What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- steve9924, on 09/15/2008, -4/+31die......DIE .... DIEEEEEE !!
lol - 1807, on 09/15/2008, -5/+37The man who wrote this article needs to get with the program. Musicians pulling albums, web radio sites going down? All of this has been going on a LOT earlier than this summer and anyone who cares about the music industry already knows about it. I can say the writer did keep me reading till the end, but I can also say I gained no new information from this article that I already didn't know two years ago.
As a journalist, I did a story a year ago about a closing local video store who blamed the internet and people downloading for it's financial losses. I then talked to another local video store that ONLY carried obscure titles. They didn't have 50 copies of the popular movies like Blockbuster, they instead would only buy one or two copies and used the rest of their money to buy titles that were hard to find. They also only employed people who had a vast knowledge of films, people who could suggest that if you came in here for 300, you should check out "movie X."
My point is, the music industry as a whole is still trying to fight the internet and if they want to fight a losing battle, I guess they should continue what they are doing. If they want to come out on top though, they really need to listen to their fan base, research the ways that most people are getting music and see how they can work with that. I don't think people are opposed to supporting thier faovrite artist. I just believe that any good business man knows the customer is always right and alienating your customers or giving them a bad experience is only going to drive them away.- DestroyFascism, on 09/16/2008, -2/+7Blimey! So presumptuous! What would customers know about what they want...Listen to them? you are joking right?
/sif not sarcasm.. - Pyehole, on 09/16/2008, -2/+9Oh, so by "get with the program" he needed to come to the same conclusion earlier. For example, when you did.
- bungoman, on 09/16/2008, -1/+4That's typically what that expression means...
- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -0/+7Your observation on a niche market market succeeding doesn't count with applied to the big picture. A video store that only sells obscure product is just like the record labels rushing to re release their back catalog on vinyl because the kids these days see it as a nostalgic reference. It's still a small market and just because they're in business doesn't mean they'd be successful in all or even most markets.
- jerrycurley, on 09/16/2008, -7/+4
- smacksaw, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3I dub thee: The Angry Disbeliever
Scarecrow video begs to differ:
http://www.scarecrow.com/ - logic11, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4In Halifax, NS, we have a few block area that used to have a Rogers Video, a Blockbuster, and a local store called Video Difference. Video Difference has a grand total of two locations, the large one downtown that I am talking about, and a small one in the suburbs. The Rogers Video went out of business a few months ago and the Blockbuster is usually empty... I have no idea how they are even still operating as I have never seen more than 4 or 5 customers in there. Video Difference expanded to a third floor a few years ago. The lines for the cash usually have more people in them than Blockbuster has in a week. Video Difference has an entire section labeled "Independent Cinema: Gay and Lesbian", another called "Independent Cinema: English Language" in addition to the usual horror, comedy (and independent comedy), drama, action, sci-fi, anime, childrens... you get the idea. They hit the niche markets hard and have experienced a lot more success in that one particular area than blockbuster has. Now, they will never compete with Blockbuster on an international scale, but Blockbuster seems likely to go bust within the next few years and Video Difference will probably still keep doing its thing, making a lot of money in a small market and employing more people than the local Blockbuster does. Sometimes being smaller is actually an advantage.
- smacksaw, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3I dub thee: The Angry Disbeliever
- Theycallmetak, on 09/16/2008, -1/+7"All of this has been going on a LOT earlier than this summer and anyone who cares about the music industry already knows about it."
I haven't cared about the music industry since CDs came out. I care about music.
And where can I find "Movie X"?
- DestroyFascism, on 09/16/2008, -2/+7Blimey! So presumptuous! What would customers know about what they want...Listen to them? you are joking right?
- steve9924, on 09/15/2008, -1/+23All respect to the above comment, but I think the thrust of this article is that they are now doing even one better- they are pulling songs from iTunes, hoping to force people to buy albums instead of songs.
- writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2This is an old practice. When a single was selling too well, they'd pull it to oblige people to buy the album. Nothing new there.
- MeghnaK, on 09/15/2008, -5/+7LOL!!
- dbrose67, on 09/15/2008, -1/+15So true...."But the music industry, stuck obsessing about exactly that -- former revenue -- would prefer that you only listen to music when and where they want you to. And that's no way to figure out the path to future revenue."
- Surferess, on 09/15/2008, -1/+13Gotta digg this one for the headline alone!
- WhatsUpWithJack, on 09/16/2008, -8/+9NIN FTW.
- y2kery, on 09/16/2008, -3/+3Yeah, Trent Reznor rulez! More musicians should be like this. Screw the record labels.
- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -0/+6yeah, because the majority of musicians out there are so famous that they can just throw their music on the market and rely on the good will devotion of fans to give back financially. you're so ignorant my head hurts.
- smacksaw, on 09/16/2008, -3/+2y2kery@riaa.com
- y2kery, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2Maybe I should have been a little more specific. More POPULAR artists should do this. It worked for NIN and Radiohead.
- y2kery, on 09/16/2008, -3/+3Yeah, Trent Reznor rulez! More musicians should be like this. Screw the record labels.
- hsinray, on 09/16/2008, -2/+8Music must live! but stop killing the listeners!
- pingpants, on 09/16/2008, -1/+8Dugg for Dumenco's passing homage to Muxtape.
- Synova, on 09/16/2008, -2/+26***** THE RIAA!
- SiXiam, on 09/16/2008, -1/+3***** Fox News!
- TheMachine1, on 09/16/2008, -0/+11Too lazy to look up the link but Courtney Love did an excellent article describing how little money most bands make on a record sale. The entire music industry is based
on the artists producing music cheaply and the Industry not the artist banking most the profits. So now you have Internet downloads that have cut the pie smaller for the artists. To the point its no longer an incentive to produce new work. Granted there is likely a creative dry spell to and we need some new revolution in music. The solution to the first part is artist need to realize Internet sales can eliminate the need for splitting profits.- fourpointsix, on 09/16/2008, -0/+6This is what you're referring to: http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/l ...
Steve Albini wrote one too called The Problem With Music: http://www.negativland.com/albini.html - kurtergad87, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4Google: courtney love music industry article
Result: http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/l ... - jerrycurley, on 09/16/2008, -6/+1
- TheMachine1, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3Jerrycurley major kiss ass for corporate abuse on Digg.
- NinjaNato, on 09/16/2008, -1/+3But do we need a revolution in music creativity, or a revolution in music marketing?
There's plenty of talented musicians out there. The problem is that there's no easy way to get their music to the masses without a record deal through a big recording company.- monkeybelly, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4There is an easy way. It's called the Internet. You don't need a big money hording record company to make the masses hear you. Save the internet. Save music.
- edmcguirk, on 09/16/2008, -1/+5You can make your music available on the internet all you want but nobody will get it if they don't know you exist. That's the purpose of marketing.
The record companies had a style of marketing that worked really well for them. They made their money through selling media.
The internet breaks their lock on media distribution and they will have to develop a new method of making money for their method of marketing. Too bad all the new methods invented so far make less money than the old methods.
More than likely the era of blockbuster mega-stars is over and instead of making a few fortunes off of a few bands, they will have to make small profits off of hundreds of bands. - NinjaNato, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3monkeybelly. I agree, that's what I was getting at.
However, edmcquirk hit the nail on the head. It's not enough to just put your music on the Net. Your music must also be marketed.
- smotpoker1, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2Well the first thing they need to do is get rid of rap.It just plain sucks and most of the so called artist are stupid.
- fourpointsix, on 09/16/2008, -0/+6This is what you're referring to: http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/l ...
- skelliewag, on 09/16/2008, -1/+10Definition of madness: doing the same things over and over again expecting different results. Take note, music industry.
- smacksaw, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3I thought that was the definition of the surge.
- nepidae, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1Actually they are doing the same things over and over and expecting the _same_ results (lots of money). Its the market that is changing, not their tactics.
- Exzhaton, on 09/16/2008, -2/+5Welp it's real simple. In this age media is as easy to give and receive as it is to breathe oxygen. Artists need to realize that they need to branch out and do other stuff that can't be so easily obtained, like live performances or introduce a big merch line. There's just no more money to be made purely by media.
- Exzhaton, on 09/16/2008, -3/+2Or maybe get a real job, you lazy ***** lol, and realize that Art is not made for money.
- rattler72, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3Exactly... thats why they should go to Sonichall - http://www.sonichall.com license it with creative commons - http://www.creativecommons.org and make their music free.
Let it flow like water... the real money is in tours and merch. Period.
- Alias1431, on 09/16/2008, -3/+13***** THE R... ***** me, this is old.
- leftcoastfunk, on 09/16/2008, -1/+3true that
- BlackJacket, on 09/16/2008, -1/+4This article was actually very informative. I hadn't heard that artists and the record companies were pulling tracks off iTunes to encourage album sales. Thats a good idea on there part. Don't get me wrong, a lot of albums only have one or two decent songs, but I think the ability to download a single track has hindered the industry in more than just album sales.
It hurts the fans too. Before you could download any song you wanted, if you heard a song you liked, you bought the album, and in many cases there were a number of songs on the album that were actually better than the singles. You expanded you field of influence and progressed your listening experience.
When was the last time you put a compact disc in your stereo and just pushed play? There was a kind of magic back then that, I think, is gone now.- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3I totally agree. And the sound quality of CDs and vinyl greatly surpasses these horribly compressed .mp3 torrents...
- danlowlite, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2And I can totally hear the sound quality degrading through these little white bud earphones...or over the sound of my trunk buzzing...
Of course, if you listen to Green Carnation or somesuch, your album/song choices are somewhat, err, limited.
- danlowlite, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2And I can totally hear the sound quality degrading through these little white bud earphones...or over the sound of my trunk buzzing...
- Aroundtheworls, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4I agree that the ability to download singles has changed things greatly, however restricting this will just encourage more people to pirate the individual single. Not a smart business decision.
Things have changed, and I agree the user experience isn't what it used to be, but this is the fault of the record industry for being slow to adapt to the changes that have taken place in distribution. Why did iTunes have to come from Apple, a computer maker, and not BMG, Sony or others? It's because despite their massive resources they buried their heads in the sand and hoped the Internet would go away.- writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2"Why did iTunes have to come from Apple, a computer maker, and not BMG, Sony or others?"
No way would a major corporation give the distribution of its goods to the direct competition. For a while, they all tried to set up their own web distribution, until Jobs pulled them around the table.
- writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2"Why did iTunes have to come from Apple, a computer maker, and not BMG, Sony or others?"
- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3I totally agree. And the sound quality of CDs and vinyl greatly surpasses these horribly compressed .mp3 torrents...
- Hobbes57, on 09/16/2008, -1/+5Seriously? We can't go barely 7 days now without repeating front-page articles?
http://digg.com/music/How_the_Music_Industry_Spent ...- generalchaos316, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2Agreed...I feel my brain capacity shrinking by the megabyte...
- 0tis, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3If you measure your brain capacity in megabytes, I'd reckon its already shrunk somewhat.
- umtumm60702, on 09/16/2008, -7/+1Download music MP3, buy mp3 music, legal MP3 downloads at http://justmusicstore.com
http://mp3lava.com/- writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2You realise you are promoting piracy on Digg?
- aflaks, on 09/16/2008, -3/+2whoa, that popular virgin chick from the breakfast club was in a band too?
- newl, on 09/16/2008, -4/+4Who're you kidding? It's only just spring. Summer is a few months away yet.
- WoollyMittens, on 09/16/2008, -1/+8The record industry is the middle-man. The internet is here to cut out the middle-man. All litigation and lobbying by the RIAA is a desperate struggle to enforce their obsolete business model.
Indie bands are doing just FINE, selling concert tickets and merchandise.- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -1/+4you have no clue how the music business works. if your logic stood true, then bands with even a minor following would be financially successful. but you have no clue what the production costs are, how the label acts as a bank for these bands (because unless your incorporated band is the Rolling Stones, no bank in their right mind would loan you $250k for an album).
- kirado4, on 09/16/2008, -1/+5and the costs are what exactly..? distribution is ***** all, because of the internet.. building your own studio isn't even that expensive.. seriously labels are a wast of time and money.. you're really not needed anymore. Technology has replaced you.. sorry for you
- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3Even "indie albums" can cost more than $500k to produce, factoring in all production costs. The home studio claim is a total co-out because everyone and their grandmother has a computer, an mbox and pro tools. That's not a ***** studio, nor is it even close. And don't think for a second that the internet can handle human inaction, organization, and cooperation quite like phone calls and face-to-face meetings. The internet is too saturated and just because you spend your whole like roaming around from jaded blog to jaded blog doesnt mean that the people making the music industry progress.
But you wouldn't know any of this because your ignorance overshadows any sense of logic. - writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2Poppacherry is right, no matter how unfortunate it might sound. Bands need labels. And to become big, bands need big labels. Galling, but true.
- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -1/+4you have no clue how the music business works. if your logic stood true, then bands with even a minor following would be financially successful. but you have no clue what the production costs are, how the label acts as a bank for these bands (because unless your incorporated band is the Rolling Stones, no bank in their right mind would loan you $250k for an album).
- AndrewDB, on 09/16/2008, -1/+4Damn, Digg seriously has ADHD or some sort of memory defect..
http://digg.com/music/How_the_Music_Industry_Spent ... - poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -1/+8When it comes to discussing the current state of the record industry, most have no idea what they're talking about. As a member of the Grammy Foundation (who attends town hall meetings regularly) and an employee for a well known indie label, I can say with confidence that the failure of record labels goes beyond what most people outside the business can understand.
A good example of this is people's misunderstanding of what the RIAA represents. If I just read Digg postings all day on the organization, I'd think they were a Nazi group, trying to censor and prevent anyone and everyone from getting to their music. That's really not the case. The RIAA's heart is in the right place, as it is their job to defend publishers and song writers into getting what's rightfully theirs: compensation for their works. But they've executed some things poorly and the press has been so biased and one sided on the issue, most people have a difficult time seeing it any other way.
I do partially agree with what Jonah Bloom said about the industry's mind set on past profits and trying to match those. The record industry (which is entirely different compared to the music industry) has had trouble adapting to the new digital medium, because since day one, they've made their profits on tangible mediums: LPs, 8-Track, Tape, CDs... That's why many labels (mine included) are looking elsewhere for ways of maintaining profits and allowing fans to hear the music in the ways they're desiring to. But not every band can just hand out their music and expect to make a return based on people's good will. Not every artist is big enough.
Of course the internet has told itself it can rightfully take the music based on their perception that most artists make money off their tours and merch... But here's the problem with that:
aside from now taking the art away from the artists and turning them into a strictly manufactured product, you're seeing more labels merge artists into "all in deals," where the label is handling the tours, merch, and music just to try and break even. And this is all based on top of the fact that 90% of albums don't make their money back.
So be prepared people, to not only pay higher prices for tickets (than most of you already are), but prepare for a rise in merch as well. If the labels aren't going to make money on tangible music formats, they'll sure as hell look elsewhere.- kirado4, on 09/16/2008, -1/+11No actually, most people understand the RIAA quite well by now. No one is expecting hand outs. People want good prices. Buy it once, play it on everything. No DRM. No breaking personnel liberties invading privacy.. installing viruses suing dead people and breaking laws to protect your copyrights. Unfortunately for you technology is replacing the middle man.
So be prepared to make less money if charge more for concerts if you want to maintain your ridiculous returns. What you don't get is that you have as a business over supplied and devalued your product. Technology is a bitch.- writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2I know what you're saying. But music production does not happen spontaneously. Labels are more than middle men. They actually pay for studios and promotion. Take them out and we're left with amateur hour. Remember MP3.com?
By the way, I don't work for a label now. But I've worked with enough indie labels to at least know how the thing is structured.
Many indies have been telling the majors what was happening for ten years already. It didn't stop many of those same labels from going bust. Why? Because music fans/consumers wouldn't buy into any system that did not sell music that they knew, the music from the majors.
The idea that the Internet somehow frees up music is a complete fallacy. The whole music industry actually bloody needs majors. That's as much a fact as the falling prices of music.
- writie, on 09/18/2008, -0/+2I know what you're saying. But music production does not happen spontaneously. Labels are more than middle men. They actually pay for studios and promotion. Take them out and we're left with amateur hour. Remember MP3.com?
- Aroundtheworls, on 09/16/2008, -0/+9Thanks for the insight, poppacherry.
You may say that the RIAA's heart is in the right place but the fact is that its actions are myopic and misguided. Filing lawsuits against college students and single moms is never going to win hearts and minds, regardless of intent. Instead it creates anger, annoyance, and can promote piracy as who wants to support people who would do that to their customers.
What else is the RIAA known for? Such things as preventing Pandora from serving customers outside the US like myself (thank you, RIAA), hiking costs for Internet radio, and the 'this video is not available in your country' messages. Since when is preventing your product from reaching potential customers a good thing.
The fact is that the distribution method for music has changed radically and will never go back, regardless of how many lawsuits the RIAA hands out. It's up to them, the recording industry, and intelligent thoughtful individuals like yourself to look at how to add more value to current products and find new methods of revenue. - VOICESOF1, on 09/16/2008, -0/+6Their heart was in the right place when they colluded to keep CD prices artificially high too- or did you forget that big pre napster lawsuit?
http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-30 ...
I know I never got my check so consider the internet payback.- PakoBedejo, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2All of the CDs I legitimately purchased, about 150, were purchased between 1995 & 2000 (with maybe 5 exceptions). That's the period of the illegal price fixing. So, I'm just trying to get my portion of the settlement, cuz nobody ever distributed a free CD to me. I've had to work hard to get the files myself. :P
- Cyberdactyl, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4-OK HERE IT COMES-
The RIAA truly is the music industry’s worst enemy in so many ways it's laughable. . .
Why? Let's go back to where it started...
Napster WAS the Microsoft of P2P. They owned 98+% of the file sharing community throughout the USA and probably the world. The RIAA could have. . . SHOULD have . . worked with the music industry and Napster.
Napster could have been the best, single source, marketing tool for the music industry in decades. All that was needed was to require members to share simple information such as demographic, general geographic location, interests, etc. it would have provided a plethora of critical marketing information. The RIAA then should have worked to curtail only the most egregious abusers. . those selling copyrighted music, etc. NOT attacking single mothers.
Instead the RIAA took a bat to the bee hive, scattering the so-called “file sharing criminals” to the winds.
Now, instead of a single valuable source of marketing information, they now deal with several P2P apps, torrents, etc.. . . billions of files flung to the wind.
It is becoming stunningly clear the RIAA is killing the music industry FAR quicker than little Susie at Berkley wanting a copy of Christina Aguilera’s Candyman.
* * * * * * * * *
The second major strategic blunder is possibly shutting down, or severely crippling, net radio.
What will this mean in simple terms?
As we all know, there is a huge net radio market. . .that’s right. . .that listen to music, for the sake of argument. . . ‘free’. Does anyone see a similar scenario being played out?
Why yes boys and girls. . . an exponential explosion in file sharing piracy. Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I believe that’s the exact opposite of what the music industry wants.
From where I’m sitting, maybe the RIAA is really a conspiracy to KILL the music industry not to save it.
Look, the RIAA has evolved to nothing more than the music industries' knuckle-busting shake-down goons. . . pure and simple.
They obviously are way out of touch with the current music culture. They were given their marching orders a few years back and have little idea how to approach the piracy issue. The RIAA's MO will continue till someone gets a judgment against the RIAA with a crippling punitive award that forces them to re-think their stragegy.. - akatsuki, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3When the RIAA actually pushes the MAJORITY of revenue to the artists and writers, then I think I will believe it. Distribution costs over the internet are minimal. An artist's contract should allow them to designate a ratio oh how much revenue goes to marketing, but instead the labels offer adhesion contracts that are unconscionable.
- poppacherry, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2the artist's contract SHOULD give them a lot of things. But it's the label taking all the risk and it's the label writing out the contract. Ultimately, they have the upper hand in terms of negotiations. Don't like it? I ***** dare you to do it on your own. Only a few have been able to pull it off
- smotpoker1, on 09/16/2008, -1/+2the riaa are nazis dumbass
- kirado4, on 09/16/2008, -1/+11No actually, most people understand the RIAA quite well by now. No one is expecting hand outs. People want good prices. Buy it once, play it on everything. No DRM. No breaking personnel liberties invading privacy.. installing viruses suing dead people and breaking laws to protect your copyrights. Unfortunately for you technology is replacing the middle man.
- Lancelot9201, on 09/16/2008, -5/+2 i have no bought one album in over 2 yrs due to there not being one album with more than 1 or 2 songs that's worth paying for. The fact that most online music is either loaded with DRM or to expensive doesn't help much either . In fact, I've bought a couple of singles but mostly I have downloaded torrents as I can't trust that I'm getting enough value for my dollar.. Thank God though for the Pirate Bay & Indie Artist that are offering free downloads of their music..
- frepnog, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2thank god for spell check, proof reading, and the ability to convey a coherent thought.
oh wait.
- frepnog, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2thank god for spell check, proof reading, and the ability to convey a coherent thought.
- forthex, on 09/16/2008, -1/+2*How the Music Business Spent the Summer Killing Itself*
crawling in my skin, etc. - heystoopid, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3Just a bit too late .
As was covered in more detail by the magazine "Rolling Stone" in June 2007 under the title "The Record Industry's Decline"
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/15137581/th ... - bagboyrebel, on 09/16/2008, -1/+2The exact same page was already on the front page, didn't it show up as a duplicate URL?
- swordphish, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3Music will always prevail, it's the fat cats who are getting skinner. Independent artists and labels are the way of the future. While we're at it, TV might as well just 1) insert barrel into mouth 2) pull trigger.
- DominicanZero, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4Buried as duplicate.
- knutslie, on 09/16/2008, -1/+3What do they mean "buy" music?
- ansatsu29, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3"But the music industry, stuck obsessing about exactly that -- former revenue -- would prefer that you only listen to music when and where they want you to. And that's no way to figure out the path to future revenue."
The music industry are still stuck in the cassette tapes era wherein you have to buy the whole tape just to listen to their work of art or masterpiece or whatsoever. - jmaica26, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1I think 1980's music are cool, just kinda doubted if that revival would click.
- Craig1394, on 09/16/2008, -0/+5These articles come up so often that I should just Copy and Paste.
Telling us to acquire music legally, then witholding licensing for online music services like Zune Marketplace and itunes, makes no ***** sense! Seriously, in the Zune Marketplace, some songs on an particular album are available, while a couple may not be. Some of an artists CD's are available, while others are not. WTF?
Less importantly, with the exception of a few very forward thinking bands and other musicians, most of the free music available online is nothing but noisy, indie garbage. - dominicanchen, on 09/16/2008, -6/+1That Rangle need to find his no pride Father and Obama Too! Especially when Rangle made about the Chinese' when the Chinese was going to buy an oil company, and his domb and no pride "of cause" Integrity black ass chicken George and a common he made, and I know he fell stupit! " What to expect from a half Educated House N.. offspring, His fatherless and Obama and the Puerto rican is know to abandon their mix breed mutts! anypne disagreed you're must be a Foreign or a new comer in this Country! No Insult intended. Just the Fact that the World try to hide!
- smacksaw, on 09/16/2008, -0/+4The writer of this article (and I'm surprised to see this missing from the comments) is how the RIAA is trying to kill internet radio. XM/Sirius tow the RIAA line. They play their music. Internet radio plays something totally different.
Internet radio is like a parallel distribution and advertising system. As mentioned in the article, it introduces people to new music and then amazon.com (or whatever) to buy it.
If enough commercially experienced/up-and-coming artists eschewed the RIAA and the major labels and made YouTube their MTV and internet radio their Clear Channel FM station, the RIAA and the labels would die.
That's what this is really about. Eliminating alternatives. - loomis6335, on 09/16/2008, -0/+5NOFX said it best, "Dinosaurs Will Die!"
- Leprince, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2REpost.
It was on the frontpage less than 2 weeks ago. - StupotAce, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2The fact of the matter is that the music industry isn't selling their product better than their competitors (pirates). It's all about business and they aren't trying to compete, they are just whining that it's not fair. People are willing to spend money on music services, but they don't want to offer people that. They want to charge money per song or per album.
Meanwhile, pirating music doesn't have to pay per song or per album, but there is both guilt attached (which goes away with time) and the chance of being discovered and prosecuted.
All said and done, the music industry just needs to come up with a better way to sell their music or they will continue losing. - RileyCourage, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1The media, specifically newspapers, could learn a lot about how NOT to survive Online from the delusional executives at our "major" labels. Great story.
- foryou1233, on 09/26/2008, -1/+0Song lyrics. Artists biography. Find your favourite lyrics, song-texts, artists biography and reviews http://westsounds.com/
- writie, on 10/01/2008, -0/+1You do realise this is a pirate site?
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is