Research Proposal for the Junior Research Group

“Interdisciplinary Studies on the Production of Culture”

At BGHS Bielefeld University
Simon Edwin Dittrich, 7th December 2008

Music in the Digital Age: Special Interest

Economies, (Sub)Cultures, Piracy and Privacy

Sound recordings are the predominant form of music in the current age. Music,
had always been an intangible fleeting entity, which had been invariably
connected to the activity of at least one human being. This has changed
radically with the advent of the mechanical reproduction1 of music and the
accompanying re-structuring of the musical economy. Suddenly music was
manifest in physical objects that allowed for the exact replication of cultural
forms without the involvement of human activity. As Rehbein (2007) notes this
and the professionalization of the musical field result in a collective loss of the
ability to play an instrument.
With the coupling of music to a physical object the professionalization and
commodification of music attained a new quality. Theoretically speaking the
economical field usurped the field of musical production (Rehbein, 2007).
Practically speaking popular music culture was professionalized and
participation in the reproduction of these cultural products limited to the
(passive)2 reception of recordings or concerts.
This changed to some extent when tape recorders became available and
distribution of music again became less professionalized. Then digital
technology enabled the de-coupling of content and medium, which lead to a
new form of participation in the musical field - swapping high-quality
recordings without giving away one's original. With the development of the

1
i.e. sound recordings and photography as discussed by Walter Benjamin in his famous work
The Work of Art in the Age of its Mechanical Reproduction
2
Certainly active listening is possible, in comparison to the actual playing of an instrument,
which was a lot more common in the centuries before, the process of reception has changed
significantly towards passivity. The reproduction of a melody, the precise intonation and the
other nuances of performance always involve a moment of interpretation of the musical form,
thus the reproduction is not the same as an identical copy, as it is the case with sound records.
internet and P2P-programs the distribution of music became less dependent on
commercial activity. This process has been researched by several authors; most
recently Ulrich Dolata (2008) spoke of a sectoral transformation that was
dominated by actors external to the field. These external actors, very
prominently Apple, change the commodification process of music. The value-
added chains of the musical economy have been significantly influenced by
digitization (Emes, 2004, Kromer 2007). This has lead scholars to question
whether the business model of the major labels was still viable (Cvetkovski,
2007, Emes, 2004, Leyshon, 2005, Kromer, 2007) or whether the field would
split up into smaller special interest economies (Leyshon, 2005). A factor that
has yet to receive its due attention is that not only the distribution of sound
recordings and the accompanying value-added chains have undergone
significant transformation (Emes, 2004, Kromer, 2007) but so has the process
of production of these recordings. With the increasing availability of cheap
digital recording technology the workflow of musicians has changed
significantly3, resulting in new musical forms.
The most obvious influence of digital technology on the product itself is
probably the digital sampler. This can be observed for instance in the
popularity of the Amen Break across a number of different musical genres. The
so-called Amen Break is a drum break from a recording of the 1960's funk
band The Winstons called Amen Brother. It has been sampled by various Hip
Hop groups and the genres of drum 'n bass and jungle are based on the re-
arrangement of this sample4.
The effect of the availability of cheap recording technology on the musical
content is of course not limited to this, other effects can be observed for
instance in the emergence of genres like dubstep and minimal-house and -
techno that create completely digital aesthetics. Another effect is the sheer
abundance of musical recordings produced every year, as musicians produce

3
Cvetkovski (2007) is aware of this and examines the global techno scene with regard to this
aspect
4
For a short illustration with audio examples please refer to
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj0vfU0vFSs
music that does not have to be commercially viable anymore because the
process is extremely cheap5 (cf. Strachan, 2007).
On the consumer side digital technology leads to several consequences. The
possibility of digital copying seemingly reduces the economic value of sound
recordings. Furthermore digital technology renders possible the availability of
an abundance of music and an ubiquity of music furthered by mp3-players that,
as some argue, leads to a "banalization of music" (Rolling Stone, 2008). At the
same time, digital technology also allows for increased participation of the
layman in the musical field. The predominance of the artificial sounds created
with the aid of studio recording technology acted as a barrier impeding the
participation of the layman. Digital technology allows for increasing spread of
musical practices like karaoke via video games technology, prominent
examples are Singstar and Guitar Hero, which allow for the "reproduction" of
professional recordings by the amateur. In a sense this can be regarded as a
"de-professionalization" of the music field in so far as it allows for a more
“active” participation of non-professionals. However, this process is still in its
very early stage and whether it will have strong effects on the field of music as
a whole is yet to be determined. However, in the electronic music scene, there
is already a community that is dedicated to "circuit bending" and hacking of
standard electronic equipment, for example the wiimote to use it for the digital
production of music6. The common element is the appropriation of culture,
elements of culture, which are produced by professionals or the culture
industry, are interpreted by intermediaries and the consumers, they are re-
contextualized and charged with new meaning. In music this development is
reflected by mash-up cultures, remixes7 and edits.
This newfound fluidity of musical objects again raises concerns that are at least
as old as copyright itself. In the Roman law tradition, which emphasizes the
personal rights of the author, issues such as integrity of the work of art and

5
A number of electronic music producers see their records as a simple promotional tool as far
as the economic dimension is concerned. The records are produced to be recognized and
booked by other members of the same cultural field, the actual money is made by playing live -
or DJ-ing.
6
A good many examples can be found at http://createdigitalmusic.com
7
For instance, Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails is giving away single tracks to let his fans do
non-commercial remixes
creative control resurface, at the same time sampling, remixes and mash-ups
raise questions regarding the commodification of music and freedom of art.8
The flood of publications on the crisis of the music industry is an indicator for
the extent of change that is associated with digitization. As already pointed out
above, little attention has been directed to the changing practices of musicians.
Yet it is my opinion that therein lays a reason for findings by Leyshon and
Cvetkovski. In an examination of the techno (sub)culture two aspects of a
mode of organization can be observed: Leyshon (2005) calls the overall
organisational form a special interest economy, while Cvetkovski (2007, 2004)
speaks of micro labels. Although these networks within the creative community
are nothing new, the extent to which musicians are shunning major labels not
necessarily out of a DIY-ethic but simply because it is viable (Strachan, 2007)
is noteworthy.
The challenges to the sectoral organisation associated to digitization are
numerous. This is in concordance to the production of culture perspective as
proposed by Peterson and Anand (2004, 318) suggesting "[..] that a major
change in one of these facets, [technology, law and regulation, industry
structure, organization structure, occupational careers and market,] can start a
cycle of destabilization and reorganization in the entire production nexus",
which is the case in the field of music (cf. Cvetkovski, 2007, 2004, Dolata,
2008, Emes, 2004, Leyshon 2005). Therefore a research project dealing with
music in the digital age would have to identify the change taking place in all of
the aforementioned facets, although this seems only feasible in a metastudy.
Additionally scrutinizing consumer/listener practices seems to be of utmost
importance as they contribute to the commodification process which is integral
to the market and allows for occupational careers in the production of culture.
Peterson and Anand (2004, 316) suggest that the field of music is currently
structured in "[..] a more open system of oligarchy composed of niche-market-
targeted divisions plus many small specialty service and market development
firms where the former produce the most lucrative products and the latter
produce the most innovative". The increasing spread of the organizational form
micro labels (Cvetkovski, 2007, Strachan, 2007) and the account of special

8
For a thorough introduction on this see Frith, Simon (ed.) 2004. 2nd edition. Music and
Copyright. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
interest economies (Leyshon, 2005) suggest a trend towards a different industry
structure.
Institutional change in the facet of law and regulations can be observed in the
spreading of copyright law by the vehicle of TRIPS. However there is another
set of laws and regulations that severely affects the commodification process,
telecommunication and privacy laws.
In my dissertation project I want to concentrate on three aspects of the
transformation the field is currently undergoing.
First of all, I want to examine the commodification process of music and its ties
to the Bourdieuan concepts of capital and social structure.
Secondly, I want to examine whether Leyshon´s notion of special interest
economies is a concept that can help explain the reorganisation of the industrial
structure.
Thirdly, I want to examine the social norms and practices that are connected to
music piracy, and the privacy debate. The outcome of the current legislatory
debate on telecommunication regulation and terrorism could strongly affect
music piracy, which Emes (2004) considers as constituting an illegitimate
market for musical goods that industry players have to compete with.
The first and second topics are variations on the same theme, the underlying
assumption of a further diversification of genres and musical cultures in the
future. It can be assumed that social networks and other digital information
technologies help subcultures to establish global networks, as can be observed
in the global techno community9, and serve the function of additional
gatekeepers beside the traditional gatekeepers in the field of cultural production
(Gebesmaier, 2008). Combined with the decrease in production and
distribution costs of digitized informational goods, it seems plausible that
globalized subcultures increasingly develop microcosms of institutions that
create authenticity, which is necessary for successful commodification, without
the involvement of major label players. However, it seems unlikely that major

9
Although there are centres of techno culture like Berlin, Chicago and Detroit, with a lot of
artists living in Berlin, the community makes very active use of the internet for networking,
collaborations, booking etc. Similarly techno fans, especially in Europe, travel long distances
to visit famous clubs or festivals, this phenomenon has given rise to the term “easyjet ravers”.
labels will completely perish for two main reasons: the need for a cultural
mainstream and the sheer amount of intellectual property in the possession of
major label players. Yet there are numerous indications that the business model
of the major labels is not viable anymore in its traditional form (Emes, 2004,
Kromer, 2007).
Concerning the industry structure, the assumption is a trend towards an even
more open system of oligarchy, with numerous small competing firms in
special interest economies, and significant overall loss of market share of the
major labels. In a study of German independent labels Handke (2005) comes to
the conclusion that the detrimental effects of digital information technology do
not affect small or medium sized independent labels in the same way as major
labels. A possible explanation would be the higher benefit from autoproduction
of culture (Peterson, 2005) and non-traditional gatekeeper effects (Gebesmaier,
2008) that are tied to the more innovative character of cultural products
generated by smaller, less profit-oriented labels (Cvetkovski, 2007, Strachan,
2007).
Pierre Bourdieu's conception of the cultural field of production, the concept of
capital conversion and cultural capital as such seem useful to explain these
findings even further, by connecting them to the process of commodification,
the conversion of use value into exchange value (cf. Marx, 1872). Connecting
these theoretical constructs with the empirical findings in order to develop a
thorough understanding of the commodification process of cultural goods,
especially music, is one of the main goals of the dissertation project. The basic
assumption is a close connection between the use value of a cultural product
and its position in the cultural hierarchy, however the increasing diversification
of society does not permit the presupposition of a generally valid cultural
hierarchy, instead there are several coexisting ones (cf. Rehbein, 2007), which
again points to the theme of subcultures and fragmentation of culture. Another
point that has to be considered in the conception of the process of
commodification is that cultural products are objectified cultural capital which
is used for the construction of social identity, hence the relevance of a given
cultural product for the game of distinctions, the extent to which a cultural
product contributes to the specific identity of the consumer, should be closely
tied to its marketability.
The third topic, Piracy and Privacy is linked to the commodification process as
copyright laws define the properties of the cultural products and thus the uses it
can be put to, which in turn are converted into exchange value. At the same
time the social practices of consumers affect the strategies of lobbyists. For
instance Ulrich Dolata (2008) argues that the major record companies have so
far mainly resorted to containment strategies, for instance suing copyright
infringers and influencing legislation processes. This affects public policy
discourse in two ways:
a) increasingly restrictive intellectual property rights are proposed as a
result of industry lobbying
b) enforcing of copyright laws on the internet is impeded by privacy
concerns.
The ongoing discourse on the balance between interests of the industry and
public interest is an intense, with industry lobbyists on one side and social
movements and epistemic communities on the other (cf. Dobusch & Quack,
2008). The outcome is yet uncertain, however, as Tom Bell says:
"Public choice theory teaches that even if lawmakers could obtain the data
necessary for delicately balancing all the public and private interest affected by
copyright and patent law, it wouldn't matter. Lawmakers would not use those
data - or, more, precisely, those data would not control the laws they make.
Instead, lobbying by special interests would invariably ensure that copyright
and patent law favors private interest over public ones." (2002, quoted in
Kuhlen, 2008, 18)

The investigation of these three issues will be conducted mainly by means of

literature review drawing on empirical and theoretical research from the
subjects of sociology, systematic musicology, psychology, law and economics.
Additionally expert interviews will be carried out with artists, industry
representatives, journalists and legal experts were deemed appropriate. It will
be an aim of the dissertation to combine findings that are only available in
German with research from international sources and present them within the
framework provided by the production of culture perspective.
Bibliography

Literature
ADORNO, T.W. "Culture Industry Reconsidered." In: Adorno, T.W. 1991.
The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture.
London:Routledge.

ADORNO, T.W. "On Popular Music" In: Storey, J. (ed.) (2nd ed.) 1998.
Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: A Reader. London: Prentice
Hall. 197-209.

BOURDIEU, Pierre. 1983. "Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital,

soziales Kapital" In: Kreckel, Reinhard (ed.) Soziale Ungleichheiten,
Soziale Welt, special Issue 2, 183-198

BELL, Tom. 2002. "Indelicate Imbalancing in copyright and patent law" In:
Thierer, A. Crews, W. (eds.) 2002. Copy fights: The future of
intellectual property in the information age. Washington, D.C.: Cato
Institute. 1-16.

CVETKOVSKI, Trajce. 2007. The Political Economy of the Music Industry:

Technological change, consumer disorientation and market
disorganisation in popular music. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr.
Müller.

DECKERT, Marc. 2008. "Laboratorien des Pop - Nach den Plattenfirmen

sterben nun die Tonstudios - die Arbeitsweise in diesen
Aufnahmekomplexen prägte die Musik entscheidend" Süddeutsche
Zeitung. August 11th, 11.

EMES, Jutta. 2004. Unternehmergewinn in der Musikindustrie:

Wertschöpfungspotentiale und Veränderungen der Branchenstruktur
durch die Digitalisierung. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

GERSCH, Martin & AVARIA, Corina. 2007. Die Branchentransformation

der Musikindustrie - Eine (co)-evolutorische Analyse unter
Berücksichtigung des Einflusses einzelner Geschäftssysteme. Institut für
Unternehmensführung (ifu) (104) [Arbeitsbericht Nr. 15 des
Competence Center E-Commerce (CCeC)]. Bochum: Ruhr Universität
Bochum.

HARING, Bruce. 2002. MP3: die digitale Revolution in der Musikindustrie.

Freiburg: Orange Press.
KAWOHL, Friedemann. 2007. "Urheberrechte" In: Neuhoff, Hans. & de la
Motte-Haber, Helga. eds. Handbuch der systematischen
Musikwissenschaft: Musiksoziologie. 4, Laaber: Laaber Verlag. 276-
300.

KLIMMT, Christoph. & FRANK, Sebastian. & SCHNEIDER, Beate. 2005.

"'Die Botschaft hör ich wohl, allein mir fehlt der Glaube': Die
Argumente der Musikindustrie gegen Filesharing aus der Sicht der
(Viel)Nutzer/innen von Internet-Tauschbörsen." In: Friedrichsen, Mike
& Mühl-Benninghaus, Wolfgang. & Schweiger, Wolfgang. eds. Neue
Technik, neue Medien, neue Gesellschaft?: Ökonomische
Herausforderungen der Onlinekommunikation. München: Fischer.
(Internet Research, 27)

KÖSCH, Sascha. 2007. "Das FairTrade-Logo für Musik - Mehr Geld, mehr
Respekt" DEBUG Magazin für Elektronische Lebensaspekte 118.
Berlin: Debug Verlags GmbH. 40.

KROMER, Eberhard. 2007. Wertschöpfung in der Musikindustrie: Zukünftige

Erfolgsfaktoren bei der Vermarktung von Musik. München: Verlag
Reinhard Fischer.

MARX, Karl. 1872 [2nd edition]. Das Kapital: Kritik der politischen
Ökonomie. Paderborn: Voltmedia.

MARTIN, Peter J. 2007. "Die Musikwirtschaft in der kapitalistischen

Gesellschaft." In: Neuhoff, Hans. & de la Motte-Haber, Helga. eds.
Handbuch der systematischen Musikwissenschaft: Musiksoziologie. 4,
Laaber: Laaber Verlag. 301-326.

MÜNCH, Thomas. 2004. "Musik im Radio, Fernsehen und Internet: Inhalte,

Nutzung und Funktionen." In: Neuhoff, Hans. & de la Motte-Haber,
Helga. eds. Handbuch der systematischen Musikwissenschaft:
Musiksoziologie. 4, Laaber: Laaber Verlag. 369-388.

MÜLLER, Renate et. al. 2002. Zum sozialen Gebrauch von Musik und
Medien durch Jugendliche. Überlegungen im Lichte
kultursoziologischer Theorien. In: Müller, Renate. et. al. Wozu
Jugendliche Musik und Medien gebrauchen: Jugendliche Identität und
musikalische und mediale Geschmacksbildung. Weinheim: Juventa
Verlag. 9-26.

REHBEIN, Boike. 2007. "A Globalized Music Scene" In: Rehbein, Boike.
Globalization, Culture and Society in Laos. New York: Routledge. 112-
122.
Online Ressources
CAPGEMINI. 2008. "Music Labels: Striking the right chord for stimulating
revenues." In: Telecom & Media Insights, Vol. 26, January 2008.
Available from:
http://www.de.capgemini.com/m/de/tl/Music_Labels.pdf [Accessed
14 October 2008]

CVETKOVSKI, Trajce. 2004. "The Political Economy of the Music Industry:

Its rise and stall." Adelaide: University of Queensland. Available
from:
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/apsa/docs_papers/Others/Cvetkovski.pdf
[Accessed 22 August 2008]

DOLATA, Ulrich. 2008. "Das Internet und die Transformation der

Musikindustrie. Rekonstruktion und Erklärung eines unkontrollierten
sektoralen Wandels." MPIfG discussion paper 08/7. Köln: Max-
Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung. Available from:
http://www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_dp/dp08-7.pdf [Accessed 17 July
2008]

GEHRING, Robert A. 2005. "Digital Rights Management: Ökonomie und

Politik im Reich der Ideen." In: Schindler, W. ed. 2005. MaC* -
Reloaded: Perspektiven aus der Skepsis für Menschen am Computer.
Chemnitz: Rabenstück Verlag. Available from:
http://www.josefstal.de/mac/days/2004/buch/Gehring-DRM-2005.pdf
[Accessed 10 October 2008]
HANDKE, Christian. 2005. Wachstum gegen den Trend. VUT. Available
from: http://www2.hu-berlin.de/gbz/downloads/pdf/press04_06.pdf
[Accessed 08 October 2008]

HARGREAVES, David. 2005. "Within You Without You: Music, Learning

and Identity." In: Electronic Musicological Review. Vol. 9; October
2005. Available from: http://www.rem.ufpr.br/REMv9-1/hargreaves-
engl.html [Accessed 25 August 2008]

JONES, Steve. 2000 "Music and the Internet" In: Popular Music, Vol. 19, No.
2 (Apr. 2000), 217-230, Available from:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/853669 [Accessed 17 October 2008].

KUHLEN, Rainer. 2008. Erfolgreiches Scheitern - Eine Götterdämmerung des

Urheberrechts. Konstanz: Hochschulverband für
Informationswissenschaft (HI)e.V. (Schriften zur
Informationswissenschaft, Bd. 48.) Available from: http://www.inf-
wiss.uni-konstanz.de/RK2008_ONLINE/node/30 [Accessed 14
October 2008]

KRÖMER, Jan. & Sen, Evrim. 2007 [e-book edition, originally 2006]. No
Copy - Die Welt der digitalen Raubkopie. Leipzig: Tropen Verlag. (cc
 - carbon copy books no. 24) Available from: http://www.no-
copy.org/NO-COPY_Die-Welt-der-Digitalen-Raubkopie.pdf
[Accessed 16. October 2008]

LEVITIN, Daniel. J. (2000). “In Search of the Musical Mind”.

In: Cerebrum, No. 2 Volume 4, 1 - 24. Available from:
http://www.dana.org/news/cerebrum/detail.aspx?id=3358 [Accessed
12 November 2008]

LEVITIN, Daniel J. & McGill, James. 2007. "Life Soundtracks: The uses of
music in everyday life." Available from:
http://levitin.mcgill.ca/pdf/LifeSoundtracks.pdf [Accessed 03
September 2008]

LEYSHON, Andrew. 2000. "Time - space (and digital) compression: software

formats, musical networks, and the reorganisation of the music
industry". In: Environment and Planning A,
Vol. 33, 49-77. DOI:10.1068/a3360. Available from:
http://www.envplan.com/epa/fulltext/a33/a3360.pdf [Accessed 22
October 2008]
LEYSHON, Andrew et. al. 2005. "On the reproduction of the musical
economy after the internet." In: Media, Culture and Society, Vol. 27;
No.2, 177-209. DOI:10.1177/0163443705050468. Available from:
http://mcs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/27/2/177 [Accessed 17
July 2008]

MACDONALD, Raymond R. Hargreaves, David. and Dorothy Miell 2002.

"What are musical identities and why are they important?" In: the
same (eds.) Musical Identities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1-
20. Available from: http://www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-850932-4.pdf
[Accessed 03 Septmeber 2008]

PARNCUTT, Richard. 2007. "Systematic Musicology and the History and

Future of Western Musical Scholarship." In: Journal of
interdisciplinary music studies. Vol. 1, No. 1, 1-32. Available from:
http://www.musicstudies.org/spring2007.html [Accessed 25 August
2008]

PETERSON, Richard A. 2005. “In Search of Authenticity” In: Journal of

Management Studies. No 42. Volume 5, July 2005. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishing. 1083-1098. Available from:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/joms_533.pdf?abstractid=75
8084&mirid=1 [Accessed 21 November 2008]

PETERSON, Richard A. Anand, N. 2004. "The Production of Culture

Perspective" In: Annual Review of Sociology. Volume 30. 311-334.
 DOI:10.1146/annurev.soc.30.012703.110557 Available from:
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.0
12703.110557 [Accessed 24 November 2008]

STRACHAN, Robert. 2007. “Micro-Independent Record Labels in the UK:

Discourse, DIY cultural production and the music industry” In:
European Journal of Cultural Studies. 10, 245.
DOI:10.1177/1367549407075916 Available from:
http://ecs.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/2/245 [Accessed 15
November 2008]