Thursday, February 15, 2007

2007 Grammy Awards' Backlash at Payola!

I don't know about any of you, but I'm getting sick of payola. According to my trusted friends at Wikipedia, payola is "the practice of record companies paying money for the broadcast of record on the radio." Not only is Payola immoral, it's ILLEGAL! (But neither legality nor morality has ever stopped anyone in the music business from getting what they want). Payola has been active within the radio industry since the 1920's. The first court case involving payola wasn't until the 1960's! History of Payola

Even today, Program Directors at radio stations across the country engage in forms of payola. Instead of receiving gifts or favors directly from the record labels, these labels employ third parties called "independent promoters" to make deals with stations. Independent promoters are responsible for calling up radio stations to ensure a certain number of spins for an artist. Payola court cases have re-emerged over the past few years. Specifically cases targeting independent promoters and radio stations. In their April 6th 2006 edition, Rolling Stone reported such findings in an article titled "Payola Probe Branches Out". This article explains Eliot Spitzer's, the former Attorney General of New York and now the governor, and the FCC's attempt to file suit against such payola claims. The evidence gathered by Spitzer & Co. as reported in this article, would support that independent promoters paid significant amounts of money to Program Directors so that songs like "Daughters" by John Mayer would get airplay.


These independent promoters successfully achieved their goal. As a result of stations' continued play of "Daughters", not only was Mayer nominated for both Best Male Pop Vocal Performance and Song of the Year for "Daughters"in 2005, but he won. All of this for a song that Mayer, himself, claims should have never been on the radio. Clearly, radio had something, if not everything, to do with his Grammy win. If it hadn't been for the independent promoters and the program directors, then no one would have heard "Daughters" and no one in the Recording Academy would have had the inclination to vote for this song. This year's Grammys were a different story, however. A band whose current album recieved little radio play made out like bandits at this year's awards ceremony. This act was the Dixie Chicks.

After their public outcry against President Bush at a London concert in 2003, country radio stations across the United States began to drop their music from their playlists. And, Despite their Grammy haul, Dixie Chicks still on the outs with country radio. One would think that after sweeping awards in five different categories at this year's Grammys, including awards for "Best Country Album" and "Best Country Performance", country stations would begin to pick up their songs again. But, alas, they are not. Although this means "less exposure" (terrestrially) for the Dixie Chicks, they will continue to sell more records and be recognized for their musical efforts with the help of the Internet. After their five Grammy wins this past Sunday, the Dixie Chick's saw an album sales increase of 1,500 percent! It seems as though radio play in 2007 has little to no effect on who wins what in the music industry. Perhaps record labels should stop going through extreme measures of independent promotion and payola in order to get their music heard.


Dixie Chicks win!

No comments: