Re: Issa on NPR!

Good deed..... Like Pay it Forward.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Rieken" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: Issa on NPR!


> The really cool thing is that Issa is doing this clearly with the
intention
> of getting her music out to as many people as possible.  She does not use
> the word "free" but instead uses "gift" for a reason, I suspect and it is
> clear that money is not her focus.  It is a lovely thing and the mention
of
> possibly adding a "good deed" choice in the payment options as mentioned
in
> the interview is a terrific Idea.  Again Steven, thank you for the link to
> the interview.  It was great.
>
> David
>
> On Jan 9, 2008 7:40 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I don't doubt that the Radiohead experience was characterized as a
"flop"
> > in
> > the media; I'm sure that's what many have been saying.B
> >
> >
> > As for my saying that the "hard reality" is that people will often take
> > music
> > for free if given the opportunity, I want to make clear that I'm not
> > saying I
> > like this, and I'm not saying it's fair. But to me, it's kind of like
> > global
> > warming-- I don't like it, it doesn't sound like a great idea, but you
> > have to
> > accept it as a starting point to move forward with awareness and
> > intelligence.B
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I like your analogy of the sandwich; when you put it that way, of course
> > it
> > sounds ridiculous. But this may not be the best analogy, because we're
> > dealing
> > with digital replication, and that pretty much changes everything. A
> > business
> > giving sandwiches away is literally parting with physical resources that
> > cost
> > it money. Once something is available as a digital file, it can be
> > replicated
> > endlessly and effortlessly. Yes, at a certain level there are bandwidth
> > costs
> > to deal with, but for any one person to replicate and distribute any one
> > file,
> > the cost is essentially zero.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This is not to deny the cost of producing the music in the first place.
> > This
> > has always in fact been the bugaboo in the music industry. It costs a
lot!
> > And
> > the industry has always been content to let the few huge acts pretty
much
> > subsidize everyone else when it comes to production costs. This model is
> > in
> > the process of changing but no one knows exactly what else to do, it
> > seems.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > As for MySpace, I think you may be off a bit in that any major web site
> > that
> > streams music *is* in fact paying for it-- they pay for it indirectly,
the
> > same way radio stations pay, via annual licensing fees. Individual
artists
> > aren't necessarily compensated this way, but that has to do with the
> > exploitative contracts most have had to sign along the way. (That said,
I
> > am
> > no friend of Murdoch's at all; I dislike MySpace and dislike everything
> > the
> > man is associated with.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I disagree about short samples, by the way. I never feel comfortable
> > hearing
> > music this way, and will never make a buying decision based on snippets.
> > After
> > all, for all these years, have radio stations been playing truncated
> > samples?
> > No, they play the whole song. I really want to hear a whole song, and
> > maybe
> > more than once or twice.B
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The reality of digital distribution of music necessitates a lot of
changes
> > in
> > the music industry, needless to say. Unfortunately, people don't like
> > change,
> > and will often fight against things that really can't be fought,
> > ultimately. I
> > would never be suggesting that artists shouldn't be paid for their work.
> > But
> > music is a tough tough business, and that was true well before the
digital
> > age. Very few people can support themselves this way, and one of the
> > problems
> > with the digital age is how many many many more people now have access
to
> > recording and distributing music. Neither the number of people who are
> > willing
> > to spend money on music nor the amount they are willing to spend has
gone
> > up
> > at anything resembling the rate of the number of musicians plying their
> > trade
> > publicly over the last 10 to 15 years. One of the side effects of that
> > reality
> > is that many more musicians will not be getting paid very much. That's
not
> > a
> > statement about how "free" or not music "should" be, it's just economic
> > reality, as far as I can see.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jeremy