I remember Michael Jackson's Thriller being released. It was massive. The cost was huge and if I remember correctly, (I was quite young) it was the most expensive music video ever created up until that point. Jackson himself was not known for doing anything halfway, so when it came to the release and distribution of his music, the costs were enormous. All big acts back then were like that.
Music labels and movie production companies would spend a fortune not only creating, but promoting their products. Imagine the costs involved in the promotion of albums like 'Like a Virgin' by Madonna in 1984, U2's Zooropa tour in 92 or the movie Terminator 2. These acts were already massive but promotion still had to take place to attract an audience to cover costs.
Think about where they would advertise. Billboards, radio stations, TV commercials, magazines and the list goes on. There would be local promoters doing the rounds in each country, each city. What was the reach? How many people were influenced by this? How much of a role did word of mouth actually play?
I remember sitting with a little C-tape player, waiting for my favourite songs to come on the radio and pressing record at just the right time to maximise the song and minimize the radio DJ talking over the top. And the annoyance when they would fade the song out early and talk some nonsense.
I remember an early underground of Amiga games being sold with titles that were not available locally. People recording their favourite movies onto VHS tapes labelled with markers in a slanting text as they tried to write onto the narrow sticker.
Those days are long gone.
The internet brought with it the ability to get all of this almost for free. I remember waiting for the first downloads to come in and the ecstatic feeling if the speed reached 4k. Only 4 days left at this speed!!
Those days are gone too.
I understand the arguments against piracy. It takes food out of the mouths of the artists etc. But is this actually the case? Before, the promotion costs and the impact they would make on the market have been replaced with online marketing, automated systems, social platforms, global media, fan lists etc. Word of mouth that may have been met by a few close friends ears is blogged to millions globally. A poster deemed too racy for a wall at the supermarket now reaches 4 billion online eyes. A new band that would have had to do the hard yards playing bars and nightclubs makes 100 million on their first tour. All of this happens almost for free.
It is not free of course, but when it comes to bang for the buck, the internet has provided more channels and a massively amplified market to target through ads designed for specific or likely fans, sensational news stories about what a famous person ate for dinner, movie trailers online and private people acting as publicists for their favourite bands sharing the latest tour info to their friends. For free..
And they complain about piracy. Game of Thrones I think is the most downloaded show. Are the makers and main actors starving? Taylor Swift made 170 million according to Forbes. In a year! I know they work hard for what they do and have skills (in varying degrees), but complaining about illegal downloads may be a little bit greedy.
Back in the early 90's I started to get into Photoshop. It was v2.5 if I remember correctly and obtained on the underground. I was 12ish. What 12 year old would have parents that would purchase very expensive editing software for something they didn't understand, for a kid? I had friends that did the same. Now, A couple of those people are making 3D development for Summer blockbusters. I am pretty sure they aren't using cracked versions now. These pirating kids turned cracked software into careers and became lifelong customers of a massive set of Software tools. I am sure it is the same for some of the Cubase pirates who went on to become producers and recording artists.
I wasn't very good at editing. I bought a Canon (now an Olympus) and learned another skill set instead.
I have a Spotify account and one for my wife. It is pretty cheap to get access to lots of music. That is 200€ a year. 15 years ago as a poor student, I wouldn't have been able to do it even if it existed. I would have been inclined to download an album I was interested in and give it a listen. I worked in a CD store for a while and bought an album a month with my 15% discount. In those days, not many would buy an album before spending 20 minutes skipping back and forth while leaning against the headphone post. While my wife was pregnant I was able to get VIP tickets to an Adele concert in Stockholm for my wife's birthday. 500€. And it was quickly sold out. All of the concerts were.
These pirates may download a lot. But take away the pirating and they are very unlikely to have bought the album to begin with, would never have gone to all of those movies or started using the software in the first place. Many like myself, once there is enough money, have shifted to not pirating and subscribing or buying instead. But take away the pirating and you lose a massive amount of word of mouth, facebook shares, interest and concert ticket sales. Each download is not a lost sale, it is a potential sale, and when it comes to what people truly appreciate, they will pay.
The first CD I bought was when I was 13. Ice Cube: Lethal injection. I listened to it over and over. Every word and beat became familiar. When people download, it becomes a low cost consumable that they may not even consume. But when they find what they like, they will extend their investment, go to a concert, buy a shirt, tweet about it.
The internet has provided a massive opportunity to artists. Unknowns can upload a video to Youtube and become known overnight. Labels find talented artists that they would have otherwise no way to find and professional software companies can develop their next lifelong professional customers and word of mouth sellers. The cost is that some of it gets pirated. It was always the cost.
There are big benefits for these people and companies, but they expect no downside. But without the downside, the massive upside that they enjoy would not exist to the extent it does. They should see piracy as an investment with a very large return rather than counting an often imaginary loss.
There are of course other arguments out there and starving bands. But there always were bands that didn't make it. Not every band will be Nirvana or Pearl Jam, but hey, they got their start doing the hard yards playing dives before the internet kicked in to a full-blown marketing machine.
As age wears on, I don't have the time to spend downloading torrents. I don't have the time to even watch TV that much. When I do have the time, we Netflix a movie or show, I take my wife to the cinema and a restaurant. A concert every now and again if we can afford it. Or I write for Steem.
Experience trumps volume.
I wonder what the promotion costs would be if they had to micro pay private people for every instance one of their products was shared, tweeted about or Instagrammed? After all, it is advertising isn't it? Advertisers leverage the crowds, is it time crowds leverage the advertisers?
Tomorrow I am planning to have a look at the New EU directives. I have a feeling, they are shooting themselves in the foot for a short term gain but like all short-term movers, they might not realise the chain reaction they have started.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]