Retort
Daryl;
I see what you’re getting at, and I can’t say that I disagree. This whole “experiment” reeks of Podshow manipulation, and in the long run, the impact will likely be minimal and serve more as a circle jerk for Podcasters. Average listeners will barely bat an eye. I do think you may be missing the point of this whole thing, though. A few points:
1- Music is viral. Always has been, and always will be. The only way we ever hear about any new band/ group/ genre is by word of mouth, be it a friend, a car driving by, or a large-scale advertisement. Whether you’re talking about Beyonce or the Sex Pistols, your affiliation with them came from some (any) other source. It’s up to the listener to filter out the crap, which unfortunately, rarely happens.
2- Look at the Top Songs in iTunes right now. All spots were bought and paid for. The money went to marketing reps, and the artist owns nothing. BRTC is taking artist-owned content with little ad revenue backing it, and attempting to give it a foothold.
3- What’s the difference between this and people promoting the Podcast Pickle Favourites, Podcast Alley votes or the Podcast Peer awards? The result of being high in the rankings is the same: more listeners. There isn’t a show I listen to that doesn’t consistently whore most (if not all) of those sites.
4- I probably would have waited until after the 22nd to post that. Not to censor an opinion, but much of what we’re dealing with is speculation. I’d be interesting to see how this whole thing plays out, and critique afterwards.
5- We should probably get in the habit of signing our names to blog posts on podCALGARY, so the reader knows who the author was.
Love,
- Ajay
March 20th, 2007 at 8:41 am
Your right on the signing, I though wordpress did it for me. It’s fixed
Okay, great points. Music is viral and top spots are “bought and point for”. But I thought podcasting, new media and independent artists wanted something new. I thought the wanted music success to based on talent not on corporate formulas. This makes it sound like they don’t want to change how an artist becomes successful, they just want to change who decides who is successful.
As for waiting, I thought about that, but decided that it was important to get some discussion around this. I wrote this post as a consumer of music because I am disturbed by what I am seeing happen. More and more podcasts are playing the same artists, and there seems to be a push for certain artists. Now I like black lab but I am hearing them so much that I regret buying (yes I bought it) their album because I am already sick of it.
Your email should be a post, and this should be a response. Can I post it?
daryl
March 20th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Steve from www.wickedgoodpodcast.com wanted to weigh but couldn’t get past our comment guards.
And, by the way, since I can’t figure out how to comment on your blog (it keeps asking me for a username and password and I don’t have one):
I agree that it’s probably not going to make a huge difference, but I guess my hope would be less that BM would stand up and take notice (which they’re not going to) but rather that maybe a few people would see it on the front page and check out a new band who they can’t find on the radio. Maybe that’ll open some minds and make them realize that there’s more good music out there than what’s spoon-fed to them by BM (instead, they’ll take what’s spoon-fed to them by podcasters
).
But I do get what Daryl’s saying about heavy rotation starting to ruin some podsafe bands as well. I know, much as I hate to admit it, I’ve gotten tired of Brother Love and I’m starting to get tired of Matthew Ebel because they get played so heavily everywhere, and I can see that starting to happen with Black Lab as well. I think the problem is that a lot of podcasters who play music on their shows are fundamentally either strapped for time or lazy, and they just take what they’ve heard on other podcasts and play it on theirs because they rely on people like CC Chapman or the PMC Top Ten to filter out the good stuff for them to listen to. And to a degree that’s fine, but on the other hand, that’s just as bad as what radio does. Instead of taking advantage of resources that are made available to us as podcasters to find great new bands and expose them, a lot of folks are content to let someone else tell them what’s good.
I think one thing I’m really happy about is the decision I made to, with some exceptions, only play bands on WGP that either are from New England or that approach us directly. I’ve found a lot of different stuff that way, and it’s not all the same stuff that the big music podcasts play. But I think a lot of people, as much as they tout that they’re sick of having people tell them what to listen to, are really predisposed to do that anyway, but they just don’t notice that they’re letting CC or Chris Doelle tell them what to listen to instead of MTV or Casey Kasem; the only difference is that CC and C-Dogg have better taste.
-Steve
March 20th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
Hey Guys,
Quickly putting in my two cents here - I usually keep my opinions to myself and I may be repeating something already been said.
Some really great points from both side of the coin.
I chose not to participate in this ’cause basically I don’t really like their tunes (Black Lab that is) and I’m not about to push something on my listeners if I don’t like it. I mean, thats the basic rule for my show (and most other shows I listen to), if I don’t like it, you’re not gonna hear it on my show (thats why there’s no Rap, Hip-Hop and especially NO Country - although I know I came mighty close to breaking that rule on my stampede episode last year).
I understand what the big picture is here and if something great happens as a result, it’s a good thing for all indie artists and the podcasters who play them. However, it may be the conspiracy side of me coming out here, but to me this reeks “publicity stunt”.
I fail to see that this will accomplish anything but put an extra few $$$ in the hands of the artist and maybe give them a little more exposure - which is not a bad thing. But, if the record industry peeps are paying attention, and they’re probably not, BUT if they are, you know they are already aware of this.
IMHO a more worthy band would be someone like The Vincent Black Shadow or Starwell.
Perhaps this will be taken a step or two further where people can “bum rush the charts” each month with a different artist - that would make more sense to me.
Cheers!
DJ Jeff
March 20th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
Jeff your right there are good points on both sides and it does smell like a publicity stunt. It does have to the chance of hurting both podcasting and indie bands. Depending on if main stream media picks up on it and what spin they put on it.
March 20th, 2007 at 10:00 pm
As far as a long-term plan goes, I’m just not sure it’s here. That’s why this is an experiment. There’s no doubt in my mind of an alterior motive in this issue.
I see it in the same light as I see an election. There hasn’t been a politician in my lifetime with whom I whole-heartedly agree. But I can see certain cantidates attempting to slightly shift the scales based on policies — regardless of how his/ her successor deals with that torch.
I can either vote and lay my support behind causes instead of those who back them, or I can stand back and watch, only to chime in when the plan does/doesn’t work.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:08 am
While I like the charitable giving aspect of BRTCs, and we should all be giving more, I think this whole thing is artificial. Telling people to buy a song, just to buy it is artificial. Telling people that this will “stick it to the man” doesn’t fly either because the “man” doesn’t care. If you like a group or a song, then tell people about it and why, not to do it because everybody else it.
I like Black Lab and that song in particular so I will buy it but not on the 22nd.
BTW, by talking about this all we are doing is giving this campaign (?) more press and more google entries….
-Charles
March 21st, 2007 at 7:15 am
I have always been a person who would completely reject a cause based on the actions of those supporting it. BRTC if I remember right was the brain baby of the guy from the financial aid podcast. I have heard nothing but great things about him and most of my favorite podcasts are pimping it. So I am not rejecting the concept because of the players, I am rejecting it because it is naive and mis guided.
I am listen to UC Radio’s promo on AllAxis right now and that promo is part of why I am rejecting this concept. The angry, mis-understood indie podcaster and artist screaming that they hate big media and the only response is to try and be big media.
How about adjusting how people get music and how artists get paid. Something like music.podshow could sell music for 99 cents. We promote it with out the anger and hostility. Now when the consumer buys a song they buy it from the podcasters link. Now the band get 70%, podshow 20% the podcaster 5%. (2% to me for the idea and 3% to Ajay for his great ass:) ) Just an idea but instead of trying to find one idea to “kill” big media, how bout a bunch of ideas that simple give everyone more choice.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:44 am
I think that a combo of all these ideas make sense to me. What I think, for what it is worth, is yes, there should be a different independent artist featured each month. To help promote independent artists. Even if it just gives them a momentary surge and come extra cash- good for them.
I do have to slightly disagree with DJ Jeff though. I feel that if you are going to have a show that promotes independent music, then regardless of if you like the artist being featured or not, you should at least offer support or mention Bum Rush and their mission on your show. However, that still plays in to what I said above about them doing it for other artists, and being inclusive. If it’s just this one time deal for only this band, well that’s a different story.
Don’t know if this makes any sense, coffee still kicking in.
~Dani
March 21st, 2007 at 10:28 am
Hey Dani,
I think that thats the beauty of doing a podcast, especially a music show. It’s a very personal thing even though one is putting it out there for the world to hear.
If I don’t like a certain artist or song, I’m not going to play it, period. It’s my show, I get to choose who/what gets played. I’m not being dictated to by some “higher power” and told what to play and/or what to say.
My biggest question here is - Who decided that Black Lab is the artist featured in this BRTC “experiment”? Most likely it’s someone who is a fan of their music, or possibly the band itself or their management. There are obviously a TON of other independant artists who could definately use this kind of publicity, so why Black Lab? Because they’re pissed off at a certain label for screwing them over? Doesn’t that happen every day to many other artists? This sounds like a spoiled kid who didn’t get his way and now he’s gonna “get even”.
Now I’m really gonna play devils advocate here - maybe they were dropped from the label(s) beacuse they make crappy music and the label possibly can’t market their music.
Jeff
March 21st, 2007 at 11:11 am
Well sure, you are entitled to run your show how you want, and certainly if you don’t like a band, you shouldn’t play them. But if the cause is legit, wouldn’t you want to support that cause simply because you support independent music. That is what I mean though by having a different artist each month. But you are right, it could just be one big publicity stunt by the band themselves. I guess we won’t really know how this will play out until after this one is out of the way, and we see if another Bum Rush with a different artist appears.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Just because you support indie artists doesn’t mean the you have to support BRTC. And in reverse, just because you push BRTC doesn’t mean you support indie artists. Actually, could someone please define the term “indie” as it relates to an artist.
I really doubt that this is just a publicity stunt by the band. I think Black Lab was picked because of the reasons given. It sounds very “counter culture” to do this. I think the reasons for doing this are actually good ones. It’s not the motives I am questioning, it is the prize they are seeking.
And Jeff, how do you really feel about Black Lab?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Yay, I got past the comment guards!
I’ve always assumed that “indie” basically meant non-RIAA. You can be on a label and be indie as long as the RIAA doesn’t own your soul.
I don’t think this is a publicity stunt either; I think BL’s just the lucky winner in this deal. I’m participating because I’m interested in the next step, and I want this to be as successful as possible so the next step is likely, because I’m very curious as to where this is leading.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:08 pm
“And Jeff, how do you really feel about Black Lab? ”
I like you Daryl - you funny
I’m just getting to “jaded” in my old age. I’m gonna sit on the sidelines on this one, plus there’s this hot chick sitting next to me and I don’t wanna move
March 21st, 2007 at 9:03 pm
This has been a great discussion we will have to see what happens tomorrow
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:12 am
I’ll take it a step further and say, just because you support BRTC doesn’t mean you rupport Black Lab. Maybe it’s me, but I see it as a bit short-sighted to opt out of this one just because you’re not a fan of the music.
If there’s a company that’s $1 away from curing Cancer, but the CEO of the company’s a douchebag, I’ll still give them that dollar.
Support for a cause shouldn’t be refused based solely on a factor within that cause. There’s a bigger picture here.
Are there better bands out there than Black Lab? Absolutely. But the outcome of this experiment will set a precident for future ones. If you want to see other — perhaps “better” — bands reap the benefits in the future, support is needed today.
You can’t refuse to vote and then bitch about the government.
March 22nd, 2007 at 10:13 am
I’ve been wondering how international sells will affect Lab Black’s iTunes rank? Is there a different rank for each national store? If so they are those international sells will go to different counts. Also, based on the BRTC website it looks like this thing is for just North Americans if not just Americans. Why excluded everybody else?!?
AJay you can donate to this scholarship fund w/o buying the song. Here’s the address: The Edvisors Foundation, 1250 Hancock St Suite 703N, Quincy MA 02169.
BTW, as of 1 PM EST there has been 10023 visitors to the BRTC website.
March 22nd, 2007 at 8:13 pm
Something struck me in the shower today. What about uncle seth? It seems that if a band is going to be involved in a podcast related promotion, shouldn’t it be a band that has contributed and been actively involved in the podcasting scene. Rather than a band that has an axe to grind.
March 22nd, 2007 at 8:27 pm
I’m going to give you a free pass on the “Something struck me in the shower” comment.
I agree with you in theory. But, Uncle Seth has a very raw, homegrown sound. I believe one of the key factors in this process was to find a band with both the talent and mainstream appeal that would entice the average listener.
When I was driving today, I played the song for a few friends. Mine Again has a very U2-ish vibe to it. It’s poppy, catchy, yet still indie enough to make people feel like they’re onto something that’s about to blow.
A prof of mine came up to me today and said he’d downloaded the song and played it for a few people, and they all immediately bought it through their own iTunes accounts. There has to be that mass-appeal factor that people can relate to in order to start the cycle.
We can’t go from Avril Lavine to Brad Sucks in a day.
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:18 pm
Isn’t “raw, homegrown sound” the definition of indie? Doesn’t it strike you as “anti indie” to choose a band that has a universal appeal? And to compare them to u2 (didn’t bono used to be about the music?) that made me snicker.
I am going to say that I am not really opposed to BRTC, I am just sick of the “stick it to the man” “we’re so indie” “don’t sell out” crap when what the really want is the massive success of nickleback. There is nothing wrong with wanting that, just be honest about it. Oh and don’t drink and drive
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Daryl,
I thought the same thing about Uncle Seth too. Now that it is over I hope there will be another BRTC just so Uncle Seth can get their day on the iTunes charts.
And no hitting things in the shower.
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:42 pm
So, now “indie” has a specific sound? C’mon, Daryl. You know better than that. There are bands with influences that go beyond unheated garages and using headphones as mics that are still independent. As we’ve talked about before, music is two things: subjective and viral.
The U2 comparison was made by multiple people who’ve heard the song, but were unfamilliar with indie… sorry… “non-sanctioned, personally-created and artist-owned” bands. And besides, is it such a bad thing to be compared to U2?
I’ll reiterate my point:
Black Lab is not the best band in the world.
It’s also not the worst.
All of us are involved in a medium that needs more exposure.
Casual listeners are lacking in Podcasting.
Music is universal enough to garner attention moreso than any other medium.
BRTC is a program that is connecting us in a common cause.
That cause can appeal to the nature of music purchasers
The cause outweighs the symptoms.
I’m supporting the cause.
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:54 pm
Dude, indie has always had a specific sound. To be indie you have to have a raw “garage” sound, make no money and live in your van. If you change any of those things you are a sell out. As for the u2 reference you might be too young.
I have said all along that black lab is a fine band. The issue is the attitude. Just listen to the promo you played on your last show. What the hell crawled up mike’s ass?
March 22nd, 2007 at 10:18 pm
At least you’re reading half of my post. That’s a start.
Ask Black lab of an influence, and I’m guessing you’ll hear the name “U2″ within seconds. I’m sure that comparison was made long before I’d brought it up, so let’s not get into that discussion. BTW, the first person who made that reference was about five years older than you.
Do I agree with Mike’s rant? Not entirely. But, it’s an opinion that he has, and is probably shared with a number of other disgruntled Digital Media Producers out there. At least he’s being direct with his thougts. I’d rather listen to that than hear about what [insert “Negro Comic A”] said to [insert “Accepting Audience B”] on the Morning Zoo - Z92.5fm, your home for today’s greatest hits.
How elitist does one have to be, before he/ she is considered “cool”?
- Ajay
March 23rd, 2007 at 12:12 am
I think the point that is still being missed here, is that it isn’t about a specific band in particular , or the music, or whether they have that “indy sound” or not. It isn’t about supporting one band one month and another the next.
It’s about giving ALL of these bands who are not getting the play they deserve a shot to be seen in a place that is dominated by a horrible industry. It’s the same concept that created shows such as AARC and COADJ in the first place. It’s the reason we still have independent radio out there.
When you focus on that, there shouldn’t even be an argument.
~Dani
March 23rd, 2007 at 12:26 am
Sorry, I have to bow out of this one. I found an old pot and a stick that fell from a tree this morning. I figure, I’ll take the stick and hit it against the pot to see what kind of a sound comes out.
Wait…
Does that make me “indie”???!
Shit, I hope nobody’s inspired by my sound, ’cause then, I’ll be mainstream…
March 23rd, 2007 at 7:38 am
thanx to dani for trying to bring us back on topic. That said I’ll ignore her.
The U2 reference fits in this context because there those of us old enough and “elite” enough to remember when U2 was a decent, relevant, angry band. Then they go mainstream and become another band pumping out irrelevant pop music polluting the airwaves and pretending to give a crap about the social cause of the day. U2 is no different than Britney Spears except with more hair.
What bugs me the most about BRTC is that it isn’t about getting the band noticed and having people buy the music. It is about the band getting noticed and signed by the group they pretend to hate. We hate big media, why don’t they love us? I think the next time this is done they should take BM out of it and make it the goal to simply let the general public know about a great band with out the “stick it to the man” .
Ajay, you had it right with sharing the song with people you know and getting them to buy the song. Your friends got to find a great band and the band got a sale. Win/win no loser.
March 23rd, 2007 at 8:03 am
“I think the next time this is done they should take BM out of it and make it the goal to simply let the general public know about a great band with out the “stick it to the man” .”
- Daryl, I’m with you 100%
“Ajay, you had it right with sharing the song with people you know and getting them to buy the song. Your friends got to find a great band and the band got a sale. Win/win no loser. ”
- This is the way it should be done, the very thing my show is all about (and AARC if I may be so bold
)
Jeff
March 26th, 2007 at 1:18 am
And this, my friends, is podCALGARY Theatre…
Enjoy the show.
March 26th, 2007 at 5:40 am
and now for the encore…….a group hug.
March 27th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Ahh, Jeff comment made me cry…. ;D
March 27th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
well thanks Charles……and uh……..whoever has their hand on my butt, kindly remove it , please……………it’s not that kinda group hug
March 27th, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Ewwwwwwww