Internet Streaming: An Artifact Analysis

Ask anyone how they listen to music the answer will likely be through any means of easy access at an affordable cost. A study conducted by news outlet Nielsen 's Music 360 claimed, “Americans streamed 164 billion on-demand tracks across audio and video platforms in 2014”. The rapid increase in popularity music streaming platforms are experiencing leaves people wondering what that means for the music industry. When more consumers utilize the on-demand method of entertainment access, how does that translate to the artist being accessed? Astra Taylor contributes to this discussion in her book, “The People’s Platform: Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age”. She lays criticism upon the idea of a more digitized

When wanting to listen to a song today, one no longer has to buy or download a physical copy. In today’s world, streaming has become one of the top ways of retrieving music content. This major change has led to a profound shift for the music industry and its artists. It has developed a continuous conflict that affects the way music is distributed and how artists make a living. Listeners stream music electronically through their computers, phones, cars, and more. Most of these streaming platforms allow for the content to be free, which directs to the question of whether music should be free or not. Streaming is a topic that has presented itself to be a valid issue on whether it ultimately hurts or helps artists and their careers. Streaming has both pros and cons, but in order to aim to figure a possible solution there needs to an examination of the history of the issue, a proper analysis of both sides, and evaluating its importance.

I believed the basic aim of these websites were to digitally respond reasonable to the technological changes of how music was conveyed to drive sales In a positive manner but musician ended up getting a small fraction of the income receive from streaming videos and audio songs as royalties. I can personally testify to this with my personal attitude towards many popular songs I downloaded for free online that I heard for the first time on radio. In his article published in the New York Times on January 2013, Ben Sisario commented on how online streaming has hurt the industry and partially reduced sales. According to him, Many consumers has greatly welcomed this system citing them as a smart way to save money since streaming saves them more money than buying the physical album. This will virtually hurt the artist survival unless they are engaged in an important side business for survival. ( Hartwig Masuch, chief executive officer of BMG rights

As a company in the streaming music Industry, it is essential to have a competitive advantage in order to stay in the run. Indeed, a big competition is established between all the companies which are using more or less the same business model. In the streaming music Industry, it is easier for clients to make implicit bargaining. Indeed, the more subscribers a company has, the more music labels will be in

Since April 2003, iTunes Music Store has permitted the consumer to purchase music and digital books over the Internet with success. By 2005 their shares increase significantly as a result of their tremendous success. Their product became a platform for the digital music business to explode into the industry it is today. This also made digital music affordable to the consumer who may have gone to illegal downloads in the past which in turn ensured that the music industry was getting paid for their product as well. The $0.99 cents per song download provided $0.70 cents to be paid to the record companies and the remainder ($0.29 cents) was Apple profit. By August 2005, some of the larger record companies felt that their product was

3-4). While these statistics provide a look into the numerical growth of the streaming industry, it is also important to discuss the power that these streaming services have generated—over both the music industry and over established/aspiring artists. Subscriptions are on the rise, having increased significantly over the past ten years, but as is the amount of users streaming music on a free-trial or ad-supported basis—ultimately undercutting the music industry and artists alike. Blewett and Gollogly (2017) elaborate on this point, stating that, by the end of 2016, paid music streaming subscriptions drove a revenue growth of 60.4%—this growth more than offsetting a “20.5% decline in downloads” and a “7.6% decline in physical revenue” (Blewett & Gollogly, 2017, para. 4). Moreover, Borja and Dieringer (2016) explore the concept of streaming even further in their academic article, positing that the decline in paid digital downloads may be a direct result of streaming—as, music streaming can be perceived as a “complement” for music piracy, in which listeners can freely sample music to pirate later on (Borja & Dieringer, 2016, p. 1). The authors also suggest that streaming can provide a “venue for discovering and listening to new releases”; and after completing their 1052 surveys, conclude that streaming increased the likelihood of piracy by

In 2000 the digital music was the next big thing in how consumers listen to music. The technological shift in music changed how the relationship is between the artists, recording companies, promoters and music stores on how they operate today. In the late 90’s and early 2000’s Peer-to-peer (P2P) networks allowed free exchange of music files with companies like Napster and Kazaa was a big step that allowed consumers to store large libraries of music. With the cost of hard drive space going down; it allowed for pocket-sized computers to store more information in a smaller space that open the door for apple to step in with the unveiling of the iPod and iTunes. These systems made it possible for storage and playback that gave consumers the

The "business side of music is struggling to generate enough revenue because of the new technology" ("How the Internet Changed Music."). "Most of the people who are part of making a record are paid in royalties, and anytime music changes hands without money being involved, those royalties can’t be paid—which is why so much has been done in recent years to try and reduce music piracy"("How The Internet Changed Music."). iTunes and Amazon has helped by offering cheap downloads for single songs, which allows the customer to only purchase songs they like rather than the entire album ("How the Internet Changed Music."). Spotify and Pandora, who offer either ad-based or paid subscription streaming of their music libraries, are Internet radio stations which have also helped with the piracy problem ("How The Internet Changed

Despite relevant findings, many individuals are under the impression that digital media services, such as digital downloading and streaming have a positive impact on the Music industry for reasons including music

The internet is the one media that brings up the most controversy in bands spreading their music. Whether they promote it or not their music is downloaded for free on the internet. Most bands do not like that their music is downloaded for free, but they can’t do much to stop it. In a way downloading music for free could bring the musicians even more money. If a person likes one of the songs they downloaded off of the internet they may be inclined to buy the entire album or at least the single. After the person buys the latest album they may even buy earlier albums from the same artist if they like the music enough. The internet has

Introduction: Setting the trend for the future, the distribution and consumption of recorded music transformed dramatically with the launching of Apple’s iTunes in 2001. The proliferation of online music subscription services and other music sharing services exerted a great pressure on the conventional music distribution business model. Combined with this transformation, piracy of digital music had a profound impact on the whole industry. These worsening conditions in the market place for recorded music forced both established and upcoming new artists to experiment with new ways of selling their music.

When speaking economically, the digital music sector of the international music industry is undoubtably the most important sector in the industry. Within the last decade, music has seen cardinal changes in the way both major and independent labels distribute their products. An industry that once relied on Payola 's and mass distribution of physical records and CD 's now relies heavily on the power of the internet. The first instance of mass distribution of music through the internet was by the service Ritmoteca.com in 1998 [1]. Ritmoteca had a library of over 300,000 songs, offering individual songs for 99 cents each and albums for $9.99. After signing distribution deals with many major music labels such as Warner

In the midst of the United States’ “dot com bubble” (years 1997-2000), there was a surge in technology that brought about file sharing and digital downloads. Threatening the survival of the music industry and introducing a unique set of challenges for the industry to overcome. To remain relevant in the new global market of digital music online, the music industry would have to evolve and change with the introduction of each new facet technology had to offer. The introduction of digitally compressed music files, so easily attainable for a small fee or downloaded legally (pirated) for free, made the music industry reevaluate how to make a profit and protect copyrights. Social media created a visible opportunity for both consumers and artists to maintain digital relationships while providing a platform for consumers to follow and discover new musicians and bands, naturally, making the internet a promotional medium for artists. As the corner record shops closed to make way for virtual storefronts and instant downloads; the internet, digital downloading, and social media made an enormous impact on the music industry that has changed the way consumers purchase, source, listen to, and produce music today.

Recently, Time Warner collaborated with other media companies by acquiring a small percentage of Hulu, in an effort to sustain a future in the new trend of online streaming services. TW invested a hefty $583 million cash stake, joining forces with other media giants Comcast, Walt Disney, and 21st Century Fox. The timing is the reaction Time Warner is making to the onset of major competitors on the horizon such as Netflix and Amazon, and they have a long way to go to catch up. The timing was also based on Hulu’s need for big capital to stay afloat. They were on the verge of suffering a crippling $500 million loss, which the funding from TW alone saved them from. As stated by Time Warner’s CEO, Jeff Bewkes, “Our investment in Hulu underscores Time Warner’s commitment to supporting and developing new platforms for the delivery of high-quality content and great consumer experiences to audiences around the globe,”.

Companies like Apple, have decided that it is best to get in with the downloading business. However, an end to the illegal downloading conflict remains to be realized. The RIAA and associated artists continue to wage war against illegal downloaders while computer savvy audiences persist in sharing music files online every day. While it is undoubtedly true that downloading music is a crime, it remains to be proven that it is wrong. Without establishing this principle, most downloader's are likely to continue the activity. Even with new, inexpensive and available means of downloading files, they can still be shared for free online. The rift must be repaired between music lovers who feel that they have been taken advantage of in the past and recording companies and artists who worry about their future livelihood.