I said I'd spend some time debunking some of the propaganda spewed out by the recording industry this week. However, instead of wasting our time pointing out the obvious, let's just examine one of the recurring themes in their 'mythology': that they are somehow a large investor in developing new talent and nurturing it so that they can grow as artists.

Now, I'll give you all a minute to silence your bullshit detectors because mine is blaring at full blast. Ok, so that is obvious baloney - any artist can tell you that major labels are interested in one thing: turning a profit. If your record fails to recoup, you're hosed. Plain and simple. If you haven't ready it already, Steve Albini's "The Problem With Music" outlines why major labels are bullshit better than I could ever do it. Take this brief excerpt:

"Whenever I talk to a band who are about to sign with a major label, I always end up thinking of them in a particular context. I imagine a trench, about four feet wide and five feet deep, maybe sixty yards long, filled with runny, decaying shit."

Yeah, so go take a minute and read the rest of it and come back. Back? Yeah, so the industry frequently claims that somehow digital music is robbing young artists of a career that they would've otherwise had if things were like the 'good ole days' when cassette taping was the bogeyman. This statement makes a few assumptions:

1. Labels are interested in developing 'artists' rather than revenue streams. Wrong.
2. Labels spend money to develop and discover new artists and markets. Wrong.
3. Labels are interested in new and novel types of music. Wrong.
4. Labels are not run by a bunch of jerks in suits. Wrong.

The whole sunny picture that they're trying to paint is that somehow digital music and the people who download mp3s are somehow robbing the world of untold musical genius because it's no longer profitable for these geniuses to develop their art. Anyone with half a brain can see through that thinly veiled pile of manure. Labels are interested in one thing: money. Their entire model operates on the mega-hit model. A few megastars bankroll the entire balance sheet, and the rest are merely failed megastars. It's actually a fairly high-risk strategy, and recently, those mega hits haven't been selling as many as they usually do, and hence, the profits are down.

Labels aren't out investing in garage bands, or searching for the cutting edge. They're waiting for artists who proves themselves and their marketability so that they don't have to do any work. What scares them is that now, with the advent of digital music and distribution, they're no longer needed. After doing all the hard work, artists can actually reap the rewards of a large audience without needing to access the gatekeepers. See my previous post: Behold the next generation of rock stars.

So, what's a jerk in a suit who works for a major label to do? Well, their instinct is to cling desperately to their old model and sue people who are a threat to it. Hardly productive, and ultimately futile. There is a place for labels in the digital domain, and there is definitely a need for artists to get paid for what they do. The problem is that the old guard running the music empires are too trapped in their outdated models to be able to see the way forward.

We'll try to imagine that way later in the week.

I've got a question about the validity of civil suits against downloaders.

I'd love to get a discussion going about this (and hear from real live legal professionals about this.)