Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Since the advent of the phonograph and other technological wonders that have advanced
recorded music in the 20th century, music is around us constantly - in stores, elevators, at home,
in the car and woven into other forms of entertainment like television, movies and sporting
events. The infiltration of MP3 players and digital files within the music industry has made it
even easier to be plugged in and listening to almost any piece of recorded music imaginable,
anywhere, anytime. The rapid adoption of technology, however, has brought heartache to the
traditional music industry business model. The only way for it to survive the influx of new
technologies in the 21st century is to create a new model. This revitalization will occur as a
result of the digitization of the industry and the overwhelming response of consumers to it. The
exact shape it will take is yet to be known, but one thing is certain: the music industry will most
likely continue losing control of the music they back, and the current model will dissolve
Before the new model is outlined, it is vital to examine the music industry's varied and
detailed history going back several centuries involving printed music, performances, the advent
of recorded music and the injection of commercialization into the performance, marketing and
distribution of music. Reebee Garofalo writes that in recent years "the relationship between
corporate capital and musical culture has transcended national boundaries as the music industry
has become an increasingly global phenomenon" whereas previously it thrived mainly within the
United States (319). These recent rapid technological developments coupled with globalization
Cepek and Salerno 2
have spawned an entirely different set of norms within every major recording label, forcing a
new organizational model for the industry. In order to better understand why, Garofalo breaks
down the three major phases of the old industry: 1) music publishing which stemmed from 15th
century Europe and the first copyright law in Britain in 1710, 2) recording companies which
replaced sheet music in the mainstream in the late 19th century and 3) "transnational
Connecting all three of these industry phases has been radio broadcasting. It first began in
the early 20th century with such broadcasts as phonograph music played from the Eiffel Tower
in 1908 and the great opera singer, Enrico Caruso, at the Metropolitan Opera in New York City
in 1910 (329). Radio has been so lucrative because of its relationship to the recording industry as
well as commercial advertising (332). Historically speaking, music's relationship with airwaves
has always been driven and supported by economic terms; in fact, radio is the oldest form of
electronic advertising (Lin 204) and looks like it will be here to stay. As the internet became part
of our everyday lives, radio broadcasts were converted into online streaming while traditional
radio remained a "background medium without losing popularity," both a popular means of
listening to music on demand as well as advertising (Van Dijk 206). Fast forward a few years
and online radio is not only accessible via one's personal computer, but through mobile
The technology which presented the real challenge to the music industry came along in
the form of tiny, compressed files called MP3s and a revolutionary file-sharing program created
by college student, Shawn Fanning in 1999 (Madden 6). The process of favoring MP3s over
older media like CDs has been described by Sarah Frere-Jones, a music critic, as “a small
Cepek and Salerno 3
example of the enormous financial buckling that is now global” (6). Specifically it was the
compression of the technology that brought the music business to its knees. First the recordings
went digital, then they were shrunk and highly transportable, an impossibility with physical
records or CDs (6). "Napsterization" refers to "a massive shift in a given industry where
networked consumers armed with technology and high-speed connectivity disrupt traditional
institutions, hierarchies and distribution systems" (5). It is no wonder that the traditional business
model came to a screeching halt when millions of kids started downloading music for free via
Napster. It is but an age old part of technological history: old media was being usurped by the
new methods. Only in this case it happened faster than anyone could have imagined.
This kind of transformation has been consistent throughout new media's progression and
made possible by the very networks in which it exists. What was once manufactured, marketed
and distributed within the confines of a metal and concrete building now uses the multimedia PC
for these functions and many, many more (van Dijk 56). In 2006, Jan van Dijk discussed the
possibility of old media being usurped by new media, an idea, he argues, which has been proven
false several times over (205). Within the music industry, however, it seems a much more
feasible scenario would be that older media is simply phased out (e.g. the 8-track, vinyl records
and cassette tape) while newer technology (CDs, MP3s and their respective players) takes over
gradually over time. It is important to realize that vinyl, for example, is still alive and well in
many circles and more and more frequently artists are releasing their albums or singles in vinyl,
CD and MP3 forms, supporting van Dijk's argument quite well. As fast as technology changes
The current state of the recording industry has been described as fragile, still "hanging on
to their broken strings" (Madden 7). Record sales for the music industry have been continuously
Cepek and Salerno 4
declining. The Nielsen Report shows "that total album sales, including albums sold digitally, fell
to 428.4 million units, down 14% from 500.5 million in 2007" (7). According to Pew's 2008
“Internet and Consumer Choice” report, 13% of music buyers reported their most recent music
purchase was a digital download (8). Even so, CDs are not dead quite yet. Though digital album
sales “increased 32% between 2004 and 2008 —to a record 65.8 million units— 362.6 million
physical units were sold” (8). The market for digital music is young yet, and people haven't
These statistics are just one part of the online music revolution and the problem it is
causing the current music business model. According to the IFPI (The International Federation of
the Phonographic Industry), in 2009 "the music industry transformed its business models,
offering consumers an increasing range of new services with leading technology partners" (“IFPI
publishes Digital Music Report 2009"). This was a result of an additional substantial problem:
95 per cent of music downloads are illegal and unpaid for, an enormous challenge for record
companies and their partners, as well as a perplexing situation for many artists. To date, recorded
music is the leader of the "online and mobile revolution, generating more revenue in percentage
terms through digital platforms than the newspaper (4%), magazine (1%) and film industries
(4%) combined" (“IFPI publishes Digital Music Report 2009"). The weight of these numbers
points to the social consequences of the decline in record sales seen in the music industry around
the world. It becomes not just a matter of who is listening to what using which device, but who is
making money from the deal and who is losing out significantly. Given the economic turmoil
the United States has gone through since 9/11, how people are spending their hard earned
money, or who is not, and how artists are being compensated for their contributions is of great
concern.
Cepek and Salerno 5
Bands like Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, Wilco and even David Bowie willingly jumped
on the digital download bandwagon, exhibiting their adoption of new media by releasing songs
free for download or publicly singing the praises of what MP3s have to offer, while other artists,
notably Metallica, have proclaimed the unfairness of downloading via file-sharing. Among those
who were both successful and struggling, the artists and musicians Pew surveyed in 2004 were
more likely to say that the internet had made it possible for them to make more money from their
art than they were to say it had made it harder to protect their work from piracy or unlawful use
(13). The report also revealed that most artists interviewed believed that "unauthorized online
file sharing was wrong, [but] few felt the industry was in peril because of the networks. When
asked about the threat peer-to-peer file-sharing posed to creative industries at the time, two-thirds
of artists said the activity posed only a minor threat or no threat at all to them" (13).
According to 'The State of Music Online: Ten Years after Napster," 75 per cent of
teenagers who download music aged 12-17 agree that “file-sharing is so easy to do, it’s
unrealistic to expect people not to do it” (Madden 15). It prompts the question of whether or not
a generation who knows little else save downloading music for free will ever see the value in
purchasing music. Also: is purchasing CDs vs. legally downloading MP3s as serious an issue as
the law makes it out to be? Certainly as more and more people take advantage of the new
technologies available (iPods, smartphones, subscription based online music services, etc.) and
artists continue to speak out about their views on the distribution of their material, lawmakers
will have to react and at least attempt to challenge the current laws (Lipschutz 255).
already in progress, and it is clear that, very slowly, the music industry is coming to terms with
what they will need to contend with to revitalize how they do business in the 21st century.
Cepek and Salerno 6
Music subscription services, social networking sites and new licensing channels are continuing
to become more popular among teens and adults alike, embracing new media and turning its
back very slowly on the old ways. In 2008 Nokia Comes With Music, MySpace Music and
several other partnerships with ISPs such as TDC in Denmark, Neuf Cegetel in France,
TeliaSonera in Sweden and BSkyB in the UK appeared, indicating that these types of services
will provide consumers with a legal way of obtaining digital downloads ("IFPI publishes Digital
Music Report 2009"). Touring will continue to bring in the most money, the way major players
like Madonna, U2 and Radiohead make up for declining record sales ("David K. Randall On The
Music Industry"). In addition, a research group based in New York City and London, Jupiter
Communications, has "urged record labels to embrace the online world as a marketing tool, as a
means of combating piracy, as a way to earn more revenue by cutting out retailers, and as a less
expensive distribution model" (Jones 222). Whether or not the industry takes the hint in time is
yet to be determined.
Negroponte argued that as we move into a digital state of being new business models
must arise. He argues just as television manufacturers felt that increasing the resolution of TVs
was the key to moving their industry forward, music executives feel that a more efficient
delivery of models that already exist are the key to the music industry. He writes:
Better and more efficient delivery of what already exists is what most media
executives think and talk about in the context of being digital. But like the Trojan
horse, the consequence of this gift will be surprising. Wholly new content will
emerge from being digital, as will new players, new economic models, and a
likely cottage industry of information and entertainment providers (18).
The splintering of atoms into bits introduced peer to peer sharing and bit torrent which birthed
various pay per track programs, most notably, iTunes. The pay per track model however is
nothing more than a more efficient means of delivery of an old economic model. To put it
As was illustrated earlier even with more efficient means of delivering music, the music
industry is still on a decline largely because of a refusal to develop a new economic model. There
have been examples of the direction to go, by both companies within the music industry and
companies (Netflix) outside of the music industry. Feinberg argues: “The exponential growth of
Internet bandwidth combined with the ability to significantly compress digital audio has
impacted the music industry in numerous ways” ("Rent vs. Own: The Streaming Music Debate
Continues"), the most important of which is the increased feasibility of an industry based on
streaming. Currently, the streaming music business is the flavor of the month in Palo Alto with
venture capitalists throwing their capital behind various start-ups. This has led to industry leaders
such as: Pandora, Last.FM, GrooveShark, Spotify, Rhapsody and even Microsoft. All of these
different companies have different models and they are all available on different platforms (some
being computer only and other platforms being exclusive to a certain manufacturer, an example
being Microsoft’s Zune platform only being available on Microsoft products), and this has led to
a fragmented marketplace.
When the consumer decides which platform to support, s/he has to answer a couple
questions: 1.) Which platform has the majority of the artists that I listen to (there isn’t a single
streaming platform that all of the studios support)? 2.) Is the company that answers question 1
available on my mobile device of choice? The difficulty for consumers to reconcile these
questions has been a major factor to the slow transition from owning music to primarily renting
music. In order for this new vehicle to gain foothold and not have the fragmentation of the
1. The current system based around Studios must dissolve. With the Studio system intact,
there is consistently a high probability that a Studio will favor one music rental platform versus
Cepek and Salerno 8
2. A service that develops deep market penetration and is available on the majority of major
3. A tiered pricing system that allows for everyone to enjoy the service while still keeping
Analyzing the current situation with the music industry and the transition to an online
based system, it appears that the issue needs to be addressed mostly on a macro level, or as
Negroponte would say, atoms. The macro level will deal with the overall structure of the music
industry. With our solution, it is important to understand that we are operating from the
In looking at a solution for the macro economy of the music industry, there are 5 different
groups of people whose interests need to be considered in this solution: the listeners, the
musicians, the company providing the rental service (Company X), the concert venues and the
companies producing the devices that consumers use to access the rental service. Breaking down
each of the 5 players, this is what the new economy would look like for each:
1. Company X—In order to gain market penetration, it would have to be a company that
was leading in the former economy, a company like Rhapsody or Spotify. Company X would
accept music submissions from any artist, with the only caveat being that they would have to
submit their songs in groupings (using EP’s and LP’s as examples). Company X would not have
any type of quality control. The listeners would provide the quality control through ranking
services and also by choosing to listen to the songs. Mark Mulligan suggests that a three tiered
pricing system must be instituted ("The Key To Making Free Music Services Work" )); where
we disagree is how they are implemented. Company X should provide three options for
Cepek and Salerno 9
customers: option A would be a free option that would rely heavily on ads revenue, and ads
would play with the same frequency as they do now on the radio, and ads would show along the
side of the interface that listeners are using (Google and Facebook being models); option B
would cost the consumer $10 per month and the ad frequency would be reduced to banner ads
only; option C would be $30 per month and there would be no advertising of any kind for the
listener. All three options would have the same musical content. Company X would also become
a sponsor for the various concert venues allowing them to advertise their services at the different
venues, also providing an option to host the concerts on their server once the show was over.
their phones, mp3 player devices, computers, speaker systems, etc. The device manufactures
would also help sponsor the concert venues and advertise their particular devices at the different
concerts. This sponsoring would help to increase the frequency and amount of impressions they
to Company X. Every time a musician submitted a grouping of songs, Company X would pay the
musicians a $1000 one time payout once that grouping of songs were played 100 times. After
that, the musician would receive $1000 for every 1000 plays of a particular track. Musicians
would also be encouraged to tour and would receive a percentage of the gross revenue of
4. Concert Venues—Would receive money from Company X and the Device Manufactures
to help subsidize the cost of putting on shows and also to help keep ticket prices lower for
listeners. Concert Venues would give 20% of the gross revenue to the headlining act and 5% to
the opening act. These terms would be mandatory and enforced by Company X as a condition for
Cepek and Salerno 10
5. Listeners—Listeners would benefit the most from this setup. The fragmentation that
listeners currently experience, such as Sony artists being available only on certain devices would
no longer exist. It would also increase the accessibility of bands of all different sizes since there
will no longer be a filter or gatekeeper preventing certain musicians from getting through.
Finally for the listener, it will also help to keep concert ticket prices lower because there would
now be sponsorships in place by Company X and all of the different device manufactures that
In ensuring that the music industry remains viable, there are important transitions that
have to be made. Most importantly, we must move away from the idea that increasing efficiency
of delivery is the only means of progress. It is important that we transition to a musical economy
that is free from Studios. The first step is putting in place a company that will submit music from
anyone and that has the market penetration to be accessible on any device. Once that structure is
in place Company X must use a three-tiered pricing structure that allows all listeners access to all
music, but also allows for a large enough revenue stream to allow both the musicians and
performance has been the backbone of the music industry for ages and through our structure we
are able to maintain that while reducing the pricing of concert tickets that has seemed to steadily
increase overtime. If these three things are able to be accomplished, we will be well on our way
Works Cited
“David K. Randall on the Music Industry.” Forbes.com, 2010. Web. 7 November, 2010.
Cepek and Salerno 11
van Dijk, Jan. The Network Society. 2ed. London: SAGE, 2006. Print.
Garofalo, Rafee. “Music Publishing to MP3: Music and Industry in the Twentieth Century.”
American Music 17,3 (1999): 319, 329, 332. Jstor. Web. 30 October, 2010.
“IFPI publishes Digital Music Report 2009.” Ifpi.org, 2010. Web. 7 November, 2010.
Jones, Steve. “Music, and the Internet.” Popular Music 19, 2 (2000):222. Jstor. Web. 30
October, 2010
“The Key to Making Free Music Services Work.” Paidcontent.org, 2010. Web. 7 November,
2010.
Lipshutz, Jeremy. “Digital Media Technology and Fair Use.” Lin & Atkin 243-255
Lin, Carolyn A. “Interactive Media Technology and Electronic Shopping.” Lin & Atkin 203-
222.
Lin, Carolyn A. and Atkin, David J., Ed. Communications, Technology and Social Change:
Theory and Implications. New York: Routledge, 2008. Print.
Madden, Mary. “The State of Music Online: Ten Years after Napster.” Pew Internet and
American Life Project 2009: 5-8, 13, 15. Web. 30 October, 2010.
Negroponte, Nicholas. Being Digital. New York: Vintage Books, 1995. Print.
“Rent vs. Own: The Streaming Music Debate Continues.” Pbs.org, 2010. Web. 7 November,
2010.