HOw Convergence Has Shaped the Evolution of the Music Industry By Felicity Dobson Sem 2, Convergence Cultures, 2016
The evolution of the music industry can be discussed in relation to studies into convergence within today’s society. Convergence can refer to how media content streams across various cultural channels, such as social media, print media and broadcast media. Since the 16th century, music has become more and more mobile, leading to the recognition of a ‘musical public’. (Taylor, 2001) This concept derived as a result of music becoming readily available to the mass audience, where its access had previously been reserved for those of higher power and status. (Taylor, 2001) Music now crosses between many media platforms and is available to everyone, regardless of wealth, class or age. Elements such as, the formation of the star system amongst celebrities in the music industry, the standardisation of song writing and the overproduction of recognisable tunes have all shaped the evolution and convergence of the music industry. Celebrity musicians such as Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber are examples of particular artists that benefit from the converging nature of today’s music industry.
When the theory of technological determinism is applied to the music industry, it suggests that the evolution of technology has changed the way in which we interact with music. (Rojek, 2011) This has occurred in many different ways, for example, the shift in state of musical product from physical to digital. (Taylor, 2001) Musical consumption in the 21st century has moved towards downloading and away from CD and Vinyl, which previously dominated. Another change in the music industry has been the shift from collaborative to solo in the music production process. (Jones, 1992) Before the invention of technology, the process of recording music required a collaboration of industry professionals such as mixers, producers and sound engineers. However, with the modern technology that is available to us today, these elements of music production can largely be achieved from one computer and one person. (Jones, 1992)
Majors vs Minors
Image credit: http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/apple-close-todeals-with-major-labels
Currently, within the music industry, there are four major record corporations: Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, SonyBMG and EMI. (Rojek, 2011) These labels dominate the music industry and largely produce the music that we hear in the charts and on the radio. However, similar to that of the film industry there are also independent, or indie, labels which are usually smaller companies with fewer artists. Although, for the most part these labels don’t produce as many hits and successes, there are a few surprises with successful indie labels. The most notable example of an artist achieving chart success on an independent label is Adele. Adele was signed to XL Recordings within four months of her graduating school, when the label happened upon some recordings she had posted on MySpace as part of a school project. (Biography, 2016) Despite being released on an independent label, Adele’s album 21 received record commercial success and stayed at the No. 1 position for eleven weeks, as well as going on to sell more than thirty million copies worldwide. (Biography, 2016) The divide between major and minor is set to change. Minor labels, which were previously at a disadvantage because they were unable to access the funds and resources of their competitors, are now at a level playing field as computer technology has allowed an artist and producer to essentially work from home. This means that indie labels can spend more money increasing the amount of releases they can distribute. The money the independent labels save from studio costs can also go towards marketing their artists, resolutely enabling them to gain more success.
Image credit: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/21-20110217
Evolution of the Recording Space The attitudes towards studio recording processes have changed drastically in the past decades, with the shift in technology comes a shift in the traditional practises. Steve Jones, in his book entitled Rock Formation, describes how the layout of a recording studio separates ‘musical activity’ and ‘production activity’ into the areas of the recording studio and the control room respectively. (Jones, 1992) This highlights the divide between label and artist, as the studio is largely the area musicians accommodate and the control room is largely where the producers and sound engineers ‘control’ the music. (Jones, 1992) Jones describes that those in the control room would largely view the musicians as ‘technologically unsophisticated’ and therefore the two areas would not communicate effectively. (Jones, 1992) This can explain why some releases from artists can be seen as a step away from their previous music, as those in the control room can influence the tracks and directions from musicians can be misunderstood or disregarded.
Traditionally, a recording studio is split into two sections: the recording studio, where artists go to perform vocals or instruments live, and the control room, where the industry professionals, such as the editors, producers and engineers, track and record the artist’s performance. (Huber and Runstein, 2014) Due to the growth of computer sound technology and home editing programs, it is no longer necessary for an artist or producer to travel and pay for the use of a professional facility to record, mix and edit their music. (Marshall, 2005) This technological advancement affects the demand rate for studio space, meaning that the studios have had to adapt to match the needs of their customers. One way in which studios are changing is their layout. The layout of the larger space for recording and smaller space for the control room has swapped with less space needed for performance since a synthesiser can imitate the sounds of most instruments.
As a result of the evolution of technology however, the hierarchy and priorities within the studio environment have changed. The level of control artists have over their own music has somewhat increased since the process of music production has changed from collaborative to solo. However, this does not reflect the complexity of this transition, as before music became solo it shifted in definition of the term ‘collaborative’. Before sound technology was established, television program soundtracks, for example, were composed and recorded from a live performance of an orchestra. (Taylor, 2001) With the development of computer technology, a live orchestra was no longer needed as computers could simulate the sounds of particular instruments. (Taylor, 2001) Although this movement created jobs such as sound mixers, engineers and various technicians, these tasks can now be performed through editing and tracking programs which don’t require industry training to use. (Jones, 1992) This change from collaborative to solo can not only be linked to music production but to modern day culture, in that today we can be physically alone but digitally connected to people through smartphones and social media. These technological advances which make industry and technical knowledge no longer necessary, mean that the ratio between the amount of time artists spend in the recording studio and the control room has altered. Artists can now cross over to the control room and make changes themselves instead of trying to reiterate what they want to change. Another aspect of technological changes to the traditional practises of a recording studio is the idea that artists no longer play live, meaning here when artists are playing their instruments together, much like in a live show, and the music is recorded directly from the performance. (Marshall, 2005) Now with advancements in technology such as, multi-track, overdubbing and digital recording there is no longer a need to record live or even have the members of a band in the same room at the same time. (Marshall, 2005)
A more traditional recording studio is set out, as demonstrated in the example above, with a smaller control room and a larger recording space. Image Credit: http://www.pritchardpeck.com/2015/03/what-does-beautiful-lighting-sound-like/
The more modern alternative to a layout for recording studios, as demonstrated in the pictures below, concentrates on a larger space for the control room. The studio that these photos depict even boasts on it’s website that the spaces are ‘swappable’ before advertising the space with, ‘need a bigger control room to fit your entourage, or need a bigger tracking room for drums, piano, vocals and guitar? All can be done in NightBird’s Studio B.’ (Nightbird Recording Studios, 2016)
Branding In order to overcome the uncertainty of the music market, labels employ the process of overproduction; this is systemised through the use of the royalty system and particular contract styles. (Marshall, 2005) The evolution of convergence within the music industry has changed how record contracts work. Chris Rojek, in his study of popular music, comments that there has been a rise in the industry-coined term ‘360 deals’. (Rojek, 2011) This term refers to the process of drawing everything together, such as, copyright for use of the artist’s music in advertising and ringtones, and merchandising rights for deals such as, perfume and clothing lines. (Rojek, 2011) These deals essentially change an artist into a branded machine. An example of this can be an artist who releases many different products which are marketed under their on stage persona or character, which is arguably different to their private self, which will be discussed later on. Taylor Swift is key to include in discussions on branding, as her ‘image’ now is highly commercialised but carefully controlled and raises the question when does an artist become better described as a ‘brand’? The definition of the word brand refers to ‘a type of product manufactured by a particular company under a particular name’. (Oxford Dictionaries, 2016) The name ‘Taylor Swift’ is largely recognised all around the world with The 1989 World Tour spanning from May to December 2015, visiting a variety of continents including North America, Europe, Asia and Australia. (Taylor Swift Tour, 2016) When Swift’s name is mentioned the majority of the public can picture what she looks like, name one of her songs or perhaps know one of the people she’s been romantically linked to in the past. In 2012, Swift was ranked the highest paid celebrity under the age of thirty in Forbes magazine with an estimated salary of $57 million. (Biography, 2016) The brand of ‘Taylor Swift’ ultimately brings in millions in revenue, which not only benefits her but those who help run the brand; her label, agents and employees, to name a few, all profit. Artists such as Taylor Swift are best described by the term ‘brand’ due to the fact that no matter what, their teams will continue to make decisions to best benefit the income of their brand. For every record label team, there’s a character in front of the camera. For Sony they have Taylor Swift and as long as they continue to read from the same page, they’ll keep that giant revenue growing.
Image credit: http://www.nightbirdrecordingstudios.com/studiob/
The Brand of Taylor Swift The brand of ‘Taylor Swift’ is blatantly highly manufactured. There are elements to the life of Taylor Swift that are highlighted and others are blurred, naturally to benefit the branding and keep her fan base buying tickets, merchandise and music. The team behind Taylor Swift are quick to step in and remove anything that may be deemed harmful to the brand. But how does this affect everyone else? Below are key points to discuss how power associated with being a manufactureed brand can be abused. Click on the pictures to link through to articles discussing certain copyright scandals Taylor Swift has been involved in. How much of this is her own choice and how much is controlled by Sony?
Technology and Music From the Middle Ages to the 19th century, the practises of consumption, exchange and production of music occurred in ‘fixed spatial settings’. (Rojek, 2011) Music was produced and exchanged in courts, town markets and stages and distributed via sheet music. (Rojek, 2011) The notion of listening to music was fixed in a structure of a composer/performer and a crowd/audience. However, with the rise of vinyl and CDs as popular leisure devices, and the increase in radio broadcasting, music consumption structure dissolved from crowds and performers to solo, home listening. (Rojek, 2011) Two particularly momentous advances in music technology that helped to change several aspects of the industry are the invention of the microphone and headphones.
Swift accused of copyright infringement by painter after using her painting without permission.
Swift’s legal disagreement with US clothing line, Lucky 13.
Image credit: https://pixabay.com/static/ uploads/photo/2015/11/02/18/10/microphone-1018787_960_720.png
Photographer, Jason Sheldon, wrote an open letter to Swift and Sony in response to her team’s strict copyright rules on using photographs of her.
YouTuber Shane Dawson was accused of copyright for a parody of one of Swift’s songs.
Swift’s attempt to copyright certain phrases from her album, 1989.
Image credits (L-R): https://www.theartbistro. com/index.php?option=com_spsimpleportfolio&view=item&id=4:painting, http://www. brandsoftheworld.com/logo/lucky-13, https:// www.pinterest.com/pin/94997873366391605/, https://www.buzzfeed.com/danmeth/taylorswifts-1989-with-alternate-covers?utm_term=. ygoPnx6Qa#.rqJ0xzXQO, http://www. vromansbookstore.com/shane-dawsonmarch-2015
The microphone was essentially the tool that allowed for the birth of the star. (Marshall, 2005) This invention theoretically allowed artists to be more intimate in their performances. (Marshall, 2005) The microphone projected an artists’ voice directly to the audience, filling the capacity of a venue, creating a feeling of an experience. However, the microphone also provided the artist with a tool of performance. Over the years many artists have been accused and exposed of lip-syncing, which debunks today’s conditions of an authentic artist. This element of performance is largely met with outrage from critics and fans alike and can spell the end of the artist’s career.
The other invention key to the music industry’s development was one that changed the way the public interacted with music: headphones. This invention also brought us closer to the artist, but in a more individual environment. Steve Jones, in his discussion on the impact of headphones, cites quotes from Evan Eisenberg’s research. He describes how headphones create a feeling that stretches across space and because of the acoustic, intimate nature of headphones; the experience merges with a person’s direct environment. (Jones, 1992) This crossing between a person’s emotional and physical realms reflected the 1960s societal trend of exploring one’s inner space and self. (Jones, 1992) Headphones echoed the then future shift of the music industry between collaborative and solo. Headphones made the listening of music become a more solo experience from the previously Image credit: http://www.custom-cable.co.uk/ images/detailed/6/Oppo-PM-1_Headphones_ collaborative nature of a live concert. Side.png
One particular technological advance that caused struggles in controlling music reproduction was the invention of the Digital Audio Tape (DAT). DAT decks became available to the mass market in the early 90s and allowed sound to be ‘reproduced digitally, with no distortion from copy to copy.’ (Jones, 1992) Due to the pristine sound quality this started up a bootlegging industry where people would duplicate their tapes for commercial resale. (Jones, 1992) However, this concept was difficult to enforce due to the fact that the majority of copies being made were still by ordinary people intending to use the copies for personal use, for example, for copying music onto a mix tape to play in their car. (Jones, 1992) Making an airtight copyright law would therefore have insinuated that these people were breaking the law as much as the few who were bootlegging and pirating the music for commercial purposes. A popular misconception about bootlegging is that the quality of the copy is poor quality. However, as previously discussed, the quality of the copy increased as the quality of recording equipment increased. The media largely helped spread the view that you should always support the artists by not purchasing bootlegs, reinforcing that the copies would never be as good as the official recordings. (Marshall, 2005) However, what the media and record industries failed to recognise was that people who purchased bootlegged albums wanted the ‘warts and all cover’. (Marshall, 2005) The part that made the recording valuable to a fan was the exclusive content, the noise of the crowd and talk of the performers, which would usually be cut out of official recordings. In the 21st century, illegal downloading is the modern day equivalent to the copyright struggles of the past. Chris Rojek, in his discussion of popular music, notes that illegal downloads, along with the new rise in streaming services, could bring about less revenue for the music industry as a whole and potentially risk the consumption of music becoming free. (Rojek, 2011) Over the last decade it seems that the figure for illegal downloads has risen and isn’t set to change in the future. Rojek notes figures from 2006, which state five billion tracks were illegally downloaded compared to only 5,079 million tracks that were downloaded legally. (Rojek, 2011)
‘5 billion tracks is eqivalent to 38,000 years worth of music’ (Rojek, 2011)
Digital music: what belongs to us? Issues of copyright also link to issues regarding ownership of digital music. The designation of what is your legal property usually becomes blurred when applied to digital files. This begins a discussion regarding the term ‘property’. The word property is derived from the Latin word ‘proprius’ meaning ‘one’s own’. (Jones, 1992) With this definition, music, digital or not, should be owned by us. However since digital music files do not physically exist, how do we know that we actually own them? Within the music industry, this question has been raised on many occasions, particularly in relation to the music purchasing service Apple iTunes. Through this application, people are able to purchase music to then download onto a smartphone or MP3 device, such as an iPod, to listen to as often as they desire and even on the go. Instead of owning the content like the mass public believe they are when they click the button entitled ‘buy’ they are actually leasing the material from the provider. (Osborne, 2012) This is because you are purchasing the license to use the song, not the actual file itself.
Bruce Willis incountered issues when trying to leave his iTunes collection to his children in his will. Click the picture to the right to view the full article discussing the story.
Image credit: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000246/
In the case of Taylor Swift, it is not the first time she has disagreed with royalty policies. In mid-2015, Swift expressed her feelings over Apple’s decision to not pay artists during the free trial period of their new service, Apple Music. (Bajarin, 2015) In an open letter she comments that she finds the decision to be ‘shocking’ and ‘disappointing’. (Bajarin, 2015) Hours after the letter was posted, Apple reversed its decision and agreed to pay artists through the trail period.
Royalty Policies Music services such as Spotify are set to change the way we interact with digital music. Before it’s invention, Apple iTunes stood alone as the most successful music download site. Spotify offers unlimited streaming of songs from various artists, and you can choose whether to have a free version of the service or a premium version. The free version allows users to only listen to music through shuffle; they cannot choose a particular song to listen too. However, although the service is free, after every few songs your listening is interrupted by advertisements, which cannot be skipped. Due to this, they offer a premium service that does not have any advertisements however the user has to pay a monthly cost. In terms of its royalty policies, Spotify has lost out on hosting several artists, namely the music collections of The Beatles, AC/DC and Taylor Swift. (Ellis-Peterson, 2014) Swift disagreed with the low royalty earnings of between $0.006 and $0.0084 per song play. (Ellis-Peterson, 2014) Although these rates are low and potentially damaging to smaller, indie label run bands, considering 25% of listeners on the platform streamed Swift’s music, it is hard to argue that her earnings were not substantial. (Ellis-Peterson, 2014)
Image credit: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/spotifychanges-logo-color-to-brighter-shade-of-green-2015-6
To some Swift was hailed a hero for standing up to corporate businesses but to many she was also shamed for essentially wanting more money to add to the already million pound industry that is the ‘Taylor Swift’ brand. However, as commented in an article by Time magazine, the letter didn’t only benefit Swift, it also benefitted Apple. (Bajarin, 2015) The launch of Apple Music was imminent and the company had failed to get interest in the new streaming service, with the letter making headlines across the Internet and news outlets, it drew attention to the service. Although masquerading in an attempt to look out for smaller artists and indie labels, Swift also secured herself extra payment from the service, which if we remind ourselves of her current financial status seems unnecessary. More importantly it should be noted that clearly the disagreements have since been swept under the rug with Swift appearing in adverts for the launch campaign for Apple Music, seemingly acquiring more money from Apple. (Click images below to watch the comercials)
The Age of the Viral Hit After WWII, the newly industrialised world struggled with a concept it did not quite understand how to cope with: a new found abundance of free time. (Shirky, 2010) Over the decades that followed the end of the Second World War, the public searched for ways in which to enhance their connectivity and find productive uses of their spare time. (Shirky, 2010) During the technological and digital revolution, the Internet created a way for the public to use their free time, for both entertainment and commercial uses.
However, when it comes to viral videos the inclusion of video hits becomes less representative. The phrase to ‘go viral’ usually applies to videos that are popular for a short duration of time, and typically as soon as the trend hits major media, e.g. talk shows and the news, the trend has already died out. Another relevant discussion is that a hit song is no longer just a successful song; usually Internet memes, parodies and viral clips accompany it. For example, Adele’s comeback hit song ‘Hello’ became the second quickest video to reach 100 million views on YouTube and spawned numerous parodies from the public as well as celebrity parodies, such as, James Corden and Ellen DeGeneres. (Platon, 2015) Click the image below to view Billboard’s article on the best reactions to Adele’s release of Hello.
Services such as, YouTube and, the short video-looping service, Vine, are changing the landscape of how a video/person becomes famous. In the same sense as a one-hit-wonder in the music industry, these services are often responsible for viral videos. Viral videos do not gain popularity through old forms of media such as television, radio or newspapers, but instead become popular due to being spread on social media sites. (Gurney, 2011) Sometimes a surge in popularity of a video can be due to tastemakers, who are members of society who are viewed as having influential taste, in other words, celebrities. Viral videos are usually short, which reflects our decreasing attention span in the technological age, and typically are humorous in nature. How do streaming services, like YouTube, and viral videos affect the music industry? Billboard charts started including Vevo and other videos that included the authorised audio of a particular song in their chart calculations. (Billboard, 2013) According to an article published on the Billboard website, this move is to ‘further reflect the current divergent platforms for music consumption’. (Billboard, 2013) The week this move was made caused the official music chart to change drastically, with songs such as Rihanna’s ‘Stay’ jumping from 57th to 3rd. (Billboard, 2013) This dramatic move up the charts may indeed show that people were consuming that song more on streaming platforms as opposed to downloading the song. Also, since radio airplay is also included in some chart counts, it is evident that people no longer rely on tastemakers, such as radio DJ’s, to introduce them to songs. Instead, users actively search for music through social media and streaming sites.
Click on the images below to watch the two parodies mentioned above, from the Late Late Show with James Corden and The Ellen Show, respectively.
Is it easier to gain success in the music industry in the 21st century? Some hits can, therefore, be misrepresentative in how popular the actual song itself is. As seen in the success of the song ‘Harlem Shake’. The song debuted at number 1 due to the timing of Billboard’s move to include YouTube hits into the chart calculations. (Billboard, 2013) The song was accompanied by a viral meme, where a group of people start dancing after a certain point in the song. Arguably, this viral video was more about the appeal of the dancing, with celebrities and Internet personalities joining in with the craze, rather than the actual song. With the captivation of the dancing aspect, was it representative of the craze for the song used as a background feature to become number 1? A similar case to the Harlem Shake phenomenon can be seen in Drake’s hit Hotline Bling, which ultimately gained viral attention due to the ridicule of his dancing in the video and less to do with the popularity of the song.
Click on the image to the left to view a compilation, posted on YouTube by user GoodClipsDaily, of videos made in reaction to the Harlem Shake video craze. Image credit: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/0aGCAW6vyPk/maxresdefault.jpg
Click on the image to the right to view a video posted on the BBC Trending website. The video discussing how Drake’s Hotline Bling video became a hit with the Internet. The Hotline Bling’s creator, Director X, comments in the video about how the video would not have been as successful without the dancing aspect. He also discusses how incredible it is that we now have access to technology that allows us to edit in the ways members of the public did with Hotline Bling and how different this is compared to the tools he had as a child.
Image credit: http://www.wonderlandmagazine. com/2015/10/7-wonders-many-faces-hotline-blingdrake/
With the new, more accessible platforms such as YouTube that allow anyone to create and share their music, and especially since these hits are now included in chart calculations, is it easier or harder for an artist to gain success? Musicians such as Psy and Justin Bieber gained a following and success through viral videos and YouTube respectively. (Billboard, 2013) Justin Bieber found success through posting clips of himself singing covers onto the sharing site YouTube, which within months of posting had accumulated thousands of views, built him a strong fanbase and eventually led to him being signed by R&B artist Usher. (Biography, 2016) Through this case study it could be argued that the platform has meant it is easier for unknown artists to hit the big time, however it should be noted that Bieber’s case is one in a million. There are 48 hours of video uploaded to YouTube every minute and hundreds of those are young aspiring artists hoping to be discovered. (Allocca, 2012) Ultimately, the site’s content moves too quickly for anyone to fully be noticed and gaining attention from record executives is hard. Although the site provides a place for artists to showcase their talents, to some degree it seems there is an element of luck involved in actually being successful and picked up. Below are links to Psy and Justin Bieber’s first successes, respectively. When comparing the two artists, Justin Bieber went on to become a million-dollar selling artist, however, Psy’s subsequent releases were not as successful as his debut, Gangnam Style.
Fandom
One explanation of the term ‘fandom’ can be that it refers to a certain ‘matter of personal passion or individual taste’. (Duffett, 2013) This definition suggests that an individual identifies an element within the fandom that they are searching for, whether that is, a way of life, a certain style or the community aspect. This explanation applies to the music industry and is backed up by research from Stockhausen, who notes that youth look for ‘freedom and oneself’ in popular music which is why they are drawn to become fans. (Jones, 1992) Alongside our draw to the music itself to fulfil certain societal and emotional needs, we also become a fan of the celebrity image attached to the song. Pete Ward, in his book Gods Behaving Badly, comments that ‘the close identification that many people seem to have with celebrities is suggestive of religious analogy.’ (Ward, 2011) He cites examples such as how the media routinely refer to celebrities as ‘idols’ or ‘icons’ as evidence of this. (Ward, 2011)
‘The media needs to take more responsibility for the strong emotional attachments it helps to arouse.’
(Duffett, 2013) Social media platforms, such as Twitter, allow users to interact with people and celebrities from all over the world. Users can fill their timeline with celebrities and friends alike, as well as interact with them, often leading to the relationship between fans and celebrities feeling like a genuine friendship. This can be particularly troubling and dangerous for young people, as there can be a breakdown in understanding over what is deemed appropriate and what is not, as demonstrated by a documentary exploring the behaviours of One Direction fans. (Link to video through image below) In this documentary, the fans essentially stalk the members of the band, by travelling to places where they grew up or used to work, and demonstrate extreme examples of fan behaviour, such as one girl who claims she got braces because Niall from One Direction had them. (Channel 4, 2013) The program also shows the impact of social media on celebrity culture in the modern age. The girls are shown to use Twitter to piece together the band’s likely location, as well as also using the platform to communicate with others in the fandom in order to track the members down. (Channel 4, 2013)
The ‘authentic’ artist A way in order for record labels to ensure that they are creating hit music is to make the music market more predictable. They control this through the process of standardisation, meaning they make one record sound very similar to another to ‘encourage people to buy the familiar’. (Marshall, 2005) However, due to the appeal of the celebrity as one who is individual and relatable, they cannot make the standardisation of records obvious. They do this by focusing the media and marketing’s attention on the individuality and originality of the artist themselves, thus the star system is born. (Marshall, 2005) In order to keep the public viewing an artist as authentic and original, labels employ teams to carefully monitor the artist’s branding and marketing. These teams build up artists’ ‘uniquely individual personalities’ and spend time carefully constructing online biographies to make them sound the most relatable. (Marshall, 2005) Referring to the previous example of Taylor Swift gives evidence of this process. Swift’s image has been meticulously crafted to build up an image of a relatable, girlnext-door image. This unique persona is decided on to match the style of music she performs and her target audience. Holly George Warren, who is the co-editor for The Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll, states that Swift was “very good at capturing the voice of the teenager” by writing songs that sounded like “diary entries”. (Biography, 2016) This amounted in a young teenage following that ultimately related to the words she wrote.
The artist is born, at the same time his work went on sale’ (Taylor, 2001)
Image credit: (Channel 4, 2013)
The marketing of Taylor Swift The 2009 MTV Video Music Awards were pivotal to the rise in popularity of Taylor Swift. (Biography, 2016) When Kanye West interrupted her acceptance speech, Swift became ‘a victim’ in the eyes of the public. (Biography, 2016) The clip of this moment when viral across the internet and resulted in propelling her into the media and gaining a bigger following than she previously had.
The marketed image in real life ‘Music is performed by people who conceive of themselves as performers by an audience who conceive of them as performers.’ (Marshall, 2005)
The degree of success in the way a star is marketed forms a guaranteed market for the star’s future releases. (Marshall, 2005) When a star misbehaves or acts differently in real life to the way the marketed image of them suggests, fans are often disappointed and can change their opinion about them. But as Lee Marshall, in his discussion of popular music, notes that theatricality is a central part of a musical performance. (Marshall, 2005) He goes on to explain that this affects our perceived knowledge of who we think they are. (Marshall, 2005) The performer may have very little relation to that of the private individual. (Marshall, 2005)
The creation of characters in her music videos has cemented Swift’s likeability to her fans. Often she is seen to represent a typical teenage girl and their problems, such as in the You Belong With Me video. She is also represented as not taking herself seriously, as seen in her video for Shake It Off, which leads her to become a role model in the eyes of young girls.
Swift is often depicted as caring and extremely generous towards her fans, which is obviously important as they are responsible for buying her records and making her successful. There are many videos, such as the one shown on the left, of her interacting and surprising her fans on shows such as The Ellen Show. The clip linked in the image above shows Swift inviting a selection of her fans to her house to listen to her new album exclusively.
With social media platforms, such as Twitter, this becomes even more difficult as users are invited into a stream of consciousness and, essentially, an activity feed of their favourite celebrity. With the sudden rise in popularity of services such as Twitch and Periscope, the boundary for users between an artist’s performance and their real selves is further broken down. These sites allow users to view a live video feed (often from artist’s own houses) of a celebrity and interact with them. The similarity between these services and that of friend-dominated services, such as Skype or FaceTime, can further confuse the divide between friend and performer/celebrity.
“It’s not about being mysterious and private any more, it’s about being open and putting it all out there.” [talking about twitter]
(Gaskarth, Kerrang magazine, 2016)
The downfall of Justin Bieber An example of actions of a performer being different to that of their marketed image is Justin Bieber. When he first became successful in the music scene, he was marketed as cute and innocent to the target demographic of young girls. Later on in his career, this image suffered from scandals, bad behaviour and unfavourable press. (Billboard, 2016)
In 2011, a woman claimed that she had gievn birth to Justin Bieber’s child. After DNA proved that this was not the case, the mother of the child dropped the lawsuit. (Biography, 2016) This was Bieber’s first brush with scandal and showed the extreme fandom of some of his ‘Beliebers’.
The comeback of Justin Bieber Despite the enormous amount of bad press that caused his image to suffer, in 2015 he managed to make a comeback and landed three singles in the top 5. (BBC, 2015)
The song Where Are Ü Now, gave him a new context within the genre of dance music. (BBC, 2015) Followed by the chart-topping What Do You Mean, a whole new audience discovered Justin Bieber. His new material changed his target demographic from young, teenage girls to young adults. (BBC, 2015) Image credit: http://www.justinbieberzone. com/2015/04/justin-bieber-where-are-u-now-music-video-coming-soon/
Image credit: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/11/02/article-0-0EA31DBF00000578-336_468x634.jpg
When visiting the Anne Frank museum in Amsterdam, Bieber left this message (see image on right) in the visitor book. (Biography, 2016) The comment outraged the majority of the public, although most of his fans remained loyal to him, many of which stating they didn’t know who Anne Frank was. (Biography, 2016) Image credit: http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/apr/14/ justin-bieber-anne-frank-belieber
In 2014, Bieber’s scandals reached a peak. Bieber was arrested on suspicion of drag racing and driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs. (Biography, 2016) He was granted bail, which was set at $2,500, the charges, however, were reduced to only resisting arrest. (Biography, 2016)
Image credit: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/23/showbiz/justin-bieber-arrest/
Although upsetting many members of the public and artists, Bieber managed to uphold working relationahips with many artists that were key in the success of his album, Purpose. (BBC, 2015) The likes of Big Sean, Ed Sheeran and Halsey, to name but a few, provided their songwriting skills for several tracks on the album. (BBC, 2015) Image credit: http://www.billboard.com/articles/review/6762408/justin-bieber-purpose-album-review
In an interview with Nick Grimshaw on BBC Radio 1, Bieber comments that he named the new album Purpose for a reason. (BBC, 2015) “I named the album Purpose...because, for a while there, I feel like I lost my purpose, and I feel like I found my purpose again.” (BBC, 2015) Image credit: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=UfSLlD2cGAY
Covergence: a positive or a negative for the music industry? The evolution of a so-called participatory culture is largely down to the gradual process of convergence throughout the technological revolution. Within the music industry, many elements have changed and will continue to change to better represent and allow for the changing environment for how we consume, produce and exchange music. With all these changes to the music industry, it raises the question whether convergence in the music industry is a good development. Overall, it gives us better access and tools to create original content, but largely it depends on whether the running of record labels change to allow processes of standardisation and overproduction to be discarded. Similarly, the appeal of celebrity in the music industry is down to the marketing of record labels and in this age of digitally being closer to artists, the music industry could very well see the breakdown of the star system as we know it.
‘You know where you stand when someone tells you what popular music they favour’ (Rojek, 2011)