Payola, Value Judgments, and Other Jibber-Jabber
Wednesday, April 5, 2006
There’s no form of art tied up with notions of “authenticity” as much as music. We don’t get it from the music itself, however; aside from certain sectors of hip-hop, punk, and folk, the music itself doesn’t necessarily concern itself with “realness” as a thematic element. No, music listeners apply labels to each other—our tastes are, more or less, considered authentic or not based upon myriad factors, which can and will be broadly generalized here. From my experience, musical meaning is formed through musical alliances–with media messages hitting us from all sides, musical meaning is derived not as much from the content itself as the context in which it’s consumed.
Take, for example, the current bluster regarding PR companies feeding music to blogs in exchange for free artist publicity. Now, I’m never one to keep my mouth shut about what huge corporations do to gain a foothold in a certain market, but that’s not what I’m referring to here. As a blogger who’s been contacted with relative regularity over the past 8 or 9 months by all manner of label and “entertainment group” (fancy phrasing for the intermediaries between labels and public), I’m more concerned here with what is done with the music on the receiver’s end rather than the methods of the distributors. Because the general consensus to gain popular acceptance is that blogs are somehow “corrupted” through their acceptance of CDs and other things from labels in exchange for promotion, and I happen to wholeheartedly disagree with it. Here’s a somewhat longwinded explanation why.
Over the past few decades, the popular media has commonly been viewed as a tool for content producers to infiltrate the minds of consumers, who are taken as passive vessels that absorb every message sent toward them exactly as it is intended to be absorbed. This is what the PMRC and Joe Lieberman, along with hundreds of “concerned” or “watchdog” groups have wanted people to believe. And people, of course did. It’s known as the “hypodermic” method, and it infers that kids who play violent video games develop a higher propensity toward violence, along with kids who listen to Judas Priest and 2Pac. And of course, it’s a load of shit.
Study after study has disproven these claims as junk science—propagated to serve larger cultural interests while ignoring a wealth of extenuating cultural factors—but somehow, they carry on. Consumers are still viewed as hollow chambers to be filled with whatever media producers want to fill them with. And while a good number of content producers probably still believe that (to an extent, they have to), I have more faith in my fellow humans than to believe they fall for it. At least most of the time.
Which brings me back to the blogging point. Bloggers are viewed as consumers by labels (indie or not) and definitely by PR companies. But a type of consumer with perceived influence over others, befitting blogs as an asynchronous mode of communication. So they’re offered tons of free stuff with the hope that a small percentage will end up getting some publicity and assist in the label (or, heaven help us, the artist) turning a profit. That’s the model. It’s not viral marketing as such, but it’s marketing nonetheless.
And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it. Because while there are plenty of bloggers ready and willing to plug anything sent their way in the name of free and easy content, I’m going to take a logic leap and assume that most of them don’t. For the majority of the bloggers I keep in contact with, free stuff from PR companies and labels is taken in and assigned personal meaning in the same manner as music they come across through any other channel—word of mouth, advertising, Soulseek, Pitchfork, etc. If it’s great, then, ideally, they’ll think of some unique way to express their admiration for it, and post accordingly. I personally hold no shame for the fact that I’ve posted tracks from CDs received in the mail and/or been emailed, and I also hold no shame for the fact that I’ve occasionally had my interest piqued by advertising to purchase something. It’s the way things happen. What’s important to consider is that it doesn’t happen automatically. A post on a blog is a decided action, just like deciding where to eat lunch, what type of car to buy, or which movie to rent. And while advertisers like to keep their products at the front of our minds, we’d all like to consider that we have a bit of control over our actions. At least I hope.
The vastly misapplied term “payola” has lately been cast at bloggers by those without a real understanding for its loaded meaning. For radio DJs, there used to be an institutional code that deemed it necessary to clearly tag music that was acquired for money as such. If that didn’t happen, then a law was violated, there’s Congressional grandstanding, Dick Clark sells his soul/Alan Freed kills himself, etc. Of course, this all occurred when there was still an inkling of personality in programming popular music (intended for the public) on publicly-owned radio airwaves. Now that access to the airwaves and music distribution is all corporately controlled, the payola’s just taken on a different form. The DJ is largely gone, replaced by test-marketing groups and A&R guys.
The term “payola” itself still holds a significant stigma, though, and is now being attached to the next musical distribution channel deemed “pure” or “untainted”. But it can’t be applied to blogging—it doesn’t make sense. Payola can’t exist within blogging when there are absolutely no institutional standards for bloggers to follow. And, of course, there shouldn’t be standards for bloggers to follow. Ideally, blogs should exist as a remediated version of freeform radio, or zines, or something else—essentially, public venues for zealous fans to turn others on to what they love. We can all be John Peel. While I’ve given some thought to calls for journalistic standards (source-citing) within blogs, I’ve come to the conclusion that they’re totally unnecessary, normalizing, and detrimental to the spirit of the exchange of information that blogging idealizes, which brings me back to the notion of authenticity.
This recent trend of “outing” bloggers for posting PR music means tagging them as “false” or “inauthentic,” when a more realistic (or sympathetic) approach reveals that their individual rationales most often signal otherwise. Personal taste, which is what blogs are ideally broadcasting, is a very nebulous thing, and it’s always publicly represented in myriad ways by different people, based on who they are and what they deem important. That’s why some blogs take a corporate model, complete with ads, and talk of “serving their readers”, and others take an opposite approach, curating a highly personal collection of music for an idiosyncratic following. And thousands of others do thousands of other things. But to assume that music acquired by bloggers from PR companies or labels is somehow “tainted”, or the blogger is inauthentic, just eliminates the role of human agency and reverts to that medieval hypodermic model all over again. It’s hard for some to believe, but not everyone internalizes the same popular messages in the same way, and those who would apply a blanket term to a group of wildly dissimilar people speaks volumes toward who’s doing the applying than the applicant.
Filed under: blogs me ranting about stuff Payola PR
okay but the thing is that. . .oh wait, no you’re COMPLETELY RIGHT.
Thanks for being the voice of reason in this RIDICULOUS bit of grandstanding.
nice post. I for one am astounded that this topic has gotten as much (virtual) ink as it has. It’s not payola if I’m not getting paid and have never put forward any ethical standard to which I’m trying to adhere. I’ve never sold anything I’ve gotten from a PR company, but that’s because the pile of crap is too damn heavy to haul to the store. I listen to *maybe* 10% of what I’m sent. Sometimes I write it up either positively or negatively, more often it just goes in the Pile. But I will happily accept more swag from most anyone who wants to send it, because that 1 in 20 CDs that I listen to cold and totally connect with makes it worthwhile. And you’re damn skippy I’ll write it up if I like it.
People just like to complain about stuff.
I have been working on a similar post, and totally agree with you, Eric. Great post.
Like Frank, I gladly accept CDs and vinyl, because occasionally I will discover an artist I surely would have missed. Most (95% is a good number) end up being passed on to friends who might enjoy them, but the 5% makes it all good.
Great post that puts into words what most music bloggers would agree with. Thanks.
Um, I just want to echo all of the prior comments. Great post!
As always, nice job, my friend. You make me feel ashamed to sit at a computer and attempt to write.
I think it’s interesting to explore the idea of expectations and obligation in this. Because for whatever role the bloggers play in receiving music, there’s also the flip side of labels/companies sending it. There’s a certain amount of risk on their part sending out CDs/MP3s that may never see the light of the Internet.
Like Frank and LHB said, I sort of think of it as a risk/reward factor. I can risk my time listening to a bunch of schlock on the chance there’s that one gem in there that I’ll want to post on (this happened recently with the band Figurines). Likewise, promo companies, artists and labels send stuff en masse, perhaps hoping for that one post that will help trigger public consumption.
But is that their expectation? If they send a CD to 100 bloggers, how many do they realistically expect will post? To me, that’s the risk they run in sending that out.
I recall from a poli sci class I took long ago, a lecture about social obligation. The prof. used the example of going out to a bar with friends. If a friend buys the first round, are you entitled/obligated to buy the next round? Does the buyer of the first round EXPECT a beer in return?
Am I even on topic anymore? Does it matter?
I will say one thing: This is one ucockly topic.
kevin is buying us all drinks! Huzzah!
Nice work. I don’t see this as any different than old-fashioned print publications receiving advance copies for review. In more than 20 years of writing for various print publications (ranging from daily newspapers to specialty rags), no one ever offered my money for a good review.
My gut feeling is that the good blogs (stereogum, fluxblog, marathonpacks,gorilla vs. bear etc.) will continue to rise to the top, just as good print publications did in their time. Respect and quality win out.
I must be covering the wrong sort of music because I’ve only twice been sent a free record and my blog is pretty popular. If Ace Records want to start throwing free Northern Soul CDs at me I’d be very happy. Mp3 blogging is bloody hard work and I don’t make any money from it.
Last week Astralwerks sent me the new Candi Staton album and I am going to write something about it because it’s good. That’s the only criterion I care about. I’d understand the concern if bloggers were hyping crap to their readers.
Great entry. I really enjoyed reading this entry and hope that we as bloggers would put more thought on what we post, and not be dictated by other agendas. Rather we just post what music we enjoy or discover on our own.
But even if a blog was hyping crap to its readers, I don’t think it’d make a difference — people would just stop reading that blog, and move on to one with whose taste they agreed. It’s not as if the music blogosphere is one large, monolithic mass; there’s no single blog everyone has to read. It’s definitely not like radio, where there are a limited number of frequencies in each city and, as such, people only have a limited number of options to choose from if they want to listen to the radio. In that case, “payola” is obviously a bad thing, since people can’t really look elsewhere for their music. But in blogs? There’s no comparison to be made.
So yeah…I just want to echo what everyone else has said: great post. I feel compelled to write about it on my site now, too.
I posted a more lengthy response to this on the blog you linked to above, but the main point of my post is this:
The majors own radio and advertising, so indie labels have to find another way to get the word out about their artists. Sending out some free CDs for people to hear and spread the word is a small price to pay, and it certainly is not payola.
In the blog network I have worked to cultivate in doing promotion for Toolshed (we currently only work with indie labels), I know I have found a crew of folks who have most likely spent a good portion of their disposable income over the years purchasing music and going to shows. They have shared music with their friends and have invested a lot of time and effort into learning a lot about music, even before they started blogging. This is something that can’t be faked over night.
I never pressure them to post (though I may ask their opinion about records if they haven’t, but I would never harrangue a blogger to post something they don’t like because I value their opinion and recognize their individual tastes).
When I hear music discussed as “product” by industry types, it makes me wince. If I ever have a site tell me they will put a feature up if they get an ad (happened recently) I won’t contact them again. I don’t begrudge any site for putting up ads however, if it is a means for them to keep doing what they love. It’s just the pay-for-play thing, which I think it VERY rare in the mp3 blog world is going to give everyone a black eye.
The practice of giving away MP3s by the indie labels is a bit like the model of public radio in that it shows a level of TRUST in their consumers to do the right thing (buy the record, support the artist).
Again:
Great post. (Again.)
I may be reading the wrong blogs, but so far I haven’t seen anyone say that taking free records is wrong or that people shouldn’t review things they get from labels. Everything I’ve read on “blogger payola,” including the onelouder post, just calls for greater transparency, and I really don’t see how anyone can argue against that or claim it has anything to do with the “hypodermic model.” (Seriously, there really might be some more extreme posts that I’ve missed, so if anyone has any links to examples of this I really would like to have a look at them.)
Until this discussion got started, I think a lot of blog readers didn’t realize that bloggers were getting free stuff from labels. Really, just the fact that people are talking about it accomplishes the most important task–to let people know about these common practices. I’m not saying those practices are wrong, but readers should be aware of them.
Sending a blogger a free cd does not automatically result in its being reviewed, much less positively. But it does affect the likelihood of something getting a mention in a pretty obvious way.
When I was involved in the zine scene many years ago, I knew people who said they were afraid to negatively review certain releases for fear that they’d stop receiving promos from a label that they mostly liked or felt they needed to cover. This was of particular concern since they felt obligated to listen to and review more new records than your average person can normally afford to buy retail (one reason why distributing promos does sometime make sense). Not everyone censored themselves as a result (and those that did usually just refrained from writing a negative review, rather than writing an insincere positive one), but some people did, and I imagine the same is probably true in the blogging community.
Whether you want to accept promos is a personal decision. Whether you let it affect what you write is another. It’s not a question of right or wrong until you get into deliberately currying favor (though I have to say, I’ve certainly witnessed that too, and readers don’t always see through it). But I think it just makes sense for people to be more honest about this stuff. If you don’t have a problem accepting promos, you shouldn’t have a problem with making a blanket statement on your blog that you accept promos or maybe even saying “the release I’m about to review was given to me as a promo” when that’s the case.
But to say “everyone should be more honest about this stuff” implies that there is something dishonest about receiving a promo and posting about it out of enjoyment of the track without wedging in some sort of disclaimer. In the case where someone might be trying to “garner favor” with plushy reviews about something crappy, it’s insulting to the general public to assume that they’ll take the blogger’s opinion spoon-fed. Just as the PMRC putting forth that violence in games = violent kids is nonsense, expecting crappy music on a blog to lead to a bunch of people listening to crappy music is likewise malarkey.
all i can say is what i have said numerous times before – marathonpacks has the best written music blog in the blogosphere. And also in my humble opinion the best overall. It’s all about the music and as long as we are helping the cause then I guess it is all good no matter if we grab payola or not…
The only promo cd’s i have been sent actually sparked mmy interest. One I had seen in concert and felt good enough about them to do a post as I enjoyed it. The later sparked my interest to go to a concert and ended wiht me actually liking a few tracks off the album. This is the best analysis on any of the music blogs I have ever seen.
the general assumption with the “anti” position is that there’s a tacit understanding between the blogger and the PR people that what they send will be posted. It just doesn’t exist. I’ve never felt any sort of “pressure” from any PR people to put anything up, let alone with a positive bent. Which is why I see PR freebies as just another form of label publicity–direct-mail advertising, that, just like mass-mediated messages, can be ignored if so chosen.
As for the “more transparency” issue, that’s asking for an instutional ethics to be put in place for what is essentially a broad, heterogenous network of content producers, without any mention of how such a thing would be implemented. Sure, blogger A could type on his/her laptop “I bought this CD after months of searching at my local record store, which has no visible corporate affiliation”. Would this make a post more “valid”? Wouldn’t someone who’d shill for a label in the first place just lie about it anyway? Journalists, again, are part of an institution, and what comes with that is an assumption that they’ll tell the truth. Whether they do or not is subjective, but it’s assumed that they just will, or get publicly shamed for not.
i want to confess that i took payola from the orangette soda company for my latest masterwork. they provided your boy with 48 orange sodas. i drank half of one.
Personally, I don’t care if it was posted by a blogger, a fake blogger, a PR company, a record label, or Adolf Freaking Hitler.
The music is either good or bad, and either you like it, or you don’t.
Hitler’s blog has tons of Wagner. And Coldplay.
and R. Kelly
i hate to represent an unpopular opinion, especially with so many well thought-out and valid points being made. but i do disagree on one point.
it’s not payola to get free cds or entrance to shows or anything of that sort. but it’s not exactly true that it’s impossible for there to be blog payola. it may not be going on now, but i think if somebody actually were being paid real money to blog about certain things that would, in fact, be at least pretty damn analogous to payola. to me, payola = acting like you made a decision about what to blog about based on finding something interesting vs. doing so for totally mercenary reasons.
again, i don’t know of any cases of this happening and i don’t think getting free stuff is even remotely the same thing. and i don’t think there should be some kind of arbitrary “standard” to apply to blogs; having a blog isn’t the same thing as being a journalist, unless maybe somebody chooses to treat it that way for themselves only.
other than that one nitpicky point, you’ve laid out a very logical and persuasive argument.
looks like I’m a little late to say “excellent post” but I just want to echo what Sonicdeath99 said – I blog on the side, and a good 50% of the things I post about come in the mail from my journalism gigs. It is honestly a little more of a grey area from a journalistic perspective – an unbiased reporter isn’t supposed to receive perks, which free CDs/concert tickets could certainly be considered, but at the same time, our job is to write about albums prior to when they come out in stores and review inaccessible sold-out concerts, so ultimately what it comes down to is seeking out what you find interesting/relevant and asking the labels/PR to do their jobs and help you out. It’s a win-win situation. Most of the stuff we get, we don’t time or inclination to cover, which is true for every publication (or blog) in the universe, so I don’t see how anyone could really consider just receiving things for free an obligation. Even if you HAD to post on everything you got, it would be impossible, and besides, who wants to do that?
Obviously blogging isn’t subject to the same strict ethical standards because ultimately the reader gets to decide whether they like an mp3 or not, an interaction they don’t necessarily get to have with a print review, but I think the same basic precepts can still be applied.
I just posted the comment below over at One Louder. It is only vaguely relevant to the conversation at hand. That said, somewhere in what I’m saying there is something relating to authenticity. I am entirely too tired…
ONWARD!!!
——————————
Holy Crap.
Angryrobot – I feel like you’re missing an underlying truth to all this – WE ARE HIRED BY LABELS. LABELS YOU LIKE. I didn’t invent some eeeeevil promoter job where i sit in a high rise corner office and set out to commodify blogs, (which I enjoy and which i write, enthusiastically and openly and without trying to hide where work and play meet,) turning them from pure, write-out-of-love enterprises into a machine for press releases and shwag.
Yes, there are shitty blogs that write about shitty bands just because they got the CD in the mail. FINE. But I have a problem with the notion that the very NATURE of PR is the underlying problem. (This goes to jason’s comment, too, that “The PR companies hope you’ll spread some positive word of mouth in return for their charity. To me, this is the crux of the problem.”) You want to write about the bands you love. What’s wrong with a promoter sending you a record with the notion that you might love it? Yes, some do a better job then others. Some work on a large scale where they can afford to send out 500 CDs and see who “bites.” The byproduct of that is that they get the lazy people, too. Others (like myself) send out, say, 75 CDs to people we think will genuinely enjoy and yes maybe love what we’re sending. The reason we are hired (and, on a good day, the reason I love my job) is that I am set on a mission to bring band and fan together, and to maybe maybe maybe help a band get one step closer to being full time musicians. and the point is NOT that I’m some exception to the rule or I want to show everyone how credible I am, the point is that the UNDERLYING CONCEPT, for me and for the major-label-sending-out-too-many-copies-of-the-mediocre-band, is the same: bring band and fan together.
If someone’s tactics are shady, or a writer is caught WILLFULLY LYING about liking a band they secretly hate, call them out, loudly if you like. But the underlying concept of promotion is not the problem, and the notion that a writer should be made to feel bad, or hesitate about writing about a band he or she truly likes, just because the CD came in the mail, is (to me) totally contrary to the notion of being a music fan.
Finally, to jason, who said, “How do you discern whether someone is being honest in their praise or is just paying back the free tickets?” READ THE BLOG. I’m sure (and I seem sarcastic but I mean this sincerely) you can tell when you’re reading the words of a fan and when you’re reading lip service. Really.
I tend to agree that disclosure is the best way to keep everybody honest. That doesn’t mean that getting CDs in the mail is bad (I get them, too, of course). I’m merely suggesting that blogs who are not ashamed to talk about it earn credibility.