Payola is OK

I hear people in the “indie” scene complain about payola. I think this probably has root in the fact that small bands and labels often do not have the resources to compete in the payola game. Would they if they could? They probably should. There is nothing inherently wrong with paying a radio station to play your music. It is voluntary exchange between two parties. It can be considered the same as advertising. However, payola has wrongly been made illegal.

Major label pop music is notoriously terrible for the most part, and many would rather hear their favorite “indie” artists (often terrible in their own ways) in the place of the majors. Some people (even in high places) try to frame the issue as a matter of competition among artists so the best artist gets played, making payola look like cheating. However, that is not the issue at all. The station is not responsible to listeners to play what they will like. The real issue is the radio station’s bottom line.

Competition occurs behind the scenes (though in many cases quite visibly, given the music press), and it is probably in the best interest of the station to put the best songs (however subjective such a designation may be) in rotation because this will theoretically cause more listeners to tune in. This also can enhance the station’s reputation. These listeners hear the advertisements, which helps the station sell more ads and make more money. The station can also make money by selling advertisement to artists by playing their songs for pay. Again, this is simply voluntary exchange between two parties.

Radio play, whether free or paid, is essentially advertisement. This holds true whether the artist’s goal is to sell more records or to promote some cause.

If a radio listener does not like what he hears, he should listen to a different station, buy his own records, go to work for a station that makes its own playlists and get involved, promote his preferred music online, or some other alternative. If an artist wants to be successful (however he may define success), he can choose another alternative approach besides advertising with radio play.

In March 2007, OpeningBands.com posted the following in its news section under the header “Score One For Indie Labels”:

“The FCC is currently finalizing a settlement with four major broadcasting companies over Payola. As part of the agreement, 4 major broadcast companies would pay $12.5 million in fines and provide 8,400 half-hour segments of free airtime for independent record labels and local artists. The four companies tentatively named are: Clear Channel Communications Inc., CBS Radio, Entercom Communications Corp. and Citadel Broadcasting Corp.” (the link to the news story no longer works)

Payola’s wrongful illegality aside, it seems very strange that part of the suggested punishment would include providing 8,400 half-hour segments of free airtime to “independent record labels and local artists”. The criminals who advocate for continued payola illegality have essentially paid for advertisement (play) of independent and local artists with the hijacked airtime of these companies. This is clearly a crime, whereas the original payola was not.

These local and independent artists are not necessarily better, so the already flawed “quality competition among artists for listeners’ benefit” argument can be tossed out completely. You have no rights over a station’s playlists anyway.

It would also be interesting to see which artists are selected for these artificially protected, hijacked airtimes. Would the mainstream “independent” acts on large labels that are “independent” only in name be good candidates? Would these mainstream “independents” create unwanted competition for lesser-known artists? This could very well resemble the joke of nineties “alternative” music: Alternative to what!?!

Independent music fans, the government, and the general public need to carefully consider the injustices of payola illegality and the proposed (false) restitution for such non-crimes.
The following articles have influenced the above article, and provide additional related information (Strongly recommended!):

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/frazier1.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff46.html