Sony settles lawsuit Ok, the thread title is a bit juvenile but the news confirms a little of what we all no, that pop music is horrible that gains audience by being pushed on to us. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050725/us_nm/media_payola_dc_15 Sony BMG settles NY radio probe for $10 million By Derek Caney Mon Jul 25, 4:40 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - Sony BMG, one of the world's largest music companies, will pay $10 million to settle a New York State probe into the way the music company influenced which songs were played on the radio, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said on Monday. ADVERTISEMENT The probe centers on a number of "pay-for-play" practices, widely known as "payola," including paying independent promoters to help secure airtime for songs. Under the Sony BMG settlement, the company agreed to stop making payments to radio stations in exchange for airplay, Spitzer said. "Instead of airing music based on the quality, artistic competition, aesthetic judgments or other judgments, radio stations are airing music because they are paid to do so in a way that hasn't been disclosed to the public," Spitzer said at a press briefing. As part of the settlement, Sony BMG admitted that payola "has continued to be an unfortunately prevalent aspect of radio promotion. Sony BMG acknowledges that various employees pursued some radio promotion practices on behalf of the company that were wrong and improper." Spitzer also said the payola investigation continues at the other three major record companies -- Universal Music Group, EMI Group Plc, and Warner Music Group Corp., as well as the country's largest radio companies. "These practices are pervasive," he said. "We are far along with the other three labels. We have received documents and are deep in conversations with them about this." Sony's $10 million payment will go to not-for-profit groups that fund programs for music education and appreciation in New York State. Spitzer said he didn't know if the payment could count as a charitable tax deduction. Asked for comment, an EMI spokeswoman referred to a statement in the company's annual report that said it was cooperating with a Spitzer investigation into the promotion of records on New York stations. "EMI has a long-standing, strict written policy prohibiting unlawful radio promotion practices," the company said. "EMI is not currently aware of any reason for believing that there will be a material financial impact on the group." Universal Music declined to comment, while Warner Music was not immediately available to comment. Spitzer has also issued subpoenas to radio companies including Clear Channel Communications Inc., Viacom Inc.'s Infinity Broadcasting, Entercom Communications Corp. and Cox Radio Inc. The companies have said they ban the use of independent promoters. The attorney general saved his harshest criticism for the radio companies and called on the Federal Communications Commission, which licenses the airwaves, to be more vigorous in fighting payola. "I would certainly encourage the FCC to take a hard look at whether something that is this pervasive, something that is so corrosive to the marketplace should not merely be investigated and pursued but whether some of these stations deserve to have their licenses stripped from them," Spitzer said. "If the New York attorney general forwards materials, we of course will take a look at them," said FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's spokesman, David Fiske. One FCC member said there should be an immediate investigation of whether federal payola laws were violated. "I've asked Mr. Spitzer to share all of the evidence that he has uncovered with the FCC," Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein said in a statement. Asked if he thought radio would improve as a result of the settlement, Spitzer laughed and said: "I don't think anyone wants me to make aesthetic judgments about what's on the air. I've been a Bruce (Springsteen) and Grateful Dead fan for decades. As far as I know, their music is still played on the radio, just not any stations that my kids listen to."
hahha just teasing... but on a more serious note: i think other music companies do this as well. but since Sony has a bigger piece of the pie, they'll get hit first. 10 mil to them is nothing.
I don't think that quality, artistic competition and aesthetic judgements have been a part of programming songs on commercial radio since the 70's.
Back to intelligent discourse, I don't think it ever around, not even in the 70's, I think radio station have always received pay to spin records. It just that it was much more local where as today, the industry is so big and so interconnect that it's hard for anyone not on a major lable to break through.
Yes, but in the 70's, there were a LOT more independently owned stations with DJ's that routinely broke new artists. That just doesn't happen anymore. There has been payola since the 50's, but the 70's was a very transitional period for the business when it went from AM to FM. FM radio in the 70's played literally anything and everything. It would go from blues one minute to hard rock the next to folk to bluegrass and everything in between. My dad worked for an AM station in the 70's that did news during the day, rock music in the evenings and blues, reggae and everything else overnights. That's something you'd obviously never see on any commercial radio station today.
a tv network can make more money airing one thing over another, i dont see why a radio station wouldn't be able to do the same. if the public doesn't want to listen to crappy music.....they'll just switch the station.
it's tougher when all the stations are owned by a few companies, all of which take money from the major record compaines to play that crappy music. It's sort of like if every channel on TV was showing infomercials, all day long because the infomercial companies paid them to do it. At least that's how it feels to me. Choosing between crappy Nickelback and crappy Britney Spears seems a lot like choosing between watching ads for Miracle Knives or Bowflex. I choose to turn off the TV, but lots of couch potatoes will just veg out and watch the infomercial because there's nothing else on. That doesn't mean it's compelling or good.
Oh, sh*t yeah... Luis Miguel and Marc Anthony and Alejandro Fernandez were doing this plenty during the late 00's, but radio stations put a stop to it. It's illegal in my Mexico.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pwn3d Originally was a misspelling of "owned" that became a common online usage of the word.
But if all the stations are doing this, and there really is a market for alternative music or TV options, then someone would come out with a unique station that actually plays/shows good stuff, and everyone should flock to that independent station, making it profitable. The free market would take care of this, if there really is a market for it. It seems to me that this is just another form of advertising. Coke will pay to have its products placed in movies or other types of product placement to get exposure. Why wouldn't an artist or record company do the same?
The problem is with Clear Channel. They own more than 1500 stations nationwide. Their next nearest competitor owns fewer than 300. In some markets, they own virtually all the popular music channels. They also, as a result, swallow up most of the ad revenues leaving other stations to struggle. But, setting that aside, the reason labels pay to get artists on stations is because it influences the stations with the biggest transmission power and the widest range of influence. While music is not driven by the radio quite the way it was in the 70's, it is still a significant source of income and promotion vehicle. Just like pay-to-play clubs where the band has to PAY the club to get a gig. If you want the exposure, you do things that you would otherwise never do.
"Instead of airing music based on the quality, artistic competition, aesthetic judgments or other judgments, radio stations are airing music because they are paid to do so in a way that hasn't been disclosed to the public," Spitzer said at a press briefing. So now radio will lead songs with "This song is brought to you by Sony BMG. Enjoy."???
