In this weekend’s news feed: The New York Times follows a BMI licensing executive around the American Southwest on bar, club, and coffee house calls. Anecdotes involving strippers and guns ensue, but the deeper issues resonate beyond the clichés. The law vs. common perceptions vs. recession budgeting vs. kill-them-with-patience strategies: Getting paid–it’s…complicated.
It struck me as kind of odd that ASCAP got little more than an “oh, yeah, and them too” reference, since I think it might have been interesting to hear more on how their philosophies and enforcement styles differ in the current era. Still, even though the article provided a pretty elementary outline of PRO activities, for those not already deeply in the know I’m sure it’s bound to generate some discussion–if for no other line than this one, re: new technologies that improve tracking music usage, whether for commercial gain or not. The author notes that:
Friends I talked to had a similar reaction. To a one, they said: “Jesus. Sounds like Big Brother.” When I mentioned this to [BMI’s former Vice President of Business Development David] DeBusk, he smiled ominously. “Yes. Well. We’re here to help.”
In the end (of this article, at least) the barkeep with the heart of gold signs on the dotted line.
Who do the P.R.O.s actually serve? Isn’t it the pop-music-industrial-complex — an oligarchy of a few corporations that monopolizes our culture to devastating effect? Only the tiniest fraction of composers make a significant amount of money from BMI or ASCAP (if any at all.) There are thousands of composers across America doing very good work, but they are not paid because their music is not a product of the pop-music-industrial-complex.
Culture is by nature local, so this highly centralized industrial complex actually weakens our cultural identity. It is little wonder that their collection methods are often similar to forms of racketeering.
I’m always happy when I see a local musician writing her own songs, building a regional fan base, and thus defying the whole corrupt mass media racket.
Actually William, there are many, many more thousands *in* the “pop-music-industrial-complex”, that aren’t making a penny either.
Musician Harvey Ried has an interesting article about P.R.O.s on his site:
http://www.woodpecker.com/writing/essays/royalty-politics.html
One idea seems especially interesting, though it does not include a date:
“There has been some recent activity in state legislatures trying to tax and regulate ASCAP, and nothing definitive has happened yet. Kentucky and Ohio are currently considering a gross-receipts sales tax. Presumably ASCAP passes taxes on to the user in states that impose such taxes.â€
To extend the idea, it might be helpful if state legislatures put hefty taxes on ASCAP and BMI (and other manifestations of the mass media) and used the money to fund their own local cultures. It might be similar to the way we tax gasoline to fund road building and maintenance. Of course, the development of such laws are unlikely in our plutocratic society where the government and capital are essentially the same thing, but at least the legal theory is interesting.
Another option might be for artists to create local co-operatives for mutual support and to help communities regain their appreciation for local cultures. Could local artists (or even state or regional governments) create their own collective studios and local distribution systems that could serve as a counter-balance to the totalizing effects of the mass-media oligarchy?
I just bought a “share†in a local farm co-op which entitles me to pick up a bag of produce every Tuesday of the best vegetables and eggs I had since I left my own family farm when I was 17. Maybe its time to turn our back on the P.R.O.s and start creating our own regional systems for support, development, and distribution.
If successful, they would probably quickly be destroyed, but still, one can always dream.
Just because most songwriters don’t make money doesn’t mean that none of them should.
As a church coffeehouse coordinator, I promote songwriter showcases, rather than pop open mics. I don’t see it as “defying the mass media racket”. I’m just promoting the local culture (and avoiding royalty payments). Nothing is achieved by thinking that one can actually put a dent in the earnings of the “pop-music-industrial-complex”.
The trick is to monetize more art, not to de-monetize the art that actually makes money.
That’s actually what I am saying. We need a more equitable distribution of musical production and reception. Instead of a few artists and their corporations making billions through a monopolistic oligarchy (the Wal-Martization of music,) we need a more regional orientation to culture that would allow more musicians to make a living with their work, and most importantly, allow for people to develop more authentic musical identities. This would not entail eliminating mass media, though it would require a major shift in how we think about culture, and allow an alternative to the mass media’s often one-dimensional domination of our cultural lives.
And of course, this discussion has been oriented toward song writers and popular music. Yet another model would be needed for classical musicians, such as the public funding systems used in Europe. They are very effective and also have a very strong regional orientation.