Commentary: Why everybody should care about the fight over music performance fees

It looks fair on the surface.

Radio plays music, and the artists who play that music should be paid. After all, subscription services like Spotify pay performance fees. Why don’t you play radio?

There are currently two competing bills in Congress. The first is the Local Radio Freedom Act, which is backed by broadcasters. This does not allow us to impose yet another fee on an industry that has historically driven the success of artists and labels.

A competing bill, the misleadingly named American Music Integrity Act, imposes these fees and is backed by major music label groups.

The rationale behind the fee is the idea that forcing radio to join the streaming service creates a “level playing field.” In fact, playing fields vary in design.music platform monetized directly From the music they stream. They are free of regulations as well as virtually all costs associated with operating a broadcaster.

There is no shortage of charges for radio. Millions of dollars in royalties are paid to music composers each year. Broadcasters (mostly) that stream music over the Internet pay an annual digital fee. Additionally, increasingly expensive FCC licenses require all stations to serve the public, regardless of format, and have strict requirements for public service programming, standards of decency and, of course, emergency communications.

Add in the cost of millions of dollars invested in station staffing, broadcasting news and important information, transmitting equipment, towers and antennas, and you quickly realize that radio and streaming platforms have virtually nothing in common. It becomes clear.

Even record labels will admit that the vast majority of new songs are found on free radio broadcasts. The musicians you’ve ever heard of are famous for the radio airplays that exposed their music and the DJs who promoted and interviewed the artists and their upcoming concerts. This represents literally millions of dollars in free promotion and exposure.

Imposing fees on radio is now an existential threat to many broadcasters.

M.Any broadcaster should abandon the music format and replace it with cheaper alternatives, usually syndicated political talk and sports. andStations that remain in the music format will be more conservative about playing new music.

Radio stations are taking risks by testing new music on air. Unfamiliar songs may lower your rating. If the Program Director chooses compelling new music, the reward is increased ratings. The opposite is also true. If you give the “losers” too many chances, that programmer’s next step is often the line of unemployment.

Long before she appeared at this year’s Super Bowl, Rihanna was one of the unknown artists looking for airplay. In the late 1990s, we welcomed her to our station as her program director on her WJBQ-FM (Q97.9) in Portland. She thought her first single, “Pon de Replay” had potential.

Rihanna also showed up at my daughter’s dance studio, Casco Bay Movers, on Forest Avenue. Who knew this young, untested talent would become a global superstar?

The fledgling Maroon 5, the Barenaked Ladies and countless other performers sold out the stadium from acoustic shows in our boardroom.

If you enjoy free broadcast radio and the proposed appearance fees apply, be prepared to lose one or more of your favorite stations. If radio charges were enforced, artists who write their own music (a healthy percentage) would essentially be seconded: get a composer. and performance royalties.

Record labels have a complicated history of abusing artists, with naive musicians surrendering publishing rights, sales rates, and even concert revenues. It’s a little wealthy to see these same record labels expressing concern for the financial well-being of their musicians. please.

Radio broadcasts have never defrauded artists, stole royalties from composers, or defrauded proceeds from concerts or merchandise.what radio have We have invested millions of hours of time and promotional value to expose our artists to our audience on airplay. We are thrilled to see them succeed. We are not waiting in your mailbox for a check from them as payment for our contribution.

The system of broadcasting music for free has been around for over 100 years. Changing it now would do serious harm to stations, cost jobs, reduce local broadcasting in favor of nationally syndicated ones, and almost certainly eliminate many outlets broadcasting music to the public. ruin it.

Appearance fees would hurt the very artists they were meant to support.

” Before

Next ”