Stop Thinking of Yourself as a Good Person: The Ethics and Economics of Music Streaming

I'd add something to this thread along the lines of "I don't use Spotify or any other streaming service and this is just one reason amongst many why", but the thread seems to have worked it's way around to that already. I still buy everything I want on CD; I'm slightly more selective about what I want than I was a few years ago, but we've still bought somewhere in the region of 40 CDs this year so far, I'd wager.

Taxes are our shared contribution to a decent society; if you moan about paying them then you're an asshole, btw.

Taxes are our shared contribution to a decent society;

agree

if you moan about paying them then you're an asshole, btw.

disagree

Ppl who earn decent incomes should not tell anyone poorer than them what to spend their money on

― lex pretend, Tuesday, August 4, 2015 6:09 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I totally agree with this btw, this isn't about browbeating anyone into buying CDs. Just saying that what people feel they can afford is often dictated in part by what's available. I mean, I earn a decent income and I still use Spotify for most of my music listening -- there's always something you feel like you need the money for more when the choice is presented, like I can buy a few CDs a month or sign my daughter up for a swimming class instead.

i've always tried to get as much music as possible for the least amount of money, which used to involve primarily buying used cds. streaming actually gives artists more money than that did, so i won't really take any guilt-trips about streaming unless the guilter is going to go the full garth brooks and deride purchasing used products as well.

however, i'm interested in the economics of creative work and i think streaming as it stands is a horrible deal for musicians and independent labels. if they don't, i have no major compunction about taking advantage of it.

and while i dream about buying more pristine vinyl reissues of great music if i ever go up a tax bracket, i'd probably use streaming to find out whether albums are good, cuz i don't want pristine vinyl reissues of albums i don't like on the shelf. now if you're smart like bob seger, you don't give me that option.

i should say "if you're smart like bob seger's manager." seger has said he'd love to give us all a chance to find out whether we like against the wind, but that his manager has some issues with the label re: online platforms, and as seger likes the size of his many houses he's going to let his manager do what he must.

i bought a bunch of new cds this morning for the first time in a really long while, it kind of felt great. i have two kids and less disposable income than i used to when i would buy like 60-70 cds a year so i mainly use spotify or buy used cds but it was kind of amazing to just say "i'm going to buy new music"

also one of those albums i bought today was a three disc set for $25 that i have never listened to before but read positive reviews and heard a strong recommendation from a friend, i haven't made a purchase like that in forever and i felt like i was 20 again or something

joanna newsom thanks u for your business

lol it was kamasi washington

I bought that Kamasi Washington thing too, even though the publicist sent me a download. Going to see him play later this month, too.

I am actively holding bob Seger and Taylor Swift up at gunpoint and making them perform duets, also I'm streaming stuff on Spotify with the sound real low 😎😎😎

We all (I assume) agree that minimum wage should be raised even if it means paying slightly higher prices but I doubt many of us would voluntarily pay a higher "support workers" price where a lower one was offered.

Back when the economy wasn't shit the standard tip at restaurants was 15% and that's what I tipped. Now I tip >20% because the economy is shit and I have a salaried job so the economy is much more shit for a waiter than it is for me. Lots of people do the same. Doesn't that amount to paying a slightly higher "support workers" price? Admittedly, only slightly higher.

When you download a record from bandcamp, and it suggests a price you can pay the band if you like the album and want to keep it, do you pay it? I do. I think lots of people do.

Ppl who earn decent incomes should not tell anyone poorer than them what to spend their money on

― lex pretend, Tuesday, August 4, 2015 6:09 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

look, i get that capitalism is rigged and specifically rigged against the poor, as well as that more money does not make one a better or wiser human being, but there are still such things as good decisions and bad decisions.

there's such things as shuttin the hell up about other ppls's shit too

^^^^^^^^^^^^otmmmmmmmmmmm

Sometimes advice is good.

maybe some people feel they need it but I have never known good advice (unless any answer to a question counts as 'advice', but then credit for asking the question imo)

i think j gets to the root of the real problem, which has nothing to do with money and everything to do with people who feel compelled to give unsolicited advice to strangers, particularly when that advice is based on vague and inappropriate categorizations. talking about what "the poor" should do is just as stupid as talking about what "the muslims" or "the gays" or "the latinos" should do.

also tbh when you're condemned to lose no matter what budgetary decisions you take then being told how you could've done things better is less help than getting yr teeth kicked in

like, nobody is more acutely aware of when they shdn't've treated themselves to those cigarettes/that drink/that pair of shoes/the nice bread than people who have to weigh those decisions daily

Personally, I'd be grateful for a smart friend who regularly challenged my choices of how I spent my time and money. I made a lot of poor choices and I didn't always have the self awareness that I was screwing up that badly. I don't think that's unusual at all.

But I have heard some friends complain about particularly annoying friends/acquaintances who acted like a life coach with no good advice.

Or maybe we're just talking about giving advice to people you know nothing about?

the key thing being not to assume people are unaware of or interested in your views

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/811#Shaftesbury_5987_284

sorry for libertyfund link

I HAVE often thought how ill-natur’d a Maxim it was, which, on many occasions, I have heard from People of good understanding; “That, as to what related to private Conduct, No-one was ever the better for Advice.’’ But upon farther Examination, I have resolv’d with my-self, that the Maxim might be admitted without any violent prejudice to Mankind. For in the manner Advice was generally given, there was no reason, I thought, to wonder it shou’d be so ill receiv’d. Something there was which strangely inverted the Case, and made the Giver to be the only Gainer. For by what I cou’d observe in many Occurrences of our Lives, That which we call’d giving Advice, was properly, taking an occasion to shew our own Wisdom, at another’s expence. On the other side, to be instructed, or to receive Advice on the terms usually prescrib’d to us, was little better than tamely to afford another the Occasion of raising himself a Character from our Defects.

In reality, however able or willing a Man may be to advise, ’tis no easy matter to make Advice a free Gift. For to make a Gift free indeed, there must be nothing in it which takes from Another, to add to Our-self. In all other respects, to give, and to dispense, is Generosity, and Good-will: but to bestow Wisdom, is to gain a Mastery which can’t so easily be allow’d us. Men willingly learn whatever else is taught ’em. They can bear a Master in Mathematicks, in Musick, or in any other Science; but not in Understanding and Good Sense.

otm

i feel like this whole debate is pretty much typical of modern capitalism, huge corporations construct a system that's a massive scam then all the blame is placed on individuals for their small, insignificant little choices within that system.

like i saw someone post a thing to facebook about like "IF YOU EAT ALMONDS IT'S YOUR FAULT CALIFORNIA HAS A DROUGHT" like really? my fault they let nestle suck their water dry and wouldn't even impose fucking lawn watering bans until it was too late?

also otm

UMS OTM

do people really have music they stream every time they want to listen to it? The hassle of that is prohibitive imo - I often have shitty wifi. If I really like something I want to make sure I have it for keeps.

I'd say I'm streaming 90% of the time I'm listening to music at home.

I'm only 10% of a good person.

David Byrne weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/opinion/sunday/open-the-music-industrys-black-box.html?_r=0

I usually will stream a full album from youtube because it is quicker to type in "_____ full album" than to wait for iTunes to open and search in there.

do people really have music they stream every time they want to listen to it? The hassle of that is prohibitive imo - I often have shitty wifi. If I really like something I want to make sure I have it for keeps.

― kinder, Thursday, August 6, 2015 9:52 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yea i pretty much only stream at work, and use streaming only to discover new music and check things out i've heard about. at home & in the car it is music i own. i think if i had an aux port in my car though i would stop buying music and just do spotify premium for the download-to-phone option

wow, this Richard Street-Jammer post on Invisible Oranges really opened our eyes

It's kind of hard for me to attach any moral dimension on streaming music. Knowing the history of labels screwing artists over, all kinds of dirty accounting tricks, albums 'falling off the back of trucks', artists getting screwed out of money even when they have supposedly solid deals, etc.

It's not artists making deals with the streaming services, it's the labels. It's not consumers deciding what amount goes to artists, it's the labels. The moral imperative to treat artists well should fall on labels alone imo. The idea that the consumer is morally responsible is great for taking that load off the labels. Now they have multiple scapegoats: streaming services AND consumers.

I asked Apple Music to explain the calculation of royalties for the trial period. They said they disclosed that only to copyright owners (that is, the labels). I have my own label and own the copyright on some of my albums, but when I turned to my distributor, the response was, “You can’t see the deal, but you could have your lawyer call our lawyer and we might answer some questions.”

Insane that this is David Byrne, one of the most well-known musicians in the world, and a smart cookie who has given lectures and written books on the topic. And even he can't penetrate the fog.

I buy albums first. Then I stream them anyway. I'm a very good person, obv.

how do you DJ with streamed music? how do you sample streamed music?

my listening habits, for a long time, have involved making myself gapless mixes of recent listening or based around a theme. that's a big part of why i can't stand a stream.

how do you DJ with streamed music?

use a hard wired ethernet connection, not wifi :)

how do you sample streamed music?

analog output to digital recorder

how do you get your hair to shine like that?

here's the pertinent graph:

http://f.cl.ly/items/2n2e0L1V1z1m161j153y/ClouDrop%206%20Aug%202015%2015%3A44%3A16%206%20Aug%202015%2015%3A44%3A16.png

interesting timing on that drop there around 2007, I wonder if any confounding factors could have caused it

http://i.imgur.com/dKoBZl7.png

MORE VINYL IS BACK THINKPIECES WE NEED MORE VINYL IS BACK THINKPIECES

That slope is probably an inverse curve of piratebay traffic numbers.

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/history-pirate-bay-will-return/

I dunno, that chart is saying CDs were outselling cassettes as early as 1985. That can't be right, since CDs were still twice as expensive, and players were REALLY expensive (and not nearly as ubiquitous as cassette players).

I don't think you're reading that graph right. Looks more like around 92-93.

It's almost like people will follow the path of least action and couldn't give a shit about art at all - even when that was paying £15 for a new CD. Who knew?

That burden shouldn't have to be on the backs of the consumers, though. The industry was supposed to have "solved the problem." It's not music fans' fault that a heavily promoted, artist-endorsed music distribution channel is so exploitative.

It seems to be taken as a given in this convo that the labels are inherently and irredeemably exploitative, and just aren't going to change, so there's no point in leaning on that particular pressure point in the chain. Like a force of nature or something.

It seems to be taken as a given in this convo that the labels are inherently and irredeemably exploitative, and just aren't going to change, so there's no point in leaning on that particular pressure point in the chain. Like a force of nature or something.

The last innovation major labels came up with was the "360 deal", where they get a cut of all revenue streams (merch, touring, etc.) rather than just record sales. Does that sound more or less exploitative than what was going on before?

I only seem to speak in a bland register but why are we painting consumers as ethical, sentient beings? We're not, broadly. Even on here, which is, I assume, a relatively invested subset, there's at best a grumbling passivity.

xp More! But again, I work in a creative industry where the artists have well-established avenues for ensuring favorable compensation. You can watch mainstream movies & TV shows via any legitimate avenue, and generally feel comfortable the participants aren't being financially exploited (..."creative" Hollywood accounting notwithstanding, LOL). I know the music biz is a very different ballgame, for a host of reasons, but it's hard to get my head around.

well we don't have functional unions anymore, for one thing (thx rock n roll!)

It's clearly true that Spotify only exists because we (long before I worked here) agreed to work with the majors instead of against them. But Apple had already done that. Unless you really believe that Bandcamp could have beaten the iTunes Store if streaming hadn't happened (and that streaming wouldn't have happened without Spotify), which seems implausible to me, then it's hard to see how this part could realistically have been different.

It seems to be taken as a given in this convo that the labels are inherently and irredeemably exploitative, and just aren't going to change, so there's no point in leaning on that particular pressure point in the chain. Like a force of nature or something.

If we can't convince companies to change to save us all from terrifying global catastrophe, how will me make them change to make themselves less money from music?

It’s the artists (and their management) who negotiate contract terms with the labels, not listeners — though apparently (and sadly) most don’t have the leverage to get favorable terms w/r/t streaming royalties.

i know almost nothing about the film industry, way back or right now, but are there similar discussions happening over on the film threads on ILE ? anywhere on the internet / academia / wherever ? like about netflix / amazon prime / filmstruck / criterion / streaming films in general

are there any useful analogues ?

don’t mean to detail but if anybody has pertinent links i’d be v grateful

See my post 5 slots up, for starters...

ha, sorry.

i need to stop posting on my phone.

thanks !

any other insights also welcome :)

(Basically, everything’s negotiated with the guilds, at least in terms of residuals. This doesn’t mean everyone gets the same upfront deal for the same project, of course — but that’s negotiated between talent and studios/prodcos, and is highly dependent on multiple factors, same as it’s ever been.)

Yeah, the film discussions I've seen centre much more around the dangers to film preservation, stuff getting pulled from services due to rights issues and such.

I think the difference is that the barrier to entry is so much higher on the film side, so there are fewer filmmakers complaining. The hypothetical career path is also still in existence (get your parents to fund your shitty horror script -> take it to Sundance -> direct the next Fantastic Four film) so the discussion is different. But I totally see filmmakers complaining about streaming sites and being asked to work for free, etc.

Also the means of distribution have traditionally been so limited in the indie film world — if you managed to get a film financed & produced, it’s a labor of love, you’re thrilled it gets into a single festival and some ppl see it, etc. Streaming sites that pad out their catalog with low-budget docs & features may not be offering great terms, but the filmmakers probably see it as an avenue that wasn’t open to them before.

It’s not like they could have gotten their film into theaters on an “indie label” and gotten the equivalent of “album sales,” there’s no analogy w/music.

Few years ago, I edited a film website, one affiliated with Indiewire. I am not a cineaste, so I found much of the carrying on therein by self-identified cineastes (who were largely very poor —bordering on incompetent— writers who had only ever written for internet outlets for nothing or for peanuts and never had an incentive to, yknow, get better) utterly tiresome. In my experience, film enthusiasts were handwringing about the integrity of the cinematic experience, i.e. you-must-see-if-at-the-theater-or-it-ain't-film. Also, the sense that post-millenials have no interest in film qua film, to the point that these kids may not even —gasp— have a favorite movie, they just watch shit for 5 minutest on youtube, portended tremendous ill.

Actually, to complicate what I wrote above a bit — it may the case that the rise of streaming has led to a rise of “blockbuster culture” at theaters, where fewer exhibitors are taking chances on smaller films and would rather just book Avengers Pt. 126.

my kid loves movies, her friends love movies, my nieces and nephews love movies, who are these theoretical young people?

Yeah even indie films require the input of so many more skilled/paid people than music, which even on the 'blockbuster' side of music, is a producer team that cranks out a few hundred songs a year plus a few hours from the singer in the vocal booth, I don't think that's a useful model/comparison at all. Even if there's no way to monetize it, still people all over the world will record hundreds of thousands of songs a year, and they'll want to distribute them somewhere: Youtube, Spotify.

The percentage of songs that recoup their cost of recording (including getting paid for the hours writing and recording) from physical sales, digital sales or streaming has to be very close to zero, even back in the heydays of CDs.

Actually, to complicate what I wrote above a bit — it may the case that the rise of streaming has led to a rise of “blockbuster culture” at theaters

This book is six years old and predates much of the handwringing over streaming, but the beginning of blockbuster culture is already in place: 360 deals, winners take all, the Long Tail as entertainment balkanization, etc. etc.

Here's a recent (and long) article which also crunches some numbers:

...there’s a widespread claim that ticket sales have declined because Hollywood’s obsessive focus on sequels, franchises, blockbusters and IP (“SFBIP”) has led many people to stop going to theaters altogether. In fact, the segment of the population that doesn’t attend “the movies” has been unchanged since 2002 at one in four, and a greater share of the population goes to the theater today than at any time between 2009 and 2017.

Nearly all the decline in theatrical consumption has instead come from a reduction in the frequency of attendance by the most intense moviegoers. This reiterates the idea of secular decline; those who loved the product most, love it less each year. (...)

The explanations for this are simple. Over the past 40 years, viewers have added more high-quality screens and sound systems in their homes, the quality of television content has improved, the ability to access this content (e.g. ad free and on demand) has improved, and bigger (and more social) alternative entertainment experiences have emerged, such as Call of Duty and Fortnite. This is similar to the first secular decline of theatrical attendance. Before household TVs emerged, audiences attended the theater 40-70 times per year – after all, it was the only way to watch video news (attendance peaked during World War II). As families added more TVs to their homes (thus allowing family members to individually watch), consumption dropped.

Today, movies earn their keep by displaying content that is best able to defeat at-home consumption and alternatives – to persuade audiences to turn off Netflix, get in their cars, drive to a movie theater with convenient showtimes and available seats, park, buy $10 tickets, sit through 10 minutes of commercials and 20 minutes of trailers as the adjacent seats fill up with strangers, watch the film for 150 minutes while holding off the restroom, then drive home. The only way studios can reliably do this is by offering a spectacle that simply needs to be seen on a big screen (Avengers: Endgame) or has such cultural relevance you can’t wait until the home video release to catch up (Us, or again, Avengers: Endgame). It doesn’t seem to matter if a film like Booksmart is terrific (it is), widely available and evangelized. The role of the movie theater has changed.

HoC going to take this up:

Streaming has changed the music industry - but do the economics of music streaming work for everyone?

We're launching an inquiry into the economics of music streaming today and want to hear from you.

Find out more and submit evidence here: https://t.co/tj3lUEVnZ2 pic.twitter.com/7fov9s99of

— Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee (@CommonsDCMS) October 15, 2020

forgot about this thread.

so did we get this sordid

This sounds like a cool idea: https://pitchfork.com/thepitch/inside-the-fight-to-fix-economic-inequality-in-dj-culture/