Payola 2: Why it matters

What is the significance of the Payola settlement? Why was this even a legal matter? There are 3 keys to this event:

1) Federal law prohibits broadcasters from accepting secret payments or anything of "substantial value" in exchange for airplay of a specific song; (I’m not sure about airplay of a specific artists). Its clear the broadcasters violated that law;

2) Broadcasters are granted a license to use the public airwaves — there are specific standards they must maintain, in order to maintain that license and keep that privilege (and it is a privilege, not a property right). Anything fraudulent, misrepresentative (even a failuire to disclose) violates FCC governing practices and standards, as well as legislation.  Again, a clear violation;

3) The FCC is the primary agency charged with regulating this, but like so many other Federal regulatory agencies, they have been asleep at the switch. This is a political issue;

This is not like, as has been suggested, supermarkets selling  shelf space to food companies, or Barnes & Noble selling book racks to publishers. That’s because the supermarkets and B&N’s owns their own shelves; They are private property, free to be used as their owners see fit.

The airwaves, on the other and, are the publics’; Broadcasters are merely given a license to use them for the benfeit fo the public. If they can make a buck doing so, that’s all the better — but do not think that Clearchannel or Infinity or any othe broadcaster over the public airwaves has a specific right to dispose of the public’s property at their own discretion.

Here’s a few select quotes from the settlement announcement:

"This is not a pretty picture; what we see is that payola is pervasive," Mr. Spitzer said, using a term from the radio scandals of the 1950′s in describing e-mail messages and corporate documents that his office obtained during a yearlong investigation. "It is omnipresent. It is driving the industry and it is wrong."

The Attorney General’s findings alleges that the illegal payoffs for airplay were designed to manipulate record charts, generate consumer interest in records and increase sales:

"Instead of airing music based on the quality, artistic competition, aesthetic judgments or other judgments, radio stations are airing music because they are paid to do so in a way that hasn’t been disclosed to the public," Spitzer said at a press briefing.

click for larger graphic
Graphic courtesy of NYT


The Washington Post noted: 

"With the recording-industry settlement, Spitzer has again uncovered
widespread wrongdoing in an industry primarily regulated by a federal
agency, in this case the FCC. Previous Spitzer investigations into
misleading stock research in the brokerage industry and abuses in the
mutual fund industry were widely seen as an embarrassment to the
Securities and Exchange Commission, Wall Street’s primary regulator."

The FCC should be similarly embarrassed . . .


UPDATE: July 28, 2005 6:22am

Slate’s Dan Gross asks, What’s Wrong With Payola?


UPDATE: July 29, 2005 5:52 pm

The NY Post observes: Music execs sacrifice the great for the glitz; They go even further than I do, blaming Payola for all lousy music on the Radio:   

It turns out that the monotonous repetition of awful music played on commercial radio stations is largely caused by companies like Sony, the world’s second-largest record label, that regularly paid millions of dollars in under-the-table bribes to radio hosts and producers to get specific songs played over and over, without regard to a tune’s worth or initial popularity.

The select handful of illegally hyped tunes eventually catch on from sheer repetition and sell well, but the overall result has been a tidal wave of mediocrity that causes record sales to drop year after year.

In the category of hip-hop music, industry insiders have long complained that payola bribery has fueled the rise of marginally talented gangsta rappers – who endlessly boast of "keeping it real" even while relying on corporate bribery to purchase airplay and popularity they could never dream of achieving honestly.

It wasn’t always so. Once upon a time in the music business, the key to success was "having ears" – spending long nights haunting bars, nightclubs and juke joints scouting new talent.

The legends in the business were men like the late John Hammond, who exchanged a Yale degree and wealthy pedigree as part of the Vanderbilt family for a life in the Greenwich Village jazz clubs, where he discovered and promoted a 17-year-old unknown named Billie Holiday in the 1930s, along with groups like the Count Basie Band.

Decades later, as a talent scout for Columbia Records, Hammond helped launch the career of another teenager named Aretha Franklin and had the ears to discover folk singers like Pete Seeger and Bob Dylan.

One of Hammond’s last finds before his death in 1987 was a kid from Jersey named Bruce Springsteen.

Clive Davis, another talent scout for Columbia, signed Janis Joplin, Carlos Santana and Billy Joel in the ’60s and ’70s, then formed Arista Records in 1974 and brought us pop giants like Patti Smith and Whitney Houston.

Arista was later bought by Sony, which last year fired 110 Arista workers and folded the label into RCA.

As corporate giants purchased and shut down independent labels, the men with ears have been replaced by lazy, greedy company men who see popular music as nothing more than a commodity to buy, sell and manipulate by any available means.

These payola crooks are denying the rest of us access to the real talent in our land – and breaking the law to boot.



Office of NYS Attorney General Eliot Spitzer
July 25, 2005

Evidence: Internal Industry Pay-for-Play Memos

Discontinuance Order

Radio Payoffs Are Described as Sony Settles
NYT, July 26, 2005

Sony BMG Settles Radio Payola Probe
Firm to Pay $10 Million to End Role in Spitzer’s Ongoing Inquiry
Dean Starkman
Washington Post, Tuesday, July 26, 2005; Page D03

Category: Music

DVRs — Not PCs — will be Home’s Media Center

Category: Film, Music, Technology, Television

Give It Away

I get some interesting questions about my interest in music/film. (You may have noticed that commentary on this subject tends to run on Tuesdays). In particular, I find the intersection between technology and entertainment to be fascinating. Clearly, its been a huge driver of so many new innovations and products, from iPods to plasma screens to TiVos.   

Understand where my criticisms of the recording industry come from: While I am interested in music and film as a fan, my issues with some of the poor decision making of the labels and studios comes from a business/investment perspective.

As an investor, I want to know how the Labels have managed their key assets, how they have strategized, what their  business model is for the future, how they incorporated new technology, what their responses are to changing consumer tastes. 

In short, they have done a horrible job. Not just recently, but historically. The recording industry has failed to recognize several key ideas:   

- all business models are temporary;
- change is ever present;
- adapt or die.

On that note, I would like to share a terrific commentary/rant from music industry insider Bob Lefsetz. His take on the Music Industry’s failure to adapt to P2P and other new tech is fascinating:

Give It Away
"Call it the Metallica Rule.  When you can’t get arrested, give it
away.  When you’re a star, arrest people for stealing your music.

Radio’s over.  The model is done.  Unless iPods start coming with
commercials  and every Internet radio station has to have twenty
minutes of ads, terrestrial radio is done.  Oh, it will survive in a
fashion.  As a place for news and talk.  But for music it’s history.

OH NO, you say. It’s in all those cars!

Don’t be a fucking idiot.  Of course radio counts today. But if
you’re thinking about today, you’re just as dumb as the major labels.
Because really, it’s what’s gonna happen TOMORROW!

Look at major label release schedules.  It’s not like the seventies
anymore.  If something doesn’t have hit potential, it doesn’t come
out.  Furthermore, that which DOES come out is tweaked endlessly,
making it palatable for sporting events and fashion shows, but it lacks
that one essential ingredient of TRUE hit music…it doesn’t touch your

It’s all about the bottom line . . . 

Read More

Category: Finance, Music

Quote of the Day

Category: Economy, Markets, Psychology, Real Estate

Barrons picks up “Fed Responsibilities Outsourced to China”

Category: Media

Wages & Personal Income

Category: Economy

Prediction Markets Redux

Category: Markets, Psychology

Weekend Linkfest!

Category: Investing, Weblogs

Neuroeconomics: Brain Damaged Investors

Category: Investing, Psychology

Housing is Dominating Economic Activity, part 3

Category: Economy, Real Estate