c) Has/will this change popular music?
d) Will we still need media companies in future if people can produce and distribute cultural products directly?
I think both questions are really a case of supply and demand. Although the websites talked about in previous posts potentially give anyone the chance to create music that is heard by the masses and to then succesfuly advertise and distribute this online, what the masses actually want to hear must be considered. Considring the biggest sellers in the music industry at the moment (artists such as Girls Aloud, Beyonce etc...), it is likely that such artists do need the support of larger labels. Such commercial acts are unlikely to support themselves online and while people continue to buy this music then larger companies will continue to create such music and grow financially and in power. The same goes for other cultural products-indipendant film, television, radio etc ARE now able to be produced by the individual. However, unless demand for this exceeds demand for mainstream and currently more popular film (/tv/radio), there will continue to be demand/need for large companies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it also depends on the aspirations of the artist. Some might be happy with online recognition and the freedom of being able to do what they want, when they want without compromise, as when an artist signs up to a big label they give up a certain amount of their creativity and freedom as it isn't their money that they are spending. But as long as people want to achieve their dreams on a worldwide scale, there will be definitely be a need for the larger companies - even if in the end all they are good for is putting money behind the 24th series of the X Factor! x
ReplyDeleteHi Kay! James is right- The band 'reverend and the makers' built up a huge fan base via the internet. But now they have released 2 albums, they say they are quitting because they don't like the way the music industry is run, and that it's "not about the music anymore". It obviously wasn't their aspiration to be rich and famous- they genuinly were doing it for the music, and they have called the shots by refusing to make any more albums!
ReplyDeleteHello!
ReplyDeleteYes I definitely agree that it has to do with the band themselves. I've talked previously about quick profit artists with no staying power...these are the kind that I don't think would go out and do it on their own via the internet. But why are Reverend and the Makers using the popularity they now have to release their own music online, which doesn't require the backing of a big label? I'd say New technologies certainly allow bands to do this now and they don't need a label behind them
Arguably even more impacting upon popular taste is the fact that artists who lose their recording contract -as they go out of fashion- can still make a good living by releasing their music online and publicising gigs & tours via their network of fan blogs, SNS sites and YouTube/Myspace. Marilyan? and Brian Eno do this. David Bowie ended his record deal and followed his mate Eno online. Even obscure artists like Pete Atkin (check him out -you might like him- sort of Home Counties Grandad meets Divine Comedy) who never sold more than a few tens of thousands of LPs in the 70s has a new recording career online -now he's retired from his old job as a radio producer.
ReplyDelete