The Music Industry Is An Oligopoly

This exploitation minimized the value of the singers, as they seemed easily replaceable as long as the next one could sing the same old song and make it a hit on the charts. Despite good integrationist intentions, the music in this industry was a result of the commoditization of black culture, further complicating the relationship between the music and the Civil Rights Movement. Listeners would receive glamorous snapshots of life as a black American, and not garner the complexity of the issues that existed. On the other hand, using this frame of a neatly packaged life made white audiences more receptive of black music, allowing them to ease themselves into the idea of

The music industry is made of companies which produce and sell music. The music industry as we know it was solidified in the mid-twentieth century, where records succeeded sheet music as the primary product in the music business. Record companies were established, but did not last very long until the late 1980s when the “Big Six”, a group of multinational corporations consisting of Sony, MCA, WEA, Polygram, EMI, and BMG controlled most of the market. Initially there were five corporations (CBS and RCA (both now belonging to Sony), WEA, EMI, and Polygram) that had emerged in 1978 to own 60 per cent of the market. (Wallis and Malm, 1984, p. 81)

“The rise of rock ‘n’ roll and the reception of it, in fact, can tell us a lot about the culture and values of the United States in the 1950s. According to historians James Gilbert, there was a struggle throughout the decade ‘over the uses of popular culture to determine who would speak to what audience, and for what purpose”. At the center of that struggle, rock ‘n’ roll unsettled a nation had been “living in an ‘age of anxiety’” since 1945” (p.15). Altschuler talks about how music and race interlock with one another. Rock had become a “highly visible and contested arena for struggles over racial identity and cultural and economic empowerment in the United States” (p.35). Other chapters within the book state the battles involving sexuality, generational conflicts, as well as other social issues. The author states ideas that are somewhat problematic. For example, he states that there is a myth that rock ‘n’ roll went into a “lull” following the payola hearings (the practice of record promoters paying DJs or radio programmers to play their labels ' songs) of 1959 and did not come about again until the arrival of the Beatles in 1964.

The foundations of today’s popular music were built by an unlikely source: a poor white

Music has become a center piece of life; however it comes with a vigorous price unknown to most of the public. The music industry is littered with corruption. My proposed research problem focuses on the manipulation and control the music industry has upon its artists through an unescapable 360 deal, which in and of itself is not only reducing an artist to almost indentured servitude, but also cripples record labels themselves. The 360 deal is a common mandatory contract record labels utilize to financially support an artist. This includes advances and funds for promotion, touring, and marketing, all which the artist has to pay back to the label. I believe this problem is significant and warrants further research because the record labels are unconstitutionally taking away artists rights in favor of their own greed, in turn, leaving the artist without ownership of their own songs, money, and rights to royalties.

This case study about the Spotify business model allows a broader vision of what the digital music industry is. In a short time, many companies have developed and managed marked their territory in a highly competitive industry. The start-up Spotify has undergone a remarkable evolution in a financial point of view but also in terms of its popularity. Its various competitive benefits regarding the market leader and its respect for music labels have enabled the company to be renowned and to have a reputation in the real business. Today, five years after its creation, Spotify is certainly criticized in some aspects of

The broadcasting and recording industries did not solely represent the conquering racial assumptions of the 1950's, they internalized them and helped to continue them. Racial conventions permeated the organization and structure of the music industry at every level. The very existence

The popular music industry in the late 1990s was dominated by a small number of integrated corporations with headquarters in Europe, the United States and Japan. This music market starts simply with an artist and moves along through many steps to the consumer. Everything has its start when a musician presents his music to a music manager, and if he/she finds the music promising, a contract is signed between the two, recordings are made and a marketing plan is drafted for the

No one can deny that technology is actively changing the music industry. Production, distribution and sales of music have been affected dramatically within the last 10 years along with artists, composers, and technicians. Most of the changes have been great for consumers, but vastly negative for professionals in the music industry, however a few artists have found ways to adapt to the changing atmosphere of digitally downloaded music and use it to their advantage. We’ve seen music change form from physical, tangible products like records and CD’s to electronic single tracks stored in an invisible cloud. Two major factors in this sudden revolution are online music stores (specifically iTunes) and file sharing websites that allow music to be downloaded illegally.

“Before the days of YouTube and the Internet, a band 's chances of striking it big depended on record companies. If a band was lucky enough to get a record deal, it gained access to a label 's vast resources and connections. The company paid for the band 's studio time, … and got its music played on the radio, reaching millions of record buying Americans” (Majerol, 1). Now, anyone with talent can post a video of themselves and become an internet sensation, only to then receive a deal with a label to continue growing their career. The issue is, with the Internet came digital downloading, and with the growing popularity of digital downloading came illegal downloading, known as Digital Piracy, which has affected the music industry greatly. This issue affects everyone involved in the Music Industry. From the small CD store owner to the Artist on stage, everyone has and continues to be affected by the growing popularity of digital downloading services. Artists, producers, and songwriters lose an estimated 12.5 Billion USD every year to illegal digital music services. Further, the economic impact from [digital downloading] is an estimated loss of 2+ Billion USD (Storrs, 1). This money affects the “little guys” in the industry and the average worker within the industry.

Over the past decade, the use of CDs has been replaced with online streaming and retailing. This has eliminated much of the record companies revenues as they were used to making most of their profit off of distribution and promotion of physical copies of artists albums (Niemen). This has caused for a major shift and remodeling of major players in the music industries business models. Companies such Sony, Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group have started to completely rethink the way they conduct business (Forbes). In the past record labels were not only responsible for production, distribution and promotion of an artist and his/her music, but they also acted as a bank (Forbes), funding the artists tours and recording sessions. Recently, these music giants have been moving towards becoming more of a modular network organization. What this means is that they are less occupied with the nitty gritty, and more focused on what they do best which is distribution and promotion. This also allows for more freedom of creativity for the artist as well as fairer split of profits (Forbes). This adaption of new business models clearly shows the versatility of the music industry in adapting to new times and technologies.

Producers of musical content cannot undo the adverse effects that piracy has had on the industry. Because of the internet and the way individuals have manipulated it to obtain music, many people are unwilling to change their habits. Here lies the issue between the producer and the consumer. Acts like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) work against the incentive of many consumers by telling them that they cannot do what maximizes their utility. Producers are thus working against the likings of the consumer. This is wrong.

1. Why have a handful of major record companies dominated the music industry through most of the last century?

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.

4.Ofcourse, music companies share a moral responsibility for what has happened. The main goal of this music companies is their profit from the music that they produce but it seems that they don’t see any benefit from this happening. Many people would prefer to spend their money on something else instead of purchasing pricey music unless they are fans. Fans won’t exist if the artist weren’t popular and artists wouldn’t be popular if there were no fans. There is no difference at all for a fan who bought an album of an artist and a fan who downloaded the artist music in the internet. Both are still fans who made the artist known. Technology like Napster did change the music industry both in a good way and a bad way. Let’s face it, nothing in this world is perfectly good or perfectly bad. Everything has its own bad and good side. Good because like what I just said, people who are thrifty or cautious of purchasing music may have a option to download it and listen to it for free and in this way, it is easily shared to anybody unlike physical albums. Not everybody visits the music store frequently. It’s bad side is it is very accessible to everybody like some music may contain harsh words which may influence the youth who downloads the music from the website and also physical album sales