WANTED. Up-tempo Radio-Ready Drivel.

I was reading a posting over at Ninety Mile Wind on the current state of the country music market that prompted the following response:

The current parade of country drivel on terrestrial radio is perceived to be what the customer wants, and in some respects, it IS what the customer wants, or at least what they are willing to settle-for to get where they want to be. They play it, and people listen. (or at least advertisers think so)

Artists and writers can't stand most of it, of course, but the market exists, and it comes with formulaic risk that is easily exploited by the accountants and execs.

Pop culture will always exist, and it will rarely be pretty, and will almost always be laughable and/or forgotten in hindsight, but as long as people will put up with them, 30 second hits are not going away.

There will always be someone willing to whip up what the customer will consume.

I'm reminded of a quote from Henry Ford. When asked about giving the customers what they want, he replied, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said 'Faster Horses'.

People and labels may think they want more drivel (uptempo horses), but what people really want is a way to extract themselves from reality and for that, the current drivel and vacuum-packed productions deliver! Even we, as artists, have to admit we’re distracted from reality as we contemplate how such a mindless song ever made it to the airwaves.

Unless presented with a different destination and a compelling vehicle to get them there, the consumer will continue to shovel all the hay and manure the label’s hit-farms have to offer.

Songwriters. You were made for a higher purpose.

©2009 Tim Wheeler

Look out NAB members. There is something called the Public Trust.

A reader sent me the link, below. MusicFIRST is asking for some accountability for alleged inappropriate actions by some broadcasters.

Earlier this year, the NAB spent a lot of resources trying to create a public swell against the performance act by renaming the royalties (that were to be paid to artists) as TAXES. I recall seeing articles saying that the public was overwhelmingly against a peformance Tax on broadcasters. Heck, when I heard about it, I was against it too. No new taxes, right. Then I heard they were black-balling U2 for supporting the bill. That is, some stations were purposely not playing their new single as a sorta gotcha for promoting the Performance act.

Thats when I stopped drinking the cool-aide that was being spoon fed to me by the radio stations. A little more research, and I was pretty angry. Not just because of their opposition to the Performance Act, but that they had deliberately retitled it in such a way as to deceptively create a public swell against it. I was even more miffed that they had initially duped me, too.

Give this link a look-see and then come back and comment. What do you think? Do broadcasters have a responsibility to recuse themselves from promoting their own interests at the expense of artists? Do they have the right to distort the issues in order to bolster their bottom-line?

MusicFIRST asks FCC to Rule on Broadcasters using Airtime to Lobby Listeners

Another interesting link on the hearings:

Senators Hear Plea For Radio Performance Royalties

More on the Performance Rights Act

A friend of mine sent me a link to another perspective on Artists vs. Broadcaster debate over the Performance Rights Act.

Cathy Hughes Attacks John Conyers for His Support of Performance Rights Act



Another valuable perspective. Check out who else she’s attacking.

It occurs to me that it is an outright battle just to find the other side of this story. The general public only hears about the PERFORMANCE “TAX” fight, which in itself is a blatant misrepresentation. (The Government will not be involved in the payment system for the peformer’s royalties... no tax collected) The reason is that the media outlets that can spread the news are biased on the issue.

The only reason I even questioned the first news I heard on this was because of a funny feeling in my gut. I had to do some serious digging to get another perspective.

Always Follow the money.

Performance Rights Act moves to the Senate. Clear Channel Tries To Squelch The Facts.

Quoted from Radio News:

MusicFIRST Releases Ad Clear Channel Doesn't Want You To Hear


The musicFIRST coalition today released the ad Clear Channel and other radio groups and stations across the country do not want you to hear. The 30-second script features Motown legend Duke Fakir of the Four Tops. After reviewing the script for more than six weeks, Clear Channel told musicFIRST NO! 



"Clear Channel's decision is further evidence of how corporate radio groups and stations are violating their public interest obligations," said Jennifer Bendall, executive director of the musicFIRST Coalition. "They are not the first to say NO. It just took them a little longer to reject our ad."



In June, musicFIRST asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to investigate corporate radio for violating its public interest obligations. Radio stations across the country refuse to air musicFIRST ads, threaten artists who support the effort to create a fair performance right on radio and continue to run misleading ads produced by the National Association of Broadcasters - all in an effort to further their own private commercial interests. 

"At the time of the filing we did not have an answer from Clear Channel. Now we do," Bendall said.


This week, Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rep. Rick Boucher, chairman of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, weighed in, asked the commission to investigate allegations of broadcaster misconduct.

"AM and FM music radio stations are using their broadcast license to protect a loophole in copyright law that lets them earn billions in ad revenue every year with compensating the artists and musicians who bring music to life and listeners' ears to the radio dial," Bendall said. "

All other radio platforms in the U.S. - including satellite, internet and cable radio - pay a fair performance royalty as do radio stations in almost every other country in the world. Radio gets a free ride in Iran, North Korea, China, Rwanda and the U.S. But this is going to change."

The Performance Rights Act has been approved by a lopsided 21-9 bipartisan vote by the House Judiciary Committee.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on the bill for Tuesday, August 4th. The bill creates a performance right on radio that is fair to artists and musicians, fair to other radio platforms and fair to radio.



Here is the script for the ad Clear Channel and corporate radio don't want you to hear:



DUKE FAKIR: Broadcasters earn billions every year playing The Four Tops and other artists.



ANNOUNCER: Duke Fakir helped define the Motown sound with The Four Tops.



DUKE FAKIR: But artists don't make a penny when our music is played on radio.



ANNOUNCER: Duke's right, thanks to a legal loophole AM and FM radio gets a free ride while satellite and internet radio pay artists and musicians to play their music. A bill before Congress, the Performance Rights Act, will correct this injustice



DUKE FAKIR: All we ask is fair pay for airplay.



ANNOUNCER: Tell Congress to support the Performance Rights Act. Paid for by the Music First Coalition.