Radiohead live
In October 2007, Radiohead – one of the biggest bands on earth – released their new album for free download on their website. No label, no price. My first thought was “Way to go, Radiohead! Thanks for sticking it to the man and fighting for us little people!”
I love anything that feels pure to the art and anti-institution. But then I started to think about all the big 1980s bands who earned a ton of money for their record labels…allowing them to take risks on little unknown bands like Radiohead in 1992. Without George Michael’s earnings in the 80s, we might not have Sigur Ros or White Stripes or Radiohead. When money gets sparse, risk is the first thing to get cut.
Radiohead’s development was funded by Huey Lewis’s sales. It’s a shame that they won’t pass on the favor.
Seth Godin
Fast forward to today. Seth Godin announced (here) that he will no longer be releasing books in the traditional format. This author of 12 best-sellers believes that the book industry is just too broken (and besides, he no longer needs it.) He wrote on his blog:
“Traditional book publishers use techniques perfected a hundred years ago to help authors reach unknown readers, using a stable technology (books) and an antique and expensive distribution system.”
He may be right, but being reminded of Radiohead, my first thought was “Come on, Seth, you just hurt the chances of many undiscovered writers. Very selfish move.”
But since I’m a contrarian – even to myself – I have to wonder if Seth is right. What if the publishing industry is too broken to be fixed? What if the biggest gift he could give future writers is to stop propping up an archaic system and just let it fail? Something new and exciting and forward-looking will arise from the ashes – it always does! – but not until the old is gone.
So do you think Radiohead (and Seth?) are selfishly forgetting where they’ve come from…or prophetically pushing us into a better future?
The thing is, with the shift to self-publishing many smaller musicians and writers are catching breaks, albeit on a different level. Musicians are able to record and distribute music fairly easily without needing to be discovered by a major label, and there’s room for innovation of sound without the need for major financial backing.
In the writing world, blogging is doing this too. People are being given an audience when previously one might have been unavailable to them. There are still drawbacks to the system (mostly financial, both for the publisher/record label and the struggling artist). But so far, I’m not sure the art itself is suffering.
Comment by Gary — August 23, 2010 @ 7:16 pm
Shalom Aaron,
It’s been said (source unknown) that the pioneers always take the arrows. My teacher Max once said that the greatest gift one can give to another is the gift of independence. I’ll add that prophets (the OT is replete with examples and Jesus was the ultimate example) and artists (especially as Seth defines them in his last book “Linchpin”) take the arrows as well.
Radiohead and Seth Godin (and the examples in the book “What Would Google Do?” by Jeff Jarvis) are prophets and artists in the most elevated sense of the words. They are the messengers of today. That there is resistance to the gift of their teaching (their message) is obvious and goes with the territory. Shooting the messenger won’t change the truth of their message. And they are teaching us about the needed tools for independence in today’s world of a constantly accelerating rate of change. They are giving us the gift my teacher Max was talking about.
“Change alone is unchanging.” Heraclitus (c.535 BC – 475 BC).
Often times change isn’t fair and then again neither is life. What’s always left is our freedom to choose our response to the hand we’re dealt to paraphrase Dr. Viktor Frankl.
Great post Aaron. Provocative and dare I say prophetic?!?!
Wholeness,
Jordan
Comment by Jordan — August 23, 2010 @ 9:01 pm
i love huey lewis.
this definitely got me thinking, aaron. Switchfoot did something similar lately when they dropped their major. they probably never would have found the audience or mass appeal they did without the label’s help, and now that they’ve found their audience they “went out on their own”. like you i have mixed feelings, and appreciate both sides, but i don’t yet know where to land.
Comment by Joe — August 24, 2010 @ 7:25 am
I feel like in both cases the respective media have experienced drastic shifts in many senses. Thanks in great part to the internet, our level of accessibility as consumers is through the roof. Radiohead knows we can get our hands on their music without paying if we wanted to, why not cut off that underground by giving us the option to pay OR not to pay. It leaves the control in their hands. So one might argue that by keeping the money close, and out of the hands of the bigwig execs who pull the levers of the archaic label machine – the ones who are spoon-feeding us Ke$ha and Lady Gaga – they’re paving the way for a music experience that, in conjunction with the ease of it’s accessibility, is catered toward what WE the listener want to hear (leaving the theology of a me-centric universe aside, because record execs are not prophets, nor are they God).
Even for the labels nowadays discovering artists is less about spending hours going to hit-or-miss local shows, but instead spending a few minutes quickly scouring myspace profiles and listening to a few tracks… Something I (along with millions of others) do often in my free time WITHOUT getting paid.
As far as Godin, I think that’s just smart. Keeps the cost down for him, and for other authors makes it more acceptable to dive into the cornucopia of new technologies designed to move the industry of the written word to a digital format. I think people neglect to realize that when you print a book, people can only buy as many books as are printed, and further, can only buy them in the stores/libraries where they’re placed, and are limited by the language in which they were printed. Digital files, once created, can be copied/downloaded a virtually limitless number of times, and inherently can easily be made available anywhere in the world where there’s an internet connection, and can be easily translated into almost any language.
I won’t say that hard-copy music and books are obsolete, in today’s world they both still have distinct advantages over their newer counterparts. However I feel like technology has allowed us to move in a direction where labels and publishers are no longer NECESSARY pieces of the formula for success, and starts to close the gap between creation and inspiration.
By empowering consumers, eliminating the hoop-jumping and letting them know they have as much raw potential as the people they look up to, we start to see an opportunity for exponential growth instead of linear growth. That is to say, “one artist makes one album>5000 people buy album>5000 people are inspired to create>5001 artists make 5001 albums” is better than “one person, one album>5000 buy>5000 inspired>label selects one new artist>two artists make two albums.” Obviously things aren’t as cut and dry as that, but you get my point.
All in all I think that no matter what, this is positive for both industries. It may not ultimately be a success, but even if it’s a disaster, at least we can say we’ve seen progress in industries many are starting to consider “dead-or-dying.”
Comment by Brandt — August 24, 2010 @ 11:51 am
PS typing that out on an iTouch keyboard was a bad choice!
PPS Switchfoot dropped Columbia, but have since signed a deal with Atlantic where the label gets a cut of ANY sort of profit the band makes (merch, tours, albums, iTunes). The way I understand it, Switchfoot/lowercase people records only have the rights to the music itself.
Comment by Brandt — August 24, 2010 @ 11:56 am
Shalom All,
Seth Godin on the music business.
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/03/the-live-music.html
Wholeness,
Jordan
Comment by Jordan — August 24, 2010 @ 2:32 pm
While something positive and new and exciting could come in the wake of the traditional media companies collapse, my feeling is that most consumable media, though primarily music, will be something people do as a hobby, for the fun of it. The Internet may be good at “democratizing” music in a way that gives everyone a shot … but it’s a shot, from a commercial perspective, at nothing. If you make any money at all, it’ll be an extremely modest living.
The same thing could theoretically happen with books … people will put their thoughts or stories out for a small community to enjoy but, as a means of making a living, it won’t be much of one.
Ultimately, as things have gone digital (different topic) and the means of production are available to all, the supply has gone up but the demand, as far as I can see, has not. Thus, the monetary value of that product heads to zero. I mean, who ISN’T in a band these days? They’re more unique than someone who is.
The Internet and the collapse of the media companies is not bad for personal creativity or expression at all. It’s just made producing entertainment an unviable career path (and, in the case of music, it always was — it’s just gotten worse).
Comment by bd — August 28, 2010 @ 9:16 am
I really like this. It helps de-commodify music. The internet allows for global spread of media, be it books or music or otherwise. I can theoretically reach anyone with my music, and while I won’t make a lot of money doing it, I’ll still be creating art and spreading it around.
Taking away the commercialization of music is a good thing in my opinion:)
Comment by Zach — September 8, 2010 @ 9:40 pm