Ownership consolidation and monopoly dynamics cause problems for musicians, but they also amplify existing problems. When too few companies have too much power, that means if a business model isn’t working for you, you may not have alternatives.
Here’s an example: in the 90s, it was challenging for independent music to get radio play or coverage in big mainstream magazines. Altweeklies and niche publications played a crucial role in encouraging the modern independent music movement, at local and national levels.
But ownership consolidation has been a disaster for local journalism. We’ve seen many altweeklies shuttered, page counts radically diminished, local coverage cut back, critics laid off. Pressure has also come from ad tech monopoly dynamics online.
Another example: musicians may only have limited leverage over workplace conditions and contract terms for live shows. They aren’t “employees” so they don’t get many typical employment protections. But if AEG and LiveNation control nearly all venues, the problem gets worse.
Musicians can get more leverage if they’re represented by a booking agency. But booking agencies have been consolidating too, responding to consolidation elsewhere. When that happens, rosters get winnowed down, artists lose their representation.
Here’s the good news: just as monopolies in one part of the music ecosystem encourage monopolies in other areas and make problems worse, anti-monopoly policies and interventions in one area help create healthier markets in other parts of the ecosystem.
Policies that halt or reverse consolidation in broadcasting and journalism help independent labels and diverse musicians. Policies that address ad tech monopolies help small businesses of all kinds.
More good news: Independent businesses in music are getting more organized than ever. @a2im represents indie labels, @NITO_Live reps talent companies (like booking/management), @nivassoc reps independent venues.
These businesses partner with musicians, and while they’re not always on the same side of the negotiating table as musicians, our interests are often aligned because deconcentration and ownership diversity means more options, more agency, more diversity.
Maybe the best news: there’s a growing anti-monopoly movement, in DC and across the nation. As we work to rebuild our industry in healthier ways post-covid, leaving behind exploitative systems of the past, we can help lead this movement for economic justice.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Future of Music Coalition

Future of Music Coalition Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @future_of_music

27 Oct
Quick thread on Spotify discontent: in any kind of corporate accountability work, activists usually end up making demands of companies, including things they know the targeted companies are unable or unwilling to do. It’s a pretty standard tactic and can help shift the discourse.
Some observers are going to look at “impossible demands” as a reason to dismiss activists, or claim that those calling for change don’t understand the issues. This is also a pretty standard tactic, and a risk of that approach.
With streaming royalties & music licensing, the details of agreements are complex, and often deliberately intransparent. Same is true of the business structures behind venture capital, private equity, revenue vs stock price--people get advanced degrees so they can understand it.
Read 16 tweets
26 Oct
People may disagree about what changes to the model are possible, and what the impact of changes would be. But it's clear that the full-catalog on-demand pro-rata $10 subscription ad-supported/ surveillance-based model of music streaming still isn't working for a lot of artists.
Some folks call for voluntary reforms, others call for development of better alternatives. It's also helpful to look at public policy choices that encourage businesses to center investors' goals over sustainability for diverse creators.
But this much is clear: artists collectively aren't going to accept arguments that the current state of affairs with dominant streaming models is inevitable, that it's the best we can reasonably expect, or that it's actually working great for everyone.
Read 4 tweets
2 Jun
Quick thread on what today's @senjudiciary hearing on Notice and Takedown in the DMCA is about. (1/?)
We often say that musicians typically need 2 basic things: the ability to reach audiences (in ways that make sense for them) and the ability to be fairly/sustainably compensated when their work is used.
Musicians and composers typically work with a variety of business partners in pursuit of those two goals. Those partners can include digital services that host user-generated content. Ideally, a digital service can help creators make their work available and help them earn money.
Read 28 tweets
28 May
Things that can simultaneously be true:
☑️platforms need to take more responsibility for impacts on users & society
☑️regulation is needed to address monopoly dynamics
☑️free expression means platforms have a right to an editorial point of view
This matters to musicians, of course, both because we are often reliant on platforms to reach audiences, and because free expression is a core value for music communities.
Free expression doesn’t mean Nazi punk bands have a right to have their music distributed by Bandcamp, for example. And Bandcamp shouldn’t lose any legal protection if they decide to exclude such music from their service.
Read 6 tweets
15 May
This is outrageous. newyorker.com/news/dispatch/…
When stories like this are so common, it's profoundly inappropriate that Dept of Labor is suggesting that states should be shifting more resources to "recovery" right now (that is, taking money back from workers they think are undeserving.)
State agencies are overwhelmed with applicants, and have asked Trump's Dept of Labor to be able to simplify application and recertifcation and documentation processes, and get money to workers faster. Dept of Labor said no. dol.gov/newsroom/relea…
Read 4 tweets
1 Apr
THREAD:
Q: How do I get that $1200 check as fast as possible?

A: Did you file 2018 taxes and does IRS have your direct deposit info on file? If so you're good to go. If not, here's what to do:
If you did file in 2018 but the IRS doesn't have your direct deposit info, you'll need to get that info to them so you don't have to wait for them to send a paper check. They're building the portal right now; it's not up yet. Check here for updates: irs.gov/newsroom/econo…
If you didn't file in 2018 (say, for example, you're low-income, disabled, on social security or otherwise not typically required to file) you need to file a simple return to get the check. They're building this out right now too. Check here for updates: irs.gov/coronavirus
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!