As most people are aware, EMI has been in financial trouble for quite a while. This issue culminated with the company being bought by Citigroup earlier this month, leading to a great amount of speculation regarding the future of the company, and even more analysis on how exactly EMI got into such a mess in the first place. A notable example of such commentary was published in the NME shortly after. This piece was written by Creation Records former head, Alan McGee, and it really was the most ill informed diatribe on the topic of piracy that I have come across in a long while. So much so that I felt it was necessary to reply to him directly. His piece was also very badly written, and really should not have been given column space. But then again, you really cannot expect much from the NME.
Dear Alan,
It may strike you as rather arrogant of me to write to you, or even question your opinions on the matter of piracy, especially when I am barely a music industry professional and you were head of Creation Records for a number of years. However, your appallingly dated, ill-conceived and ill-informed piece on the NME online recently highlighted you as a positive dinosaur in relation to the issues facing the record industry at present, and the best ways to overcome them and move forward. I would like to address some of these now, in order to exemplify to you the huge lack of insight and understanding you have on the issue, and why perhaps you are not particularly qualified to discuss the matter.
Firstly, EMI’s problems are ultimately down to EMI’s bad management and investment in new talent – not piracy. Using Lily Allen as an example of an EMI artist only solidifies this fact, as Lily Allen has not released an album in nearly two years, and has publically discussed numerous times that she does not intend to record any more music. Parlophone and Virgin still hold a degree of prestige and do still sign new artists (e.g. Tinie Tempah), but for the most part the label has rested on its (now ancient) laurels of The Sex Pistols, The Beatles and the like.
However, EMI will not be the last of the “the big four” record labels to fall. Sony will probably be next, although it will I imagine be a good 5 – 10 years before that happens. Who knows – maybe they will have remodelled or redirected their business strategy by then – though I doubt it. Major labels are static, stubborn bureaucracies, ill equipped for the current changes in the music industry. Smaller, independent labels have began to adapt and change their techniques successfully, developing new industry protocol such as offering free tracks to download, or even free albums. Such gestures demonstrate that both the label and the artist value their fans, and lend the whole process a more grassroots feel that appeals to and is inclusive of musicians, labels and fans alike. It is also fantastic marketing, as it offers consumers a chance to vet artists they are interested in, and if they like what they hear, that 79p lost through a free track could come back in merchandise, live ticket sales, or even a purchased album. The approach of acts like Radiohead and The Joy Formidable, who have both given whole albums away for free download, have only enhanced their popularity. Most musicians are happy with this arrangement – indeed, any musicians worth the salt appreciate how wonderful it is that people want their music in their lives, and that even being a semi-professional musician is pretty bloody amazing.
Major labels by comparison are stagnating, clinging to the old industry model where they still think its acceptable to pay artists badly (for example, a million pound record deal sees artists typically go home with less than £20,000 profit after expenses) and then charge people what is still a relatively high price for music. CDs have come down from the ludicrous heights of their early years, but even downloads are extortionate. Consumers have become wise to how record companies have abused the relationship between the production and consumption of music.
People still purchase music however. In fact people are purchasing more music now than ever before. Piracy is not the issue. Yes – millions of tracks are illegally downloaded, but huge amounts are being purchased. In reality music that is illegally downloaded is just a small section of the ginormous amount of music that is constantly being transferred, copied, borrowed, streamed, shared and purchased at present. The music industry is just too big to control these days. The amount of available recorded music has probably grown 100 times bigger than it was even 10 to 15 years ago, and that’s not including all the recorded, unsigned music available via sites like Bandcamp and MySpace. There is just too much music out there, and too many ways of getting it for to be controlled by anyone, not by musicians, consumers or record companies. In the 1970s and 1980s there was a limited supply of music and musicians. You had acts that were signed, and acts that were unsigned and localised to a scene or area. The musical world was comparatively easy to navigate. These days you only ever see your own personal musical world – the tip of a very big iceberg. Your argument, Alan, that there will never again be another band like the Rolling Stones because of piracy is therefore sheer idiocy. The market isn’t set up for another Rolling Stones; it is set up for a few major-ish artists that everyone knows and a plethora of smaller artists. The internet has made everything grassroots, whether you like it or not, which makes the creation and attainment of music ubiquitous, rapid and uncontrollable.
Of additional note, your argument reeks of the typical angry rhetoric of a music industry executive – a rhetoric that few music fans, musicians, or even people who work in the industry can sympathise with. As one of the elite people who could still make tons of cash from record sales alone, you and your contemporaries are all desperate to hold on to your cushy position, often doing very little whilst simultaneously screwing over both musician and consumer alike. Your patronising plea for consumers to think of new, young artists when considering piracy is blatantly shallow in this context. Major record labels have not been particularly interested in fresh, young talent for a good twenty years or so. Independent labels typically discover artists who then get bought up by majors after the indies have done all the hard work developing them. Major record labels care about one thing only – revenue. Its useless to pretend otherwise as we all know stories of artists who were screwed over by labels, dropped by labels, badly promoted and marketed by labels etc. Don’t stick up for the little man when you’re secretly fucking his wife.
Anyway Alan, it is highly unlikely that you will pay any attention to my reply, or even attempt to understand in greater depth any of the complexities of this issue. However, your opinion is less important now than ever. You are a pompous, conceited relic of a decaying modus operandi, retired, and with good reason. The 85 comments on the NME page, all of them against your argument, demonstrate this perfectly.
Your worthy opponent,
MiaTea
You can read McGee item for yourself at http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=146&p=9743&title=emi_s_plight_proves_it_downloading_has_m&more=1&c
