News Roundup
Josh Freese
The number one forward to my inbox this week.
In case you are unaware, you can catch up here:
and many other places on the Web.
My first inclination was this was a parody of every artist now tapping his fans to make a record. What blows my mind is all these acts need to make an album for the same price as the one they made for the major label, before they got dropped. In a recessionary time, where technology grants so many advantages, why do you have to spend $75,000 making an album? Probably one no one other than your hard core fans will ever listen to. You’re just gonna strike off and do another disc, and you know you want to release it as a CD, so you can feel good about yourself, containing music just like the one on your old albums that has been rejected by most of the marketplace. If you’re not successful, if you don’t make music most people want to buy, if you can’t generate enough income to pay for your own damn record and have to resort to begging, shouldn’t you try something different? Kind of like that insane Bun E. Carlos/Taylor Hanson/Adam Schlesinger/James Iha supergroup?
Yes, you should make your new album for bupkes. And, if you’re making an album, know only fans care about it. Only fans want to hear that much music by you, casual listeners want a track. And if your track is so damn good, then they want more, a little at a time, and maybe they might become fans. Concentrate on one track so good that people have to talk about it. But that would require you to break your paradigm, of being a loser/has-been. Complaining the label won’t sign you, which really means they won’t give you money, and the Internet killed the music business. Please, try something different. If you’re that talented…
On the other hand, your fanbase will support you in a way no other people will. So, to ask them for more money is not a bad idea. But you should give value. Asking people for $75,000 so you don’t have to live in the new paradigm, even though they do, smells of rip-off. Whereas generating enough cash to record is not a bad idea. But once again, how successful are you if you have to resort to begging? If you can’t generate this income on the road or through sales of your already recorded music? Better to sell the $150 package AFTER you’ve recorded the album. Which, as I stated above, should be done on the cheap.
But then I thought Josh Freese’s scheme was an attempt at humor. Is there even going to be an album?
If there is, I’ll check it out, and I’ve never checked out any music by Mr. Freese previously, because the whole construction here is so damn creative!
That’s what we’re selling, creativity. People want something new and different. That’s why "American Idol" is losing viewers. People have seen it! Adding a new judge who isn’t sure whether she’s Simon or Paula doesn’t change the paradigm. How about a competition where people have to write their own material. Or one solely for bands. The lack of innovation by the producers is just as lame as the lack of creativity of the contestants. Oops, the producers don’t want to take a risk, they just want to do it the same old way. Just like the record labels. And look where that got them!
Labels with their social marketing plans sign up interns and street teams to try to generate the heat of Mr. Freese’s project and are almost always unsuccessful. If something is truly great, truly creative, truly different, Internet surfers will spread the word for you. For free!
And come on, don’t you want to go miniature golfing with Maynard and Mark Mothersbaugh? How did Josh come up with this shit?
The Facebook Fracas
The flip side of the Josh Freese story. Something great is passed along instantly, but not as fast as something heinous. Last Monday morning, a national holiday here in the States, I turn on my BlackBerry and it starts buzzing incessantly, like a know-it-all contestant on "Jeopardy". Wasn’t I going to comment on the heinous Facebook license agreement?
The heat was all generated by a blog known as the Consumerist. In the past, the story would have been in a print magazine and almost no one would have known. But today, it’s a searchable/linkable site and word spreads faster than information about Paris Hilton’s latest car accident.
I didn’t bother writing because I knew Facebook would say it was a mistake by an overzealous lawyer and quash the controversy instantly. I was amazed that pint-sized plutocrat Mark Zuckerberg was so insanely stupid as to say users should trust Facebook, that’s like trusting Dick Cheney to do the right thing when it comes to torture. Finally, another twenty four hours passed and Facebook said it was going to change the language. Whew! Building the basis for a competitor every inch of the way.
And why does this matter to you?
I’ll give you an example. A little birdie told me Sony Music is going to make all their catalog $1.29 at the iTunes Store. Backlash will be unbelievable, variable pricing being revealed to be a joke. In other words, heinous behavior is outed and amplified online, so you’d better think through your decisions long before they become public.
Maybe that Sony story isn’t true. But the point remains. The entertainment business is based on shady practices, which have never received enough traction. Now, with Bruce Springsteen revealing Ticketmaster directed buyers to Tickets Now before cheaper tickets for his shows were sold out, Ticketmaster’s merger with Live Nation may be derailed. Was the Tickets Now fiasco a fuck up or intentional? Who cares! Either way, someone made a lame decision that could cost the company dearly.
We live in a world of watchdogs. Just waiting to police your inappropriate actions. Beware.
