to Pollstar reporter John Gammon following the broadcast, Live Nation’s Paul Latham stated that Live Nation has never allocated tickets without the knowledge and consent of the artists’ management. The Concert Promoters Association issued a statement to the effect that placing tickets into the secondary market reduces prices by increasing supply, and ensures that additional value is captured within the industry.
Dispatches also failed to mention that there are already mechanisms available that make ticket reselling more difficult should a tour choose to. These include paperless tickets that require the purchasing credit card to be present or photo-ticket schemes such as that used by Glastonbury festival. Removing speculators however exposes the tour to true demand, a point made eloquently earlier this week by Bob Lefsetz in his industry blog (www.lefsetz.com/) and this is not always good news for the artists or promoters.
The fans pay the bills
The wider impact of price sensitivity on the concert business must be considered for everyone competing for the same share of the fan wallet. Do fans who decide to not spend money on a ticket spend it on other concerts or other music entertainment products, or do they spend it on computer games or fashion or some other category? Do fans who spend high sums of money on concert tickets spend less at the venue on F&B or on merchandise? Will dynamic pricing be a reality and provide genuine real-time market pricing for concerts and would that be embraced by the industry and fans alike as a fair solution?
Ultimately in such a complex market there are a lot more questions than answers - while emotions clearly run high when discussing entertainment tickets, does it mean the government should legislate and introduce price regulation into efficient markets? After all, the face value is an arbitrary price that could have been set much higher or much lower. And anyhow, now that these markets exist, can the genie be put back in the bottle? Would it be helpful, and to whom? Dispatches successfully demonstrated that some fans care a lot about ticket pricing but that even more care about transparency.
Built in part on largely one-sided questioning designed to elicit highly emotional responses from disgruntled fans who chose to purchase tickets (and similarly grief stricken tales from disappointed fans who chose not to) the programme failed to make a balanced representation of issues affecting the ticket business. All the primary stakeholders in the concert industry that I speak to are concerned with how to get more fans, to habitually attend more shows, more often. That is the wider challenge that frames this debate.
--
Steve Machin (@stevemachin) runs Stormcrowd (@stormcrowd) - an entertainment consultancy specializing in ticketing and social commerce - www.stormcrowd.com/
Further reading:
Bob Lefsetz (@lefsetz) on ticket scalping
Pollstar review of Dispatches
PRS article on ticket discounting
PRS article on Secondary Market Analysis
Kobalt Artist and Label Services seeks a marketing manager
Kobalt Artist and Label Services is looking for an experienced Marketing Manager to work with its AWAL team based in London. The ideal candidate will have experience in social media marketing and a good general knowledge of the social web with the following specific skills:
· PPC advertising experience with a working knowledge of both Google Adwords and the Facebook Advertising Platform
· Competent knowledge of Photoshop/Fireworks or similar
· Well versed in the use of Topspin, Campaign Monitor, Mail Chimp, Soundcloud, StumbleUpon, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, RootMusic, and other similar sites and tools.
· HTML, PHP, Javascript and Flash knowledge are also a plus
Responsibilities will include managing social advertising campaigns across a number of platforms for multiple clients, assessing social media reach and implementing fan engagement campaigns, creating bespoke advertising assets for clients, setting up and administering direct-to-fan campaigns, co-ordinating with external marketing partners and agencies, and generating end of campaign reports.
If this sounds like a set of responsibilities you can handle, and you are looking to join the expanding Kobalt and AWAL teams, send your CV over to marketing@awal.com
Independent Sound seeks a festival co-ordinator and management executive
Position: Contract/Temporary, ongoing
Salary: £20,000 - £25,000 depending on experience
Start Date: 16th April 2012
We are looking for a smart, dedicated and creative all rounder to join a small but
successful music based company with activities in artist management, live and
recorded music. The ideal candidate will be a music lover with a genuine interest in
the business side of the music industry.
The candidate will preferably have had experience in the live music sector (in either,
or both of, booking and promotion) though candidates with suitable record company
and/or artist management experience will also be considered. You will be proficient
in using new and social media to advance and drive through projects.
We are a partner in a major festival taking place in 2013 and the role will partly
involve all aspects of co-ordinating and managing the festival. The role will also
involve assisting in the artist management and recorded music aspects of the
business. You will love live music and will occasionally need to be prepared to work
evenings or weekends. PA and admin experience is central to the position. You will
need to be nimble and adaptable, working as part of a creative and dynamic team in
all types of music based projects. This is a fantastic opportunity for someone who is
keen to learn from notable individuals within the music industry.
Main Duties:
• Co-ordination and management of the festival including involvement in artist
booking, production and the marketing and promotion of the event;
• Assistance with and planning the development of new artists, and
management of established artists on the management roster, including live
and online management and creative direction;
• Assisting with low key, limited and full scale releases;
• Office administration including dealing with phone calls, e-mail enquiries and
diary management.
The Person:
• Preferably live music experience with an established company (will consider
record label/artist management);
• Self starter with a creative and pleasant personality;
• Able to work under pressure and as part of a team;
• Strong knowledge of Mac software, Excel, Word and Powerpoint;
• Able to prioritise and work to deadlines;
• Driven and hard working;
• Strong IT skills and well versed in the use of new media and social
networking in developing projects.
Closing date: 12 Noon on 16 March 2012.
Location: London
Contact Name: Ben Dean
Email: ben@independentsound.net
Kobalt Artist and Label Services seeks a product manager
Kobalt Artist and Label Services incorporates AWAL, a leading digital distribution and marketing services provider that directly distributes and promotes the music of more than 5,000 independent artists and labels. The Product Manager will be responsible for the overview of premium projects and working closely with our Client Management, Marketing and Retail Co-ordination teams.
· Experienced in overview and co-ordination of Digital and Physical Artist Campaigns.
· 3 + years’ experience in the digital market
· Deep knowledge across digital retail, marketing and promotion
· Strong organizational and analytical skills
· good understanding of the music industry
If this sounds like a position you know and enjoy, and are looking to join the expanding Kobalt and AWAL teams, send your CV over topete.dodge@kobaltmusic.com
Closing date: 14 Mar 2012
Location: London
Contact name: Pete Dodge
Email: pete.dodge@kobaltmusic.com
Phone: n/a
Website: www.awal.com www.kobaltmusic.com
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
The government u-turn on the Licensing Act 2003
Nicola Slade looks into today’s report by a government select committee into the Licensing Act 2003 - and notes what a welcome relief it is....In the wake of the introduction of the Licensing Act 2003, which subsequently came into full force in 2005, Dave Gelly, musician and jazz critic for the Observer, commented: “It looks as though the Government has deliberately set out to strangle any kind of live music at all, not just in pubs, clubs and restaurants but everywhere - church halls, schools, wedding parties in stately homes, a marquee on the vicarage lawn, or even in your own back garden. Nowhere will be exempt from persecution.”
His comments were echoed by a raft of people and organisations, particularly the Musician’s Union, who foresaw that the Act would reduce the number of venues/pubs which would be prepared to host live music. Among other points, the law namely required that there be a license for the playing of live music in any venue, no matter how small, therefore disbanding the old ‘two-in-a-bar’ rule which had allowed two musicians, playing unamplified music, to perform without seeking a license. The fee for applying for a premises license (covering a number of elements, not just music) cost between £100 and £635.
To deal with any concerns raised over the new bill, the Live Music Forum (LMF) was set up, headed up by now UK Music chairman, Feargal Sharkey. LMF issued a report in 2007, studying the ramifications of the Act, in which it claimed that “(it) has had a neutral effect on the UK’s live music scene”, but recommended there should be more flexibility of the application of the Act on smaller premises.
News comes this morning (Thurs 16 May) that a crossparty Select Committee is now seeking to reverse some of those decisions relating to music, embodied by the Act. In fact, you might go as far to say that the committee is recommending a complete u-turn. “To encourage the performance of live music we recommend that the Government should exempt venues with a capacity of 200 persons or fewer from the need to obtain a license for the performance of live music. We further recommend the re-introduction of the two-in-a-bar exemption, enabling venues of any size to put on a performance of nonamplified music by one or two musicians,” it states. It’s welcome news indeed, but why has this u-turn come about? Given the LMF’s original claims that the Act showed nothing other than a ‘neutral effect,’ we presume that the introduction of London’s Met Police’s Form 696 might be one of the driving factors. Form 696 has been one of the most contentious demands set by the capital’s police and we count ourselves among those who completely oppose it.
Form 696 is billed as a ‘risk assessment form’ that venue owners and/or promoters have to submit to the police two weeks in advance of any planned music event. 696 has become controversial due to its stipulation that names, stage names, private addresses, and phone numbers of all promoters, DJs and artists be listed. The form also asks for a description of the style of music to be performed and the target audience. The original form also asked for details of ethnic groups likely to attend the performance, but that version was revised to omit those parameters in December 2008.
Form 696 has naturally come under fire by various groups and former LMF chief Feargal Sharkey himself. The report this morning suitably criticises 696 and even goes so far to suggest that it should be scrapped: “We are concerned at the linkage of live music and public order issues by the Licensing Act and its accompanying guidance, and we emphasise that music should not automatically be treated as a disruptive activity which will inevitably lead to nuisance and disorder. We therefore conclude that...Form 696, goes beyond the requirements of both the Act and its Guidance to impose unreasonable conditions on events and that it should be scrapped.”
“As with the restrictions on small venues, Form 696 is a wholly unnecessary impediment to live music... UK Music has been vocal amongst musicians, civil liberty campaigners and members of the public who want to see this counter-productive and morally questionable risk assessment form scrapped. I am delighted the Committee feels the same way,” Feargal Sharkey told RotD.
It’s a bizarre set of circumstances. We can’t help but wonder why limitations on live music were included in the Licensing Act and secondly, how the Met Police was able to implement 696 without consultation in the first place. If the UK government really had an understanding of music and the business itself, why are its decisions in such disarray? Maybe that says more about the Labour Party that it does its relationship with our industry?
We also couldn’t help but be amused at the irony of the timing of this news. Only earlier this week, culture secretary Andy Burnham opened a new rehearsal facility in Liverpool for young, aspiring musicians as part of a programme to open up similar spaces across the whole of the UK – with no less, financial stimulus from the government. If this report doesn’t succeed in reversing the problems with the Licensing Act, then it’s highly probable that many of those rehearsing in such spaces will continue to have limited venues to perform in.
However, The DCMS has 12 weeks to respond to the concerns of the select committee and we trust that it will see the error of its ways.
His comments were echoed by a raft of people and organisations, particularly the Musician’s Union, who foresaw that the Act would reduce the number of venues/pubs which would be prepared to host live music. Among other points, the law namely required that there be a license for the playing of live music in any venue, no matter how small, therefore disbanding the old ‘two-in-a-bar’ rule which had allowed two musicians, playing unamplified music, to perform without seeking a license. The fee for applying for a premises license (covering a number of elements, not just music) cost between £100 and £635.
To deal with any concerns raised over the new bill, the Live Music Forum (LMF) was set up, headed up by now UK Music chairman, Feargal Sharkey. LMF issued a report in 2007, studying the ramifications of the Act, in which it claimed that “(it) has had a neutral effect on the UK’s live music scene”, but recommended there should be more flexibility of the application of the Act on smaller premises.
News comes this morning (Thurs 16 May) that a crossparty Select Committee is now seeking to reverse some of those decisions relating to music, embodied by the Act. In fact, you might go as far to say that the committee is recommending a complete u-turn. “To encourage the performance of live music we recommend that the Government should exempt venues with a capacity of 200 persons or fewer from the need to obtain a license for the performance of live music. We further recommend the re-introduction of the two-in-a-bar exemption, enabling venues of any size to put on a performance of nonamplified music by one or two musicians,” it states. It’s welcome news indeed, but why has this u-turn come about? Given the LMF’s original claims that the Act showed nothing other than a ‘neutral effect,’ we presume that the introduction of London’s Met Police’s Form 696 might be one of the driving factors. Form 696 has been one of the most contentious demands set by the capital’s police and we count ourselves among those who completely oppose it.
Form 696 is billed as a ‘risk assessment form’ that venue owners and/or promoters have to submit to the police two weeks in advance of any planned music event. 696 has become controversial due to its stipulation that names, stage names, private addresses, and phone numbers of all promoters, DJs and artists be listed. The form also asks for a description of the style of music to be performed and the target audience. The original form also asked for details of ethnic groups likely to attend the performance, but that version was revised to omit those parameters in December 2008.
Form 696 has naturally come under fire by various groups and former LMF chief Feargal Sharkey himself. The report this morning suitably criticises 696 and even goes so far to suggest that it should be scrapped: “We are concerned at the linkage of live music and public order issues by the Licensing Act and its accompanying guidance, and we emphasise that music should not automatically be treated as a disruptive activity which will inevitably lead to nuisance and disorder. We therefore conclude that...Form 696, goes beyond the requirements of both the Act and its Guidance to impose unreasonable conditions on events and that it should be scrapped.”
“As with the restrictions on small venues, Form 696 is a wholly unnecessary impediment to live music... UK Music has been vocal amongst musicians, civil liberty campaigners and members of the public who want to see this counter-productive and morally questionable risk assessment form scrapped. I am delighted the Committee feels the same way,” Feargal Sharkey told RotD.
It’s a bizarre set of circumstances. We can’t help but wonder why limitations on live music were included in the Licensing Act and secondly, how the Met Police was able to implement 696 without consultation in the first place. If the UK government really had an understanding of music and the business itself, why are its decisions in such disarray? Maybe that says more about the Labour Party that it does its relationship with our industry?
We also couldn’t help but be amused at the irony of the timing of this news. Only earlier this week, culture secretary Andy Burnham opened a new rehearsal facility in Liverpool for young, aspiring musicians as part of a programme to open up similar spaces across the whole of the UK – with no less, financial stimulus from the government. If this report doesn’t succeed in reversing the problems with the Licensing Act, then it’s highly probable that many of those rehearsing in such spaces will continue to have limited venues to perform in.
However, The DCMS has 12 weeks to respond to the concerns of the select committee and we trust that it will see the error of its ways.
Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Record of the Day Twitter Directory: Call for entries
We asked our Twitter followers if there was a definitive or even just good directory of music industry twitterati. We found that there is already a pretty good google spreadsheet which is fairly wide-reaching.
As you can see, there's plenty of categories in this directory, and some interesting finds.
Although it's a great resource built up by Gabriel Nijmeh (gcn1) it seems a bit U.S focused, and we'd like to build a directory (not only to add to this great list, but also to have a stand-alone RotD webpage) which focuses on Music Industry professionals who we feel provide insight into the business we work in.
We know sites like Twellow and WeFollow already provide a great resource, but we find they are too broad in scope for our world:
We're a UK-based service (kind of like a village newsletter to the music industry), so our entries would have a UK/European slant, but no location is barred. With our daily email, weekly magazine and messageboard serve record labels, journalists, radio/tv producers and presenters PRs, managers, promoters as well as a host of industry bodies and many other music professionals.
We'll embed their tweets on a standalone page on our site so that RotD readers can track the most knowledgeable and useful music industry twitterers.
Tuesday, 28 April 2009
The media fall-out from the Pirate Bay trial
Even now, the fall-out from the Pirate Bay trial continues to dominate headlines across music and technology websites and blogs.
There have been a number of twists and turns, most recently that the judge in The Pirate Bay trial has been accused of bias. Sweden's national radio station revealed that Thomas Norström was a member of the same pro-copyright groups as several of the main entertainment industry reps in the case. Four days after the trial, The Pirate Bay lodged their appeal and claimed in a blog post, "We are more determined than ever that what we do is right. Millions of users are a good proof of that."
Two other related stories also came to light, namely a new research report from the Norwegian School of Management, which suggested that P2P users are likely to buy ten times more music than someone who doesn’t file-share. The Norwegian study looked at almost 2,000 online music users, all over the age of 15. On the other side of the coin, various reports suggest that torrent sites across Europe are closing in the wake of the news, while some suggest that they are merely going more underground and are harder to track.
Regardless of the fall-out, we were particularly interested in watching how the press (including technology sites and blogs) dealt with the news that the founders would be sentenced to a year in jail and fined by way of compensation to rightsholders.
The Times, Telegraph and Music Week handled the news of the verdict in a similar fashion. Rather shockingly, the first paragraph on Music Week’s back-slapping front page this week read: “The music industry has sunk the aspirations of future pirates after claiming its biggest scalp to date.” Marcus Oscarsson and David Charter in the Times on Friday went with the line, “In a big victory for the entertainment industries..,” while the Telegraph opted for a less bombastic, but equally strange, “Four Swedish men were jailed for a year and fined nearly £2.5 million on Friday after they lost a landmark internet piracy court case against some of the biggest names in the entertainment industry.” “Sunk the aspirations?” “Big victory?” “Landmark case?” We beg to disagree. Each time the entertainment industries have sued file-sharing services (Napster, Kazaa, Grokster), we’ve been told the outcome is ‘landmark’, so why then does the desire for litigation keep on raising its ugly head?
Rather ironically, the Telegraph and Times, in separate comment pieces, took an entirely different line altogether. “There seems little chance that the verdict will change anything in the long war between copyright owners and internet users.” (Times - Tom Whitwell). “The fact remains, though, that The Pirate Bay is simply the latest in a long line of filesharing websites against whom legal action has been taken, and yet the levels of online piracy shows no signs of abating.” (Telegraph – Claudine Beaumont)
As we might have predicted, both the Guardian and Independent approached the story sensibly, with the Guardian’s Emily Bell probably making the most sense out of all writers on the national papers. “The Pirate Bay flouted the law, daring the authorities to do something about it and so the outcome was not much short of inevitable, albeit disproportionate and ineffectual. But The Pirate Bay is not the beginning of the end for copyright infringement. That ship has already sailed, carrying more than just pirates.” Pat Pilcher in Monday’s Independent highlighted the real ongoing problem with file-sharing and the fact that the Pirate Bay trial will do little to stop the problem. “Future victories for copyright holders are looking increasingly shaky as Bitorrent tracking sites such as The Pirate Bay are about to be replaced by applications such as the Tribler. Where the current crop of Bit Torrent file-sharing applications need to be pointed at torrent tracking sites such as The Pirate Bay to find files, Tribler's searches are done over the networks of fellow Bit Torrent users, sidestepping centralised torrent tracking sites altogether.”
Of course, the story on the tech blogs was far more anti-music industry. One blogger ran the headline: “Why the Pirate Bay trial is bullsh*t”. Even the Christian Science Monitor had something to say about the whole affair (hardly surprising given where its funding might come from – namely Hollywood!), “The Pirate Bay case: Not necessarily a victory for Hollywood,” said its headline. The NME dealt with the story by giving Paul McCartney a platform to express his views, where he stated that the ruling was ‘fair’. We’re not entirely sure why it defaulted to Paul McCartney – he’s hardly the spokesperson for today’s NME generation, but maybe that was the point!
The Register’s Andrew Orlowski shed an interesting light on the events: “Any recording business executive celebrating the court victory over The Pirate Bay should have been in San Francisco this weekend for a reality check. Attending CodeCon 2009 would have brought them swiftly down to earth, and emphasised the futility of trying to prevent P2P file sharing. What's the point, when you can make money off it instead?” Even the Wall St Journal approached it all with caution: “The operators of a notorious file-sharing Web site were found guilty of copyright infringement by a Swedish court, a key legal victory for the entertainment industry that nonetheless may do little to stem the piracy of entertainment on the Internet.” (Sarah McBride)
What can we learn from this? We’d sound a note of caution to some publications: look beyond the press statements from the IFPI and certain other trade bodies. This was not an out-and-out triumph, it was yet another costly case, while the effects of the ruling simply can’t be measured. It hardly brought P2P networks crashing down. The word that copyright infringement is illegal might be stronger as a result, but is that really going to stop them? Probably not. Certain publications might be wise to take a more balanced view in future.
Nicola Slade
There have been a number of twists and turns, most recently that the judge in The Pirate Bay trial has been accused of bias. Sweden's national radio station revealed that Thomas Norström was a member of the same pro-copyright groups as several of the main entertainment industry reps in the case. Four days after the trial, The Pirate Bay lodged their appeal and claimed in a blog post, "We are more determined than ever that what we do is right. Millions of users are a good proof of that."
Two other related stories also came to light, namely a new research report from the Norwegian School of Management, which suggested that P2P users are likely to buy ten times more music than someone who doesn’t file-share. The Norwegian study looked at almost 2,000 online music users, all over the age of 15. On the other side of the coin, various reports suggest that torrent sites across Europe are closing in the wake of the news, while some suggest that they are merely going more underground and are harder to track.
Regardless of the fall-out, we were particularly interested in watching how the press (including technology sites and blogs) dealt with the news that the founders would be sentenced to a year in jail and fined by way of compensation to rightsholders.
The Times, Telegraph and Music Week handled the news of the verdict in a similar fashion. Rather shockingly, the first paragraph on Music Week’s back-slapping front page this week read: “The music industry has sunk the aspirations of future pirates after claiming its biggest scalp to date.” Marcus Oscarsson and David Charter in the Times on Friday went with the line, “In a big victory for the entertainment industries..,” while the Telegraph opted for a less bombastic, but equally strange, “Four Swedish men were jailed for a year and fined nearly £2.5 million on Friday after they lost a landmark internet piracy court case against some of the biggest names in the entertainment industry.” “Sunk the aspirations?” “Big victory?” “Landmark case?” We beg to disagree. Each time the entertainment industries have sued file-sharing services (Napster, Kazaa, Grokster), we’ve been told the outcome is ‘landmark’, so why then does the desire for litigation keep on raising its ugly head?
Rather ironically, the Telegraph and Times, in separate comment pieces, took an entirely different line altogether. “There seems little chance that the verdict will change anything in the long war between copyright owners and internet users.” (Times - Tom Whitwell). “The fact remains, though, that The Pirate Bay is simply the latest in a long line of filesharing websites against whom legal action has been taken, and yet the levels of online piracy shows no signs of abating.” (Telegraph – Claudine Beaumont)
As we might have predicted, both the Guardian and Independent approached the story sensibly, with the Guardian’s Emily Bell probably making the most sense out of all writers on the national papers. “The Pirate Bay flouted the law, daring the authorities to do something about it and so the outcome was not much short of inevitable, albeit disproportionate and ineffectual. But The Pirate Bay is not the beginning of the end for copyright infringement. That ship has already sailed, carrying more than just pirates.” Pat Pilcher in Monday’s Independent highlighted the real ongoing problem with file-sharing and the fact that the Pirate Bay trial will do little to stop the problem. “Future victories for copyright holders are looking increasingly shaky as Bitorrent tracking sites such as The Pirate Bay are about to be replaced by applications such as the Tribler. Where the current crop of Bit Torrent file-sharing applications need to be pointed at torrent tracking sites such as The Pirate Bay to find files, Tribler's searches are done over the networks of fellow Bit Torrent users, sidestepping centralised torrent tracking sites altogether.”
Of course, the story on the tech blogs was far more anti-music industry. One blogger ran the headline: “Why the Pirate Bay trial is bullsh*t”. Even the Christian Science Monitor had something to say about the whole affair (hardly surprising given where its funding might come from – namely Hollywood!), “The Pirate Bay case: Not necessarily a victory for Hollywood,” said its headline. The NME dealt with the story by giving Paul McCartney a platform to express his views, where he stated that the ruling was ‘fair’. We’re not entirely sure why it defaulted to Paul McCartney – he’s hardly the spokesperson for today’s NME generation, but maybe that was the point!
The Register’s Andrew Orlowski shed an interesting light on the events: “Any recording business executive celebrating the court victory over The Pirate Bay should have been in San Francisco this weekend for a reality check. Attending CodeCon 2009 would have brought them swiftly down to earth, and emphasised the futility of trying to prevent P2P file sharing. What's the point, when you can make money off it instead?” Even the Wall St Journal approached it all with caution: “The operators of a notorious file-sharing Web site were found guilty of copyright infringement by a Swedish court, a key legal victory for the entertainment industry that nonetheless may do little to stem the piracy of entertainment on the Internet.” (Sarah McBride)
What can we learn from this? We’d sound a note of caution to some publications: look beyond the press statements from the IFPI and certain other trade bodies. This was not an out-and-out triumph, it was yet another costly case, while the effects of the ruling simply can’t be measured. It hardly brought P2P networks crashing down. The word that copyright infringement is illegal might be stronger as a result, but is that really going to stop them? Probably not. Certain publications might be wise to take a more balanced view in future.
Nicola Slade
Thursday, 9 April 2009
Music Week Awards - full list of winners
Winners at last night's Music Week awards were: Amazon (retail service), Rough Trade East (store), Lost Tunes (digital achievement), Sony (sales force), Alison Wenham for 10 years of AIM (special achievement), Proper (distributor), Radio City (regional radio station), Radio 2 (national radio station), Columbia (regional promotions), Atlantic (national promotions), Rachael Paley, Mercury for Stereophonics (catalogue), Barbara Charone (PR for Duffy), Boots (sync), AEG (promotor), O2 Brixton Academy (venue), EMI/Universal (publisher), Kobalt (independent publisher), Xenomania (producer), Liz Godwin, Polydor for Elbow (marketing campaign), Jim Chancellor (A&R), Bacardi/Groove Armada (music & brand partnership), XL (independent label), Polydor (record label), Jeanette Lee (manager), Chris Blackwell (music exec of the last 50 years), Rob Partridge (Strat)
Tuesday, 7 April 2009
Record of the Day Innovators Award
A £500 prize & the inaugural RotD Innovators Award for the best Spotify App.
- We want to encourage the smartest developers to come up with the smartest ideas, not just in this instance for Spotify, but so that we can find room to work with them in the future.
- Read the libspotify page and see if you're interested in taking part. And read their T's & C's too.
- You have until 23:59(GMT) on Friday 17th April to get your ideas together. Send them via email to info(at)recordoftheday(dot)com with a one page summary (word doc) of what your application does, and any other information/examples too.
- Winner announced by Record of the Day on Friday 8th May
- Prize awarded at judges discretion. Contact info(at)recordoftheday(dot)com if you have any other questions.
- This isn't about ownership for us, it's about getting to know the smartest developers out there.
Friday, 20 March 2009
CMW 2009
Often a staple on the conference calendar for Europeans on their way to SXSW, the 27th annual CMW made the news in its own right this year for a clash of egos between commentator Bob Lefsetz and Kiss’ Gene Simmons, who agreed to a last-minute interview that became the centre stage event for the conference.
That this so-called 'cage-match' was more talked and written about than anything else at the event should remind conference organisers that no matter how many interesting speakers you book or the ground-breaking topics you cover, it's the ego-driven bitch-fests that will win out.
The tone of the clash had been previously set with Lefsetz's email response to Simmons' opening day keynote. Lefsetz described Simmons' speech as “a full time commercial...a product promotion for the latest iteration of Simmons Records.” And indeed it was. We're told that this joint venture between Universal Canada and Simmons Records is bankrolled by a Canadian multi-millionaire's daughter. Simmons responded publicly to the email shortly after it was published, then over dinner later that night, CMW president Neill Dixon proposed the hastily-organised 'cage-match'. Lefsetz's assertion that Gene setting up a label in Canada (rather than in his own backyard) seemed suspicious was neither here nor there but it led them to a packed conference room to set out both their arguments.
“What is your track record behind the scenes?” asked Lefsetz, “I discovered Van Halen and managed Liza Minnelli, what have you done, bitch?” Simmons fired back before continuing to plug his JV with Universal Canada. Lefsetz continued to soapbox the opinions he'd already blogged about: why bands shouldn't sign to majors, how Gene was thinking like a dinosaur and shamelessly promoting instead of 'giving back'. The low blows came from Simmons, but Lefsetz was able to put him in his place, drawing upon facts such as the way in which Simmons’ solo album bombed.
It might be the only panel we've sat through where a rock star was accused of being “an asshole” to his face. Simmons was brave and/or foolish to take up the offer for take part in the face-off: he was never going to come off well. In a room full of people who get The Lefsetz Letter and appreciate his rants, the last word would always be left to Bob. Within a couple of hours after the 'debate' Lefsetz had sent out his impressions of his meeting with Simmons to his subscriber list. Game over.
This public spat may have been an entertaining diversion from dry panels about mobile music, but it was also a childish argument and a depressing glimpse of lowest-common denominator debating. CMW and other conferences like it would do well to have more confrontation on their schedules, but not like this.
The recent Canadian Radio, Television and Telecommunications new media hearings threw up a few hot topics for debate, which gained relevance for us in the light of industry reactions in the UK towards the interim Digital Britain report. The question of the role ISPs will play going forward was in sharp focus on one panel led by IFPI chairman John Kennedy and featuring Canadian Recording Industry Association president Graham Henderson, as well as representatives from Canadian indies, publishing and the broadcast industry. Henderson said Canada has lagged behind other countries when it comes to setting anti-piracy initiatives, and was hopeful that ISPs and labels could work more closely in future, despite his reckoning that there would not be any financial incentive for the ISPs to engage meaningfully with the industry.
The SOCAN-sponsored (the Canadian collection agency) 'The Life Of A Song' panel proved particularly interesting and spelled out the life-span a hit song can potentially achieve. Randy Bachman (ex-Bachman Turner Overdrive) told the audience the story of the conception and recording of his hit 'Takin' Care Of Business'. What was fascinating was the connection the song had made with the public and the money it had made in all its various uses over the years. The songwriter's complete integrity in brokering deals on those uses was also evident. Bachman peppered his speech with fantastic anecdotes throughout: turning down $1m from a beer brand as he didn't want to be associated with alcohol promotion, then holding out for a longer-lasting and more lucrative relationship with Office Depot, which made the song both its signature tune and slogan. The session offered a sweet reminder that all you need is one hit to set you up. And that you can be an ageing 70's rocker and still work hard with dignity – Gene Simmons, take note.
CMW is a dependable and useful conference. In a year when slightly fewer of the international delegates were joining festivities in Austin, this was a manageable and relaxed atmosphere to do business in. At the very least, the value in conferences like these lays in the thrashing out of new ideas and discussion of hot topics. Even if it wasn't genuinely agenda-setting, CMW keeps apace with its competitors with a mixture of interesting debates. Perhaps the sideshows like Lefsetz/Simmons are best kept to the playground in future, though.
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
No Eyeliner on the Horizon: Nicola Slade owns up to being a massive U2 fan and ponders the kerfuffle over the band’s new release in the last week.
I am a massive U2 fan and I’m not ashamed to say it. In 1989, my uncle gave me a copy of Rattle ‘N’ Hum on cassette and on the long drive back from London to the Hampshire countryside listening to it on my Walkman, my life changed. Up until then, at the ripe old age of 13, I only had three albums: two Now compilations and the best of ELO, which my father bought me for Christmas aged four when he realised that every time they came on the radio, I danced around the front room like I’d drunk too much squash.
U2 are partly responsible for me wanting to be in the music industry – them and the Motown label. By nine, I’d decided to become a journalist, by the time I was 13, on hearing U2, I decided I wanted to be a music journalist. In 1991, when the band released Achtung Baby, I won a pre-release copy on Simon Mayo’s show and owing to my ‘huge enthusiasm’, Radio 1 asked if I would review the record live on air the next day, which I did. Rather amusingly, I couldn’t get my head around the change in direction and partly slated it. It later became my favourite U2 album. However, all of this set my plans in stone: I would head to London as soon as possible and get myself a writing job about music.
When I was 17, I spent all the money I had in the world (earned by working three jobs while doing my A Levels) on following the band around the UK and Ireland throughout the summer, sleeping in the back of a car. Bono pulled me up on stage to dance with him at Wembley Stadium, which was knee-shakingly exciting. I once spent £100 (a lot for a 15-year-old) on buying the stolen Achtung demos at a local record fair. Even when the PR sends me a free copy of the album, I still go out and buy it, just for the thrill. I have a special U2 box with everything they have ever released in a locked box under my bed. Yes: that’s the level of my fanaticism. How uncool must this seem to a bunch of music industry types?!
Watching all the kerfuffle about the release of No Line On The Horizon has consequently been particularly interesting for me, given my ‘obsession’. There have been a couple of comments on our message board this week which have stirred my thoughts - complaints are circulating in the media that the BBC has handed Universal untold amounts of free publicity in the run-up to the release and secondly, because the band decided to stream the album upfront on Spotify, some people seem to think the album sales will be affected.
If you click here, you can see the BBC U2 coverage: a Culture Show exclusive, two slots of R1, one on R2 and a R4 Front Row show. There will also be another announcement by tomorrow which involves the band and the BBC, but I’ve been sworn to absolute secrecy and can’t reveal what is. As a U2 fan, I’m loving it. Lauren Laverne certainly did a fantastic – and enviable job – in interviewing them for the Culture Show. I’m even at that stage where I have temporarily forgotten my gripes: Bono parading himself in the limelight with world leaders, the band switching their cash to Dutch tax-free accounts from Dublin, just in time for the economic meltdown which to-date has been felt more painfully in Ireland than other European countries, the Boyzone ‘moment’ in Sweetest Thing, the hairweave, the ‘re-applying for the job of best band in the world’ and so on ad infinitum.
As a working member of the music industry (or should that be ‘serving’ the music industry?), I am slightly miffed by the BBC’s unprecedented coverage of U2’s new release. The BBC’s level of support towards the music industry is good, but by no means great – look at the debacle over TOTP for a start. The BBC is great when it’s delivering coverage of one-off events: Glastonbury, for example, or Summer Sundae on 6Music. The playlisting on R1 and R2, in my opinion, leaves a lot to be desired, but on the other hand, without Steve Lamacq, Colin Murray, Mark Riley and Gideon Coe, in particular, many new bands wouldn’t get the national coverage they deserve. Overall, I would argue that the industry’s relationship with the BBC is hit and miss. However, Universal’s relationship with the BBC is quite obviously alive and kicking. One can't help but wonder if the label group’s dominance in recorded music extends to influence over the Beeb? Maybe I’m being cynical, but if a very healthy relationship exists (and no doubt with the arrival of Lesley Douglas that relationship continues to flourish), then perhaps Universal could use its power for good? Lobbying for the return of some more music TV programming would be a good start.
With regards to the fellows who see technological advances as damaging to album sales, I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest it’s all nonsense. No doubt the album sales figures will tell the full story, but No Line On The Horizon’s pre-release streaming on Spotify will not stop the fans, heading out in hoards, snapping up every available format there is. As my brief re-telling of my teenage U2 obsession reveals, I would have bought anything on offer and my first album by U2 was a copy! What was interesting about the U2/Spotify deal was that Apple seems to have been sidelined: no limited edition iPods and iTunes exclusives this time around. It’s undoubtedly interesting to see how the band uses the latest ‘killer app’ for their own purposes: a freedom which isn’t open to all bands, that’s for sure.
Anyway, turn off your TV and radio now if you’re sick of the sight of Bono’s face. The machine is in mid-flight and there’s some time to go before it lands.
U2 are partly responsible for me wanting to be in the music industry – them and the Motown label. By nine, I’d decided to become a journalist, by the time I was 13, on hearing U2, I decided I wanted to be a music journalist. In 1991, when the band released Achtung Baby, I won a pre-release copy on Simon Mayo’s show and owing to my ‘huge enthusiasm’, Radio 1 asked if I would review the record live on air the next day, which I did. Rather amusingly, I couldn’t get my head around the change in direction and partly slated it. It later became my favourite U2 album. However, all of this set my plans in stone: I would head to London as soon as possible and get myself a writing job about music.
When I was 17, I spent all the money I had in the world (earned by working three jobs while doing my A Levels) on following the band around the UK and Ireland throughout the summer, sleeping in the back of a car. Bono pulled me up on stage to dance with him at Wembley Stadium, which was knee-shakingly exciting. I once spent £100 (a lot for a 15-year-old) on buying the stolen Achtung demos at a local record fair. Even when the PR sends me a free copy of the album, I still go out and buy it, just for the thrill. I have a special U2 box with everything they have ever released in a locked box under my bed. Yes: that’s the level of my fanaticism. How uncool must this seem to a bunch of music industry types?!
Watching all the kerfuffle about the release of No Line On The Horizon has consequently been particularly interesting for me, given my ‘obsession’. There have been a couple of comments on our message board this week which have stirred my thoughts - complaints are circulating in the media that the BBC has handed Universal untold amounts of free publicity in the run-up to the release and secondly, because the band decided to stream the album upfront on Spotify, some people seem to think the album sales will be affected.
If you click here, you can see the BBC U2 coverage: a Culture Show exclusive, two slots of R1, one on R2 and a R4 Front Row show. There will also be another announcement by tomorrow which involves the band and the BBC, but I’ve been sworn to absolute secrecy and can’t reveal what is. As a U2 fan, I’m loving it. Lauren Laverne certainly did a fantastic – and enviable job – in interviewing them for the Culture Show. I’m even at that stage where I have temporarily forgotten my gripes: Bono parading himself in the limelight with world leaders, the band switching their cash to Dutch tax-free accounts from Dublin, just in time for the economic meltdown which to-date has been felt more painfully in Ireland than other European countries, the Boyzone ‘moment’ in Sweetest Thing, the hairweave, the ‘re-applying for the job of best band in the world’ and so on ad infinitum.
As a working member of the music industry (or should that be ‘serving’ the music industry?), I am slightly miffed by the BBC’s unprecedented coverage of U2’s new release. The BBC’s level of support towards the music industry is good, but by no means great – look at the debacle over TOTP for a start. The BBC is great when it’s delivering coverage of one-off events: Glastonbury, for example, or Summer Sundae on 6Music. The playlisting on R1 and R2, in my opinion, leaves a lot to be desired, but on the other hand, without Steve Lamacq, Colin Murray, Mark Riley and Gideon Coe, in particular, many new bands wouldn’t get the national coverage they deserve. Overall, I would argue that the industry’s relationship with the BBC is hit and miss. However, Universal’s relationship with the BBC is quite obviously alive and kicking. One can't help but wonder if the label group’s dominance in recorded music extends to influence over the Beeb? Maybe I’m being cynical, but if a very healthy relationship exists (and no doubt with the arrival of Lesley Douglas that relationship continues to flourish), then perhaps Universal could use its power for good? Lobbying for the return of some more music TV programming would be a good start.
With regards to the fellows who see technological advances as damaging to album sales, I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest it’s all nonsense. No doubt the album sales figures will tell the full story, but No Line On The Horizon’s pre-release streaming on Spotify will not stop the fans, heading out in hoards, snapping up every available format there is. As my brief re-telling of my teenage U2 obsession reveals, I would have bought anything on offer and my first album by U2 was a copy! What was interesting about the U2/Spotify deal was that Apple seems to have been sidelined: no limited edition iPods and iTunes exclusives this time around. It’s undoubtedly interesting to see how the band uses the latest ‘killer app’ for their own purposes: a freedom which isn’t open to all bands, that’s for sure.
Anyway, turn off your TV and radio now if you’re sick of the sight of Bono’s face. The machine is in mid-flight and there’s some time to go before it lands.