Black radio plays an important role in today’s society. “We average between 18 and 20 million listeners a week. Black radio is as critical a communications vehicle now as it has ever been. Katrina hit. Haiti, the earthquake, hit. My phones were so jammed that you couldn’t get a call through. Black radio was there [when all those crises in our community happened]. People may have had CNN on, but the TV volumes were turned down, so they could listen to black radio stations. [Black radio] provides the same type of social relationship with its listening audience that the black church does, only without the religious aspect, said Cathy Hughes” (Okasi 1). This shows that not only is radio good for music but people look forward to hearing news as well. Sometimes I listen to the radio on the way to work so that I can hear how traffic is going to be on the ride home.
Music companies are very wealthy corporations that have historically beaten artists out of their money. “When the [Performance Rights Act first was introduced], we agreed that artists should be paid back. We came up with a proposal that would put together a $20 million fund that would go back to the artists exclusively,” said Cathy. The [music industry] said no, because none of the money would go back to the record industry. Yet, that industry is already sitting on top of $100 million from the performance tax that satellite and new media pay through Sound Exchange (Okasi 2). Congress created sound Exchange, and all of their filings are public information. They had millions of dollars in the bank that they claimed they couldn’t find artists to distribute to. Now, what motivation would you have to give away $100 million, if [there's a legal provision] that after 3 years, you could keep it? After 3 years, if they can’t “find” an artist, Sound Exchange can keep that artist’s royalties (Okasi 2).
“I’m against the Performance Rights Act, because I already spend $14 million a year paying the writers and the publishers. It’s a record company’s job to pay the performers. I don’t even know a performer exists until a record company brings me a finished product! It’s like having to pay child support for a baby that’s not yours. I agree the baby should be supported, but I ain’t the mama, said Hughes! Plus, our radio stations already give up billions of dollars of free advertising. The reason satellite and Internet radio pay a fee to Sound Exchange is because they charge for their services. We are free radio. We don’t charge for our services. They were foolish not to fight it”, said Cathy (Okasi 2).
Democrat John Dingell said the following at a National Association of Broadcasters event: “I’d like to express my opposition to legislation imposing a performance tax on broadcasters. I am concerned that such a tax would be of less benefit to recording artists than to record labels, many of which are based abroad. Further, recording artists and record labels have profited handsomely for years from the free publicity they get from broadcasters, a mutually beneficial relationship that a performance tax will destroy. Lastly, and perhaps most practically, it seems ridiculous to me to impose a new punitive fee on broadcasters during this time of recession, especially as broadcasters have seen their revenues decrease by up to 40 percent over the past several years.” (Williams 1).
[this is what i said when i first thought about the PRA] I think that The Performance Rights Act isn’t a good idea. Being an inspiring artist myself, you would think that I would be for it the PRA. But by observing and reading the intentions of the money to be paid to the artist for radio play, most artist wont receive their compensations and the money will be kept by Sound exchange. Also, I considered what type of artist I would be and the roller coaster of my career. Seeing as though radio stations would only play my music if I were a very well known artist, I would not always be guaranteed to have my music played. Also, if my song didn’t do well with the first go around of air play, I could almost guarantee that the station wouldn’t play that song again or even take a chance on any other song that I may produce. The Performance Right Act is very risky on all aspects of the entertainment industry. They would also have to take into consideration that radio stations would now be obligated to charge advertisers more for airplay, which would probably cause them to back out of deals. This would result to the end of radio because networks wouldn’t have the money or support to operate its business.
But not thinking of the future of the entertainment business and record sales, there is no money being made. The only true exposure of a song is through radio and if your song is great, then your track is played multiple times. The artist SHOULD be getting paid for their work. But, I am sure the can be a compromise of how much so that radio stations wont have to shut down. But all in all, "money makes the world go round."
No comments:
Post a Comment