Meet Andrew and Brian
Posted on 14. Apr, 2010 in Commentary
Andrew and Brian are independent musicians in Washington, DC that would be harmed if the performance royalty came to pass. While Congress will hear from established musicians who have benefited heavily from radio about the “merits” of the Performance Rights Act, we hope they will keep musicians such as Andrew and Brian in mind. They are just one example of the thousands of independent artists who oppose the performance fees being discussed today on Capitol Hill.
50 percent of the revenue would go to the record labels. While the record labels claim that this is about the artists, the truth is that a full 50 percent of the proposed fee would go directly to the record labels.
The performance rights act would limit the exposure of emerging artists; already established and highly profitable artists would benefit at the expense of up-and-coming artists struggling for exposure, but the biggest beneficiaries would be the big foreign-owned record labels. In the past, Congress has deliberately exempted free and local radio from paying a performance fee, in part to prevent of creating powerful incentives to play (or not play) music. If passed, the performance fee may force local radio stations to make a careful cost-benefit analysis of every song they play. Stations may only be able to afford playing “known commodities” (i.e. artists with a proven following).
The performance tax has hidden costs to college radio, further limiting an independent or indie artist’s access to an audience. College radio stations – an important voice for up-and-coming and independent artists – would be especially hard hit by the performance fee. Compliance with the PRA would require huge investments in playlist tracking and reporting systems. Passage of the performance fee could signal an end to college DJs, who share their personal vinyl and music collections on the air to broaden listeners’ horizons.
Performers are already compensated in many ways for their music. Many musicians receive a songwriting credit, which means they are already being paid by radio stations for airplay. If the songwriter is also a performer, they are additionally paid according to their contract with their record label, receiving revenue from music sales, touring revenue and merchandise marketing. And don’t forget – the free promotion by radio stations helps both to make an artist known and to generate billions in music sales, adding to the artist’s bottom line.
New York City songwriter and performing artist Chris Milam also opposes the performance fee: “As an independent artist, my success often depends on independent and local radio. The Performance Rights Act compromises the integrity of the independent artist-radio station relationship. It limits the freedom of the indie station’s format, and obstructs potential compensation for an up-and-coming artist. It rewards the few at the success of the many under the guise of real reform. I don’t support the Performance Rights Act, and honestly don’t know one professional musician who does. Then again, I haven’t met Garth Brooks.”
Performance tax “a blow of apocalyptic proportions”
Posted on 31. Mar, 2010 in Commentary
In a commentary published Tuesday in Dartmouth College’s student newspaper, The Dartmouth, author Divya Gunasekaran notes, “…air play has served as a free promotional opportunity for artists. Record labels may be suffering financially, but undermining radio stations to save the skins of a few major labels can hardly be called a solution.”
Not only does it alter the “symbiotic relationship between artist and radio station,” it will significantly impact college radio stations and force many to close their doors. For decades, college radio stations around the country have provided their communities with unique and varied musical entertainment while promoting new and local artists.
Without local radio broadcasters to spin their music, how many of your favorite bands and artists would have never taken off?
Source: The Dartmouth
Radio rally strikes back over royalty bill
Posted on 05. Mar, 2010 in News
Members of the Free Radio Alliance yesterday greeted Capitol Hill staffers on their way to work and asked them to oppose the Performance Rights Act. Capitol Hill’s largest publication, The Hill, wrote about the rally this morning. The gathering was in response to the RIAA-backed MusicFirst Coalition’s press conference with Dionne Warwick that same day.
The Free Radio Alliance says radio airtime is free promotion that is key to singers’ careers. In fact, they pointed out with posters, that’s how they heard Dionne Warwick’s songs in the first place. Imposing a royalty would only enrich big record labels, including those overseas.
A performance tax on radio broadcasters in the US would have crippling consequences. College, local and minority-owned stations would be the hardest hit with many of them shuttering their doors. Broadcasters are struggling in this economy already – added fees and royalties paid to large record companies overseas will only add to that burden.
Sen. Mark Warner speaks out against performance tax
Posted on 26. Feb, 2010 in News
Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) called in to the 1070 WINA morning news show in Charlottsville, VA yesterday and expressed his concern that legislation pending in the House of Representatives would stifle local radio stations and prevent them from serving the public interest. The Performance Rights Act could potentially cost radio stations millions of dollars in extra fees, sacrificing their ability to stay in business.
“The last thing we need is to choke of more off our local media. We need more voices…that actually represent the local interests.”
Listen to Senator Warner’s complete comments at 1070 WINA by clicking play below.
[audio:http://67.72.16.166/wina/2239543.mp3]
National Black Church Initiative Speaks Out Against Performance Tax
Posted on 25. Feb, 2010 in Press Releases
A coalition of 34,000 church- and minority-owned radio broadcasters wrote a letter today to U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi today urging her to oppose the Performance Rights Act, otherwise known as the performance tax.
“This is the worst time to impose additional fees on minority-owned radio stations that are already dealing with layoffs, salary cuts and sinking revenues anywhere between 10-50 percent under the current economic crisis.”
The letter, signed by Reverend Anthony Evans and more than 190 other leaders in the African-American community, represents a very serious concern in the locally- and minority-owned broadcasting community. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the performance tax to local radio broadcasters could be “substantial”.
Four percent of radio stations in the United States are owned by African-Americans and the performance tax would “disproportionally harm minority radio broadcasters,” according to the letter.
“Minority-owned and church-owned radio stations speak directly to our communities, often carry our Sunday morning church service broadcasts and are a cherished resource to our communities and culture that must be nurtured and protected. Silencing our voices on the airwaves when African-Americans are already underrepresented could be an unintended consequence if this legislation were allowed to pass.”
Click here to read the letter in full (PDF 4MB). Become a member of the Free Radio Alliance and join in the fight to protect minority-owned broadcasters. It’s free and easy.
Performance tax could take radio stations off the air
Posted on 19. Feb, 2010 in News
The Knoxville radio station STAR 102.1 is worried about the possibility of paying thousands of dollars in new fees assessed on them by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The record labels are asking Congress to impose a “performance royalty” on all radio stations in the United States, and the effect could be crippling, especially to small local stations and college radio.
WATE in Knoxville has the story:
At the radio station STAR 102.1, they say the radio performance tax would add on to the thousands of dollars radio stations already pay to play music on the air.
“This added tax will only eliminate jobs and take signals off the air that are serving communities today,” says General Manager Chris Protzman.
Read the entire story at WATE Knoxville.
Media Institute opposes Performance Rights Act
Posted on 04. Feb, 2010 in News
The Media Institute, a non-profit foundation dedicated to researching the effects of communication policy issues, opposes the Performance Rights Act. The institute’s latest report titled “Performance Fees on Radio Stations: A Debacle Waiting To Happen,” details the effects of the proposed law and how it would specifically damage minority-owned and local broadcasters. FMQB reports:
Black and Hispanic stations would bear the brunt of compulsory performance fees for sound recordings, and the loss of such stations would be particularly acute for Black and Hispanic communities where local radio stations are “a primary venue for the expression of minority and ethnic viewpoints,” the paper states.
The report concludes that the Performance Rights Act…
“would most likely reduce diversity, and thus run contrary to Congress’s long-standing goal of enhancing media diversity. The economic and diversity impacts would be especially harsh on minority-owned radio stations, the outlets least able to tolerate additional burdens. Record companies should not try to kill the ‘golden goose’ of radio broadcasting in an effort to boost their bottom lines. Free music for free airplay has stood the test of time. It’s an arrangement that is not broken, and does not need to be fixed.”
Radio is more important than ever to songwriters
Posted on 26. Oct, 2009 in News
It’s a singles business. That’s what songwriters are saying more these days as record executives are more interested selling singles than full albums – and it’s radio that is providing that critical publicity to make a chart-topper. Fewer consumers are purchasing full albums and instead turn to the hits and download them online from retailers like iTunes and Amazon.
At the CMJ Music Marathon in Manhattan last week, a panel of hit songwriters concurred, “the best way to land a hit is a tried-and-true one: Get on the radio.”
“The business is so singles-driven now,” Ossoff says, adding that the new trend is for songwriters to submit only a verse and a chorus to execs, who will tell them to finish songs that have hit potential.
“Radio’s become more important because of what has happened,” said David Katz, half of the production-songwriting team S*A*M and Sluggo, responsible for recent hits from Boys Like Girls, The Academy Is . . . , and Metro Station. “The hit song’s become a more important medium because no one buys albums any more.”
Source: Newsday
Fred Baker getting out of the business?
Posted on 25. Oct, 2009 in News
The Performance Rights Act (PRA) threatens to force many local radio broadcasters off the air if it passes through Congress. The costs will just be too high, and one broadcaster has already predicted closing his doors.
Fred Baker, Jr., president of KISR radio in Arkansas, says, “if it does go through, I will probably get out of the business. There are too many people trying to hack at it as it is. I have some sympathy for the performers, but let’s look at the big labels. What salaries are they getting at the top? What kind of cars are they driving? It is one of the most stupid, self-serving things I have heard of. It’s beyond the pale.”
Bill Pharis, president of Fort Smith Radio Group in Arkansas, has seen cutbacks already:
“We’ve gone over to talk programming on three of our stations,” said Pharis. “… One of the reasons we did that is because of the fees for music. We pay a reduced rate for music on those talk stations. That’s another reason across the country news and information is now the No. 1 format. People are trying to avoid those fees where they can. They’re not looking to add any more. It won’t help (artists). It’ll hurt them.”
Source: Southwest Times Record
Senate Letter Opposes Performance Rights Act
Posted on 21. Oct, 2009 in News
Senators Blance Lincoln (D-AR) and John Barrasso (R-WY) sent a letter today to Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) andMinority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) opposing the Performance Rights Act. The PRA passed through the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.
“By many estimations, passage of this legislation would result in potentially billions of dollars flowing from local broadcasters to the recording industry and would have a devastating impact on the local radio broadcasting system as we know it,” Sens. Lincoln and Barrasso wrote.
The Senators said that imposing a fee on local broadcasters would “fundamentally change free radio,” and that many music stations would be forced to flip to talk formats rather than paying fees to air music. “At the end of the day, this will result in less music being played on the radio,” they wrote.
Lincoln and Barrasso concluded by saying, ”This legislation clearly evokes strong opposition that transcends party affiliation. As leaders of our two parties, we ask that you oppose any effort to move this bill, either as a stand alone measure or as part of a broader legislative package.”
Source: FMQB
