Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Term and Whole Life Insurance, The Difference
As I stated in the previous post, entertainment has become so much a central part of our lives, sometimes we forget to take care of the most important things that seem so trivial until a situation comes up, thought I'd share some things today, so we all can bring them forward to 2010 with us.
One of the biggest issues in our communities is health care. There are a large number of people without it, and even if they do have it, it may not cover all of the things needed to insure they remain healthy.
Another pressing issue is life insurance. I have seen so many families devastated to lose a loved one, only to find out that they never had life insurance, and the family is left scrambling to try and come up with the cash to have a dignified and respectable service for their loved one.
I'm not an insurance salesman, but I took a class early in life while in the Marines that taught me about the differences and how so many people get swindled each year, paying into an insurance policy that never matures, and expires even before they are dead, and once again, they are without that precious life insurance.
Below you can find an explanation of the big differences below, and although I know that there are some geniuses in this group, there may be at least one that may not know. That is all we need to do, is reach one person to affect change in our community. Lack of knowledge is a precursor to all things not good.
I have to point out what I first read when I found this group, and one of the house rules, #10:
Let us see how far we can travel on this road called life, how high we can soar amidst our daily strife.
Can we make a difference in one another's world, maybe with just a simple word of wisdom, usually a gem of a pearl?
I have this vision but it must begin with one who will take the hands of a few and so on and so forth. My only hope is that others see the same thing too.
10. Inspire, Encourage, Love one another!
Let's relate, actuate, educate, motivate, accumulate (knowledge), and not alienate.....
Overview
Life insurance is one of those reluctant necessities. No one really likes to think about it because it makes you confront your mortality, but you have to think about it to protect your family. The two main life insurance types are term life and whole life. Both provide coverage so your family will not be thrown into a financial whirlwind should you pass away, but their range of benefits strike a sharp contrast from one another.
Time Frame
Whole life insurance provides coverage for your entire life so long as you continue to pay the premiums. Term life has a set expiration date, whether you've died or not. Term life insurance can be bought for periods of five, 10, 20 and 30 years, and provides coverage to your family for that set expanse of time.
Cost Difference
Whole life insurance costs more than term life because you don't only pay into the policy, you're also paying into an investment fund. For many, term life is the more affordable way to go, providing you with coverage while you enter into your own investments and cash-building efforts.
Coverage
Term life and whole life insurance policies will pay out the policy amount to your family should you die while the policy is active. But term life policies have a pre-determined end date, so if it expires before you die, you'll likely lose out on your premiums and will no longer be covered. Whole life policies cover you for your entire life, expiring on the date of your death.
Investment
Whole life insurance policies include an investment portion. Your money is split between the policy and an investment fund, which allows you to build interest and cash value while the policy remains active. You can even use this money at a later date to help pay for your child's education, home repairs or emergencies. Term life doesn't offer an investment option.
Premiums
Term life premiums are very inexpensive because all you're paying for is the policy. Whole life premiums include your standard policy coverage as well as commissions, annual fees, sales charges and investing. This makes the premiums on whole life policies considerably more expensive and more geared toward the investor than just a person looking for simple coverage
7 Health Symptoms Men Should Not Ignore But Usually Do
Entertainment is a large part of everything we do nowadays. I thought I'd let that bgo today and focus on social issues that I think need to be dealt with going into 2010. I wanted to share these things because so many of us use entertainment as a vice to ignore some of the social issues that affect us in our everyday lives.
A large majority of men, especially men in urban areas of the country, will go years without going to see a doctor, even if they have health care benefits. 2010 should be the year that we all get healthier, and take care of ourselves, not only for ourselves but for ou children and families as well. Go get that colonoscopy you've been avoiding. If you are in your late 30's to early 40's it is time to get a full physical exam anyway.
I can recall my grandfather not taking care of his diabetes, and it was even serious in teh beginning. because he ignored it, and decided to keep eating his honey buns and RC cola, he not only died, but suffered before he did. A little prevention could hae save him from the terrible way he left his family.
Ladies, what is the since in having a good man if he is not healthy? Women should also be taking heed of their health as well.
Know the warning signs of serious illness.
By Dr. Mark Liponis,
Keep Your Bones Strong
When it comes to health, men often take better care of their cars or roofs than their own bodies. “If they spot a leak in their roof, they want to fix it before it damages the whole house,” says Dr. Jean Bonhomme of the Men’s Health Network. “The slightest funny noise in their car will send men to the garage. If they could only do that with their own bodies.”
In fact, a possible reason for men’s higher mortality from major illnesses such as heart disease, cancer, stroke and diabetes is their unwillingness to seek medical help as often as women do. Perhaps young men can get away with ignoring various aches and pains, but in middle age, these can be signs of something that might get worse over time.
Indeed, there are some symptoms that a man should always take seriously, whatever his age. If you have one or more of them, stop, think and call a doctor.
1. Chest pain
This is the holy grail of symptoms. If you feel as if an elephant is sitting on your chest, head for the nearest ER. (Call an ambulance or have somebody drive you.) Often, however, signs of a heart attack are less obvious, involving left-arm pain, jaw pain, sweating and shortness of breath. Chest pain that catches you after exertion, lasts a few minutes and then goes away could mean your heart is not getting enough blood (a condition called angina). Yes, sometimes chest pain is only heartburn, but why take a chance?
2. Shortness of breath
Being a little short of breath after running or a game of pickup basketball is not a big deal. But if you feel short of breath lying in bed at night, after walking a block or two or climbing one flight of stairs, you should see your doctor at once. These may be signs that your heart is getting weak—also called congestive heart failure.
3. Unintended weight loss
Many Americans are trying to lose weight. But what if you’re losing weight without even trying? If your pants are suddenly too loose, something else may be going on. It may be something relatively benign, like an overactive thyroid gland, but sometimes it’s the first hint of cancer.
4. Blood in the urine or stool
True, some people don’t even want to look. But they should. The bottom line is: There shouldn’t be any blood in your urine or stool.
Urine travels from the kidneys to the bladder in special pipes called ureters, and then to the urethra before it leaves the body. Any disruption along the way from cysts, stones, infection or inflammation can introduce blood in the urine. So can cancer of the kidneys or bladder.
Blood in the stool may be trickier to see. If you see bright red blood, it’s a no- brainer. But sometimes blood in the stool may make your bowel movement look dark and tarry. Don’t assume it’s hemorrhoids. When there’s blood in the stool, colon cancer must be ruled out, usually by a colonoscopy. (Blood in the stool also can be related to a bleeding ulcer or a condition called diverticulitis.)
5. Changes in urination
Getting up too many times at night to visit the bathroom, a weak stream, having difficulty passing urine or getting urine started can all be signs of an enlarged prostate. The walnut-sized gland that surrounds the urethra grows as men age and can cause a common condition called benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). It’s not life-threatening, but it can have a profound effect on quality of life. Identify it early, and you can prevent its progression. Prostate cancer—a life-threatening condition—has similar symptoms. A physical exam and a PSA blood test can often tell the difference between the two. Increased visits to the bathroom also can be a symptom of other conditions, including diabetes—a serious illness that may lead to heart and kidney disease.
6. Leg swelling
When fluid accumulates in your feet, ankles or legs, don’t ignore it. The swelling, also called edema, may be a warning of heart, kidney or liver disease. While there are medications (diuretics, or “water pills”) that can help reduce the swelling, it is critical to find the underlying cause: Is the heart not pumping effectively? Are the kidneys not filtering all the fluid they’re supposed to? Is the liver congested? A battery of tests is likely to reveal the reason and get you started on the right course of treatment.
7. Skin lesions that don’t go away
Many people ignore skin wounds, especially when they are not on the face. Skin ulcers, particularly on the legs and feet, that don’t heal after a few days should raise a red flag. They may be a tip-off that something is wrong with the circulation. Nonhealing wounds also can be the first clue of diabetes. A skin lesion anywhere on the body that doesn’t go away, becomes larger or changes color and shape can suggest skin cancer. Don’t brush it off. If caught early, the chances of a full recovery are great
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Tyra Banks To Follow In Oprah's Footsteps
Seems that Tyra is following in her friend's footsteps. She has decided to end her run on daytime television with the final season of her talk show.
“The Tyra Banks Show,” which has won two Daytime Emmys and is currently in its fifth season, will wrap in the spring. Banks will shift her concentration to Bankable Studios, a New York-based film production company.
“As many of you know, several years ago I made the decision to leave modeling -- at the height of my modeling career -- and although it was the most terrifying move, it was the BEST decision and led to me fulfilling some big lifelong dreams,” Banks said in a statement to fans on her website. “Now, I'm a bit nervous and excited for my next HUGE steps which will allow me to reach MORE women and young girls to help us all feel as fierce as we truly are!
Tyler Perry To Tour New Stage Show In February 2010
In the last year, the prolific Tyler Perry directed two movies released in 2009, directed another one that will be released next year and served as an executive producer on the movie "Precious." He also continued to work on his two sitcoms -- "Meet the Browns" and "House of Payne."
In the moments between all of these, Perry has apparently found time to write and produce a new stage play that he announced this weekend will tour the country in 2010.
"Madea's Big Happy Family" will star Perry in his most famous role -- the hot-tempered, full-figured, firearm-brandishing Southern grandmother known as Madea.
The play is scheduled to tour the country from January to May, with two stops in Southern California. Perry will perform at San Diego's Sports Arena for one night on Jan. 6. He will also stop at the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood for a six-day run from Jan. 19-24.
Also on the itinerary are engagements at Oakland's Paramount Theatre, New York's Madison Square Garden and Chicago's Arie Crown Theater. Perry will also perform in Atlanta at the Fox Theatre.
The Kodak Theatre said that "Madea's Big Happy Family" replaces the previously announced production of Perry's "Laugh to Keep From Crying," which was scheduled to tour in the fall of 2009 through 2010.
On his website, Perry wrote that he is already in rehearsals for his return as Madea. He added that the play will feature music, though he didn't say if it would be a musical.
"I am so glad I have decided to go out on tour," Perry wrote.
"You can't imagine how much I need to be in front of the people right now. To get that give-and-take, I am so looking forward to it. Can you believe it's been five years since I've toured? So I'm coming to make you hurt yourself in a good way."
Perry began his career as a playwright before embarking on his film career in 2005 with "Diary of a Mad Black Woman." Many of his films are adapted from his stage plays.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Kanye West Says: “I Sold My Soul to the Devil” & Brags About Having a “Bad White B*tch Like Ice-T”
Took a vacation but I'm back now. I never thought this pompous @$$ would ever admit to being the jerk he really is, but I guess the cat is out of the proverbial bag now!
Would he ever have achieved the success he now revels in like a kid in a candy store had he remained in the background just producing music? I really believe this man needs some intense psycho therapy sessions. It is very apparent that he has a drinking problem now. Every where you see him he is tossing up the cognac like drinking water.
When you play with the enemy as he is now openly in clear display for everyone to see, is doing, you get what you ask for.
How long will his star shine? I guess only the dirt bag he "SOLD" his soul to knows that! ROTF!
Friday, December 18, 2009
How the record labels spurned the YouTube opportunity
YouTube radically simplified video hosting
YouTube popped up out of nowhere half a decade ago as a source of easy video hosting and sharing. And while it may still be widely used for amateur and personal videos, it's also a major source of music videos. A recent report by tracking firm Visible Measures found that nine out of the ten most "viral" videos in 2009 were music-related (the one exception was a film trailer). As such, music videos have been a tremendous vehicle for promoting acts. Yet many in the music business seem to have received the wrong message.
With music videos being so popular, one of Google's first moves following the purchase of YouTube was to shore up deals with all four major record labels, giving them a cut of revenue for streaming videos that included their music. There was no direct legal reason to do so, especially in the United States, where the "safe harbor" rules of the DMCA make it clear that any copyright liability would fall on those who uploaded the video, not the hosting firm. However, it avoided a potential lawsuit (since then, a similar lawsuit involving Universal Music and video hosting site Veoh has shown that the safe harbors do, in fact, protect the site).
However, the major record labels tend not to remain pleased for long, and if someone else is making any money at all, they tend to feel that they must be losing some. When it came time to renegotiate the deal, Warner Music tried to force Google to pay significantly more per stream. It's still not entirely clear who initiated the next step, but the end result was that all Warner Music videos on YouTube disappeared. A few months later, in the UK, a similar dispute between Google and music collection society PRS resulted in Google blocking access to major label music videos there too. In both cases, the industry wanted to get paid a very high rate per stream, despite the fact that these videos where helping to drive a lot of attention for these artists, that could directly result in much greater revenue. Not only that, but they were providing a working platform for hosting and sharing videos - free.
Before YouTube, hosting your own videos was a complex and expensive process. You often had to set up your own (expensive) media server, and users had to install proprietary software like RealNetworks' media player. On top of that, you had to pay a ton of money for bandwidth on every stream. YouTube gave all that away and made the user experience significantly better. It's not hard to make the argument that the music industry should have been thrilled with the free service that Google/YouTube provided.
Many artists certainly understood this. Lots of musicians, big and small, already included YouTube videos on their official sites, and when the videos got pulled from YouTube, they were left scrambling to explain why the videos on their own websites were broken. Singer Amanda Palmer demanded publicly that Warner Music drop her from her contract. She encouraged fans to record her live at shows and to put those videos up on YouTube. A favorite song? One where she sang about how much she disliked Warner Music, and why the label should drop her.
Meanwhile, those artists who remained on YouTube quickly realized that there was a tremendous advantage to having videos there, even if Google wasn't paying them directly. Blues singer Joe Bonamassa said that the fact that his music was available for free on YouTube increased attendance at his shows by a factor of ten. People in the cities and towns where he was playing would share his videos, and that made them much more interested in attending his shows. It had a direct and clear impact on his own income.
All of that should have been clear to folks at Warner Music or PRS, but instead, fear ruled the day. Their biggest fear was creating another MTV. When MTV first came about, it, like YouTube, was a great way to promote musicians. Back when MTV still showed music videos it helped many people learn about new bands, buy their albums and go to their shows. But the record labels got jealous that MTV was making all this money off their content. They failed to realise that they, too, were making lots of money in making their own acts more popular. In the world of record label execs, this wasn't a fair deal. Anyone promoting their content must pay. So, the stance taken towards YouTube has been one of less promotion and less money, even as smarter musicians are benefiting from the free hosting and free software.
The end result, unfortunately, has been that almost everyone loses. Musicians get less exposure. YouTube gets less usage. Fans are left in the dark (or hunting around on less reputable sites for music videos). YouTube was a huge opportunity for the record labels, and they spent years messing it up
Idol creator launches new multimedia show
Entertainment mogul Simon Fuller, the creator of TV contest "American Idol," on Wednesday announced a new, multimedia reality show distributed on the Internet, radio and social networking sites.
Fuller, the man behind the money-spinning "Idol" pop singing contest, called his "If I Can Dream" venture "a new generation of post-reality entertainment."
Launching in early 2010, it will document the story of five young people who dream of success in Hollywood and will allow fans to interact with them in real time through text, blogs, MySpace, twitter and facebook.
Fuller's 19 Entertainment, a subsidiary of CKX Inc, has partnered with a ground breaking distribution platform that combines online television viewing site Hulu with Clear Channel Radio, Newscorp's MySpace, Pepsi and the Ford Motor Co.
Episodes of the show will stream exclusively on Hulu.com, which is jointly owned by News Corp, NBC Universal and Walt Disney Co, while Clear Channel Radio will promote the show on its radio stations and its online and mobile devices.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Are artists earning more money as record labels suffer?
While record labels are suffering, artists were making more money than ever from live performances. Glenn Peoples from Billboard countered that the chart's "interpretation ignores the realities of superstar-driven ticket prices...Live music is a winner-take-all market. The value is concentrated at the top. Once an artist becomes a huge success on the road, he/she can command ticket prices well above the rates charged by sub-superstar artists. In the middle of the pack, ticket prices do not have the same flexibility."
Same as it ever was?
They are right of course, but only to a point. Are live earnings really any different than the rest of the industry? Isn't the same earnings concentration at the top also true in the recording industry - a few artists get rich while most don't see a dime.
The new music industry is not reflected in either the Times chart or any chart published in Glenn's Billboard. Most of it happens beyond the reach of Nielson and Ticketmaster.
I see mid-level artist income growing - perhaps not dramatically, but significantly. The growth is coming from increased direct to fan sales with fewer middlemen taking a piece of the pie. In many cases, the pie may be smaller than it was, but the artist is retaining more.
For a growing group of mid-level artists, increased income also extends to their live performances. The additional income comes not from higher ticket prices, but rather from their ability to perform over a wider region or even globally without the help of expensive and unreliable label promotion machines or radio airplay.
It's a brave new world out there and and it may have been misleading to publish that chart yesterday. No one has created a chart to measure the growth I'm seeing. But that doesn't mean its not there.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Clear Channel Leads The Pack In Advertising Demographic
Clear Channel Radio Digital Streaming Audience Has Highest Concentration Of Coveted Advertising Demographic, Says Ando Analysis
Clear Channel Radio announced that an exclusive study of listener demographics of the company’s digital streaming stations shows a dramatic increase in the concentration of advertisers’ most coveted demographic: Adults 25-54. The opt-in study, conducted by Ando Media earlier this year, had an incredibly high 47.9% opt-in rate. Formats seeing a more than 20-point gain include Urban Adult Contemporary, Classic Hits, Adult Contemporary, Country, Urban Contemporary, News/Talk and Oldies.
"The big news here is that our digital listening audience is highly concentrated with 25-54 year olds," said Evan Harrison, executive vice president of Clear Channel Radio and president of the company’s digital unit. "We can now share with our ad partners the quality of our audience as well as the quantity in real-time, which adds up to 15% to our terrestrial broadcasts."
"The survey data indicates that Clear Channel's digital platform attracts a coveted demographic," said Paul Krasinski, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ando Media.
Ando Media surveyed listeners clicking the "Listen Live" button on Clear Channel Radio Web sites. No user saw the survey more than once.
Interactive music releases driving fan engagement & music sales revenue
MXP4, developer of interactive music solutions, today released data showing interactive music releases are driving fan engagement and music sales revenue. The data shows that interactive music features such as mash-ups, mixing and live updates result in highly engaged users that interact more with the artists' communities, pay more attention to marketing messages, distribute the music related content virally and drive sales.
Based on traffic data over the last six months, MXP4 saw music fans use interactive music modules for an average of 9.1 minutes while playing with 2.6 tracks. With 75% of traffic happening virally, the data also shows the viral power of interactive music.
Consumers use MXP4 powered modules on the Web and iPhones to mix, mashup and create personalized versions of their favorite songs from popular artists.
Because fans are actually playing with music, they are not simply listening but are looking at the modules. As a result, artists and brands have more opportunities to send information, such as concert dates and album information, to fans.
In addition, the interactive format means fans are more ready to take actions than when they are in a listen only mode. Data from a recent campaign tracked by MXP4 showed up to 3% of click through traffic resulting in sales.
"Our mission is to use interactive music drive the highest level possible of fan engagement while creating new business opportunities. The high level of engagement and viral distribution shows how much consumers are embracing interactive music." said Albin Serviant, CEO of MXP4.
Over 50 major artists have used MPX4 technology to create interactive singles and albums including Britney Spears, Pink, Pet Shop Boys, Basement Jaxx, Ministry of Sound, Ghostface Killah, Calvin Harris, La Roux, and Michael Jackson's label.
ABOUT MXP4
MXP4 develops interactive music solutions that are changing the music experience for consumers by allowing them to play with the music. MXP4 delivers an interactive digital music experience which enables the music industry to explore new revenue opportunities and engage more closely with consumers. Based in Paris, investors include Sofinnova Partners and Ventech. www.mxp4.com
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Black Eyed Peas Announce Tour Schedule
The Black Eyed Peas came onto the scene with 2003's "Elephunk" album, and their hip-hop style has since rocketed them to stardom. They have sold 7.5 million albums and counting, worldwide, received four Grammy® nominations and won one Grammy® Award. The band consists of vocalist and multi-instrumentalist will.i.am and vocalists apl.de.ap, Taboo, and Stacy Ann Ferguson, better known as Fergie.
The tour kicks off in Las Vegas at the Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino and ends Sun, Apr 11 7:30p at the General Motors Place in Vancouver, BC. Check Ticketmaster or your local listings for more complete tour dates.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Should DJ's Be Considered Artists?
The dj's of today that are true dj's, not mixtape only dj's, mp3 pirate dj's, cd burning and cd mixing dj's that have come to prominence, but true dj's, are artists in their own right. Some of the biggest artists in the biz either started out as dj's or either are dj's today. Some of the biggest producers in the business are dj's.
Ludacris, Jermaine Dupris, Dr Dre, Andre 3000, Biz Markie, DJ Toomp, Teddy Riley, Dilla, DJ Screw, Boy George, etc..... Slice and myself even have a lot of credits on albums as either producers, writers, scratchers, remixers, etc...
It seems everyone is a dj these days. They have so much software and hardware out there that allows you to match up the bpm's of a record without even having to know the music or what songs you are playing as long as the bpm's match. Now how is that spinning? I saw a guy in the Gap at Saw Grass Mills Mall here in Florida and I swear the guy was dancing all over the place, had the whole store rocking. I walked over to see what he was spinning, but he had the Serato system that is actually mp3's that are being played and the computer keeps time for him. All he was doing was calling up mp3's, nothing more. So those are not artists, just pretenders.
My opinion is that if you have not originally worked with vinyl, and real turntables, you are not a true dj. Some may dispute that, but it's just my opinion.
When a dj is in a club/festival atmosphere, either does a remix on his/her own, or is hired to create a legal remix of a song that is a completely different song from the original with the exception of possibly the lyrics, then he/she should get full credit of that song that he/she created as remix producer, garnering royalties, publishing, etc..., because it is a total and completely different song than the original, vice the vocals (if any. So they are artists just from that description alone.
When you have dj's like DJ Tiesto with a laser light show, packing stadiums and arenas all over the world, with no performing artists to open up for him, and it's just him, the turntables, and the crowd, that just lets you know that dj's have transcended beyond the norm for dj's and have catapulted into full blown artists. We are talent just like musicians, singers, writers, performers, and should be treated as such.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Breaking down the points, clauses and terms of a recording contract
I thought I'd share this with all those who are interested in breaking down a contract term by term, defining what each terms says and what it means. I learned this in school and it helped me out a great deal once I got into the industry.
Not all contracts are the same, this is a basic definition of a contract, each contractual situation is unique to that individual artist, but this is an overall view of what most labels include in contracts.
A contract should be tailored to your specfic situation as an artist, insuring that you benefit widely from your artistry and music.
Major Label Contract Clause Critique
Major Label Contract Clause Critique
October 3, 2001
FMC
Preface
We’ve all heard the stories criticizing major record label contracts. Anecdotally we understand that many of the deals signed by artists are bad, but what does “bad” mean and just how bad are these deals? More importantly, how exactly are they bad?
These are questions that Future of Music Coalition (FMC) has been trying to answer for more than a year now with much help from the legal and artistic community. We began this process first by picking the brains of over a dozen major label and artist attorneys to identify which major label contract clauses and standard industry deductions are considered to be the most onerous. Then we began preparing this document, which quotes ACTUAL contract language from ACTUAL record label contracts, with care taken to preserve the doublespeak that makes the documents so confusing. Finally, we translated these onerous and confusing contract clauses into PLAIN ENGLISH and paired them with easy-to-understand critiques in the hopes that even those who are completely unfamiliar with the music business can understand the implications that result from signing a standard major label deal. This is a first step and nowhere near the final word in criticizing traditional record contract language.
In publishing this document we are not attempting to say that these clauses are illegal, nor are we suggesting that artists who sign these contracts do so without excellent representation.
What we are saying is this:
The majority of these clauses exist in the boilerplate language of the standard contracts offered to artists by each of the five major labels.
The majority of these contract clauses are considered “deal breakers” for all but the most powerful artists.
The majority of artists regularly sign contracts that seem to go against their best interest as a concession for gaining access to the means of production, distribution and promotion that is increasingly controlled by five labels and their parent corporations.
Outside of the major label music world many of these clauses are seen as an affront to basic logic.
If, for example, a label is offering a specific mechanical royalty rate that is decreed by statute and dictated by law, why should they then be allowed to artificially diminish that rate contractually through “controlled composition clauses”?
If easily broken acetate recordings are no longer manufactured or sold, why should artists be forced to sign contracts that diminish their royalties due to “breakage fees” which entered the standard contract language back when a legitimate amount of manufactured records were broken before they could be sold?
We can’t understand why, in a supposedly fair market economy with full competition, one of these five labels hasn’t seen the competitive value of removing these seemingly illogical clauses and offering a better deal to artists.
These questions and many others can only be raised once the discussion of “what is fair to include in a label contract?” moves out of the contract rooms and into public discussion.
We hope this document can be used as a tool to encourage the dialogue that is beginning to emerge from a better-educated public. We hope this will be considered a “must read” for any artist considering the possibility of signing a major label deal, and any concerned citizen who is worried about the standard treatment of the creators they love. Critiques of this document and augmentations are more than welcome. Together let’s build a more complete and public record of the musician’s experience.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 1: Transference of ownership
You own nothing, ever!
What the clause says:
"You grant and convey to Label, and confirm that Label shall be the exclusive, perpetual owner of all Masters throughout the universe, including without limitation, all copyrights therein as a "work made for hire". Label and all parties authorized by Label shall have the exclusive right to exploit the Masters, and to use your name, voice and likeness in connection with such exploitation. The right to use your name, voice and likeness shall be exclusive during the term and non-exclusive thereafter."
What the clause means:
Unless Congress and/or the courts speak up and say otherwise, you have no ownership or control whatsoever in the sound recording copyright created under the contract.
If you don't recoup the costs necessary to produce, market, and distribute the record, you will never see another penny beyond your advance (unless you wrote some of the songs, and even then it's not probable).
Nor will you likely be able to get your hands on the dust-gathering CDs sitting in the label's warehouse to sell on your website or on tour.
Nor will you be able to authorize/license anyone else to do the same.
Nor will you be able to license/authorize the use of the sound recording in any movie, advertisement, TV show, talking cupie doll, or otherwise.
And don't think you can simply jump in the studio and re-record the songs on a new CD (at least for a long time after the end of your deal), because a separate part of the contract will prevent it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 2: Length of term
“How does ‘forever’ sound?”
What the clause says:
TERM:
The Term shall consist of an Initial Period and of the Option Periods (defined below) for which Company shall have exercised the options hereafter provided. The Initial Period and each Option Period are each hereafter sometimes referred to as a "Contract Period". The Initial Period shall commence on the date hereof and shall continue until the earlier of the dates referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) immediately below:
a) the date twelve (12) months after the Delivery to Company, as defined in paragraph 19.09 below, of the fully equalized, digital tape Masters to be used in manufacturing the Phonograph Record units to be made for distribution in the United States from the last Master Recordings made in fulfillment of your Recording Commitment for the Contract Period concerned under Article 3 below; or
b) the date nine (9) months after the initial commer-cial release in the United States of the Album required to be delivered in fulfillment of your Recor-ding Commitment for the Contract Period concerned; but will not end earlier than one (1) year after the date of its commencement.
2.02 You grant Company separate options to extend that Term for additional Contract Periods ("Option Periods") on the same terms and conditions, except as otherwise provided herein. Company may exercise each of those options by sending you a written notice not later than the expiration date of the Contract Period, which is then in effect (the "Current Contract Period"). If Company exercises such an option, the Option Period concerned will begin immediately after the end of the Current Contract Period and shall continue until the earlier of the dates referred to in paragraphs 2.01 (a) and (b) above.
What the clause means:
Do not be deceived into thinking that the document you sign only affects you until then end of the Contract Period, i.e. until you deliver your last album or the contract ends for some other reason. The contract affects you for much, much longer via the “grant of rights clause”, among others.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 3: Key Man Clause
Hey, man…where’d you go?
If you have nothing in your contract stating that part of the inducement to sign at Label A over Label B is based on your personal relationships with the people who signed you, then you are stuck at that label even if those people leave. So if the label head who promised the big push on your record gets the ax, or the A & R man who told you he’d be taking you straight to radio decides he’d rather work for another record label, then you are probably stuck with whoever now runs the label and with whatever A & R staff it sends your way.
The Key Man Clause, which is awfully difficult to get, allows you to leave if certain key figures leave the label. A similar provision (that is even more difficult to get) is to say that if the label is merged, sold, dissolved, etc.; you have the right to get out of the contract.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 4: Delivery/acceptance
Give us radio ready material
What the clauses says:
“DELIVERY”: Delivery means Company's receipt of two (2), two track stereo tapes, fully edited, mixed, leadered and equalized, together with a track by track list (personnel list) of all featured vocal performers, background vocal performers and instrumental performers on each Master Recording identifying their performances, and all necessary licenses, approvals, consents and permissions.
“ACCEPTANCE”: Each Master Recording shall be subject to Company's approval as satisfactory for the manufacture and sale of records. Upon Company's request, Artist shall record additional Compositions and/or re-record any Composition recorded hereunder, as necessary, until a Master Recording which in Company's sole judgment is satisfactory for the manufacture and sale of records shall have been obtained.
What the clauses mean:
Depending upon the definition of “delivery” and “acceptance”, the clause requires the artist to product either “commercially satisfactory” or “technically satisfactory” masters. The former is much more favorable to the label, allowing it to require what it deems saleable in the marketplace. If you can’t get the “technically satisfactory” standard, try to negotiate limits upon the label’s discretion. NB: Delivery includes not only acceptance of the masters, but of all associated material, i.e. proper licenses, governmental forms, etc. The delivery and acceptance sections are important not just because they control obligations surrounding product, but because they are the basis of time triggers in the contract governing how long an artist is contractually obligated to the label.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 5: The Controlled Composition Clause
Feeling a bit out of control?
NOTE: This is the most important clause in need of reform. Record companies do not recoup recording costs and advances from mechanical royalties. For singer/songwriters, mechanical royalties may be the ONLY money they ever see.
What the clause says:
(a) “Controlled Composition” is hereby defined as each musical composition wholly or partially written by You [Artist], or owned or controlled directly or indirectly by You or by any party associated or affiliated with You. If and to the extent Controlled Compositions are recorded hereunder, each such Composition is hereby licensed to [Company], for the United States and Canada, at 3/4 of the current minimum fixed statutory copyright royalty rate (the “Applicable Rate”) on the earlier of (i) the date the recording commences or (ii) the date the recording is required to be delivered; provided that [Company] will not be required to pay more than then (10) times the Applicable Rate for an Album and no more than two (2) times the Applicable Rate for a seven-inch or twelve-inch singles record. Without limiting Company’s rights, it is agreed that [Company] shall have the Offset Right if mechanical royalties payable by Company are in excess of such amounts.
(b) No mechanical royalty whatsoever shall be payable for (i) records cut out of the [Company] catalog and sold as discontinued merchandise or records sold as “scrap,” “overstock” or “surplus”; (ii) any work which is non-musical; (iii) records distributed by [Company] which are not “Records Sold” (as defined herein); (iv) any work which consists of an arrangement of a work in the public domain; or (v) any more than one use of any work on a particular record.
What the clause means:
The Copyright Office sets the statutory rate for mechanical royalties, increasing every two years according to changes in cost of living as determined by the Consumer Price Index. The rate increases are by authority of the 1976 amendment to the Copyright Act. The first rate increase was in 1981. It was at about this time that the Controlled Composition clause became commonplace in record contracts.
The main purpose of the controlled composition clause is to NOT pay artists the statutory rate and to NOT increase royalties as costs of living increases; basically, to thwart copyright law.
The controlled composition clause limits the amount of mechanical royalties the company is required to pay for records it releases, and holds the artist responsible for the excess. In essence, the record companies are compelling artists to subsidize the payment of mechanical royalties. Here’s how they do it: (all examples assume today’s royalty rate of $.0755).
1. Artist gets 75% of the statutory rate per song = $0.056 per song, not $0.0755.
This is based on the minimum statutory rate, so the company calculates the same rate for a 10-minute song as for a 2-minute song. This thwarts the statute, which provides increased rates for songs over 5 minutes.
2. Artists gets royalties on maximum of 10 songs = $0.56 per album total
Under the statute, an album with 12 songs would earn $.90. Under this clause, the maximum royalties payable would be $0.56. If the maximum is exceeded (by using a cover song or a producer demanding a higher rate), the artist is held responsible for that excess.
3. Rate is fixed on date master is delivered.
The reduced rate will never increase, thwarting the Copyright Office statutory cost of living increases. Record labels lock in the earliest date possible. Some contracts fix the date at execution of the contract signing, knowing full well that the record won’t hit the shelves for two years.
4. Not pay royalties on “free goods”Under the compulsory license provisions of Copyright Act, record labels are required to pay mechanical royalties on all records “made and distributed.” Instead, record labels thwart this law by refusing to pay for so-called “free goods.” This confusing word “free-goods” is not defined as promo albums. Rather, all major labels define “free goods” as 15% of the records they sell. Using this provision, major labels calculate royalties on only 85% of records sold.
5. Reduced rate applies to all “controlled compositions”The definition of “controlled composition” casts a wide net. It includes songs written by producers on the album. Customarily, the record company hires these producers without negotiating a reduced mechanical royalty rate. The artist is forced to make up the difference. This is particularly egregious because most artists have no control over producers.
5. Hold Artist responsible for excess mechanical royalties.
If the total amount paid by the company does exceed the specified maximums, the difference will be deduced from the artist’s royalties. The possibilities of the artist running afoul of all these provisions are endless and, potentially, very expensive for the artist.
The following example illustrates the devastating effect this clause has on royalties:
Example:
Artist has agreed to be responsible for any costs of mechanicals over $0.56 (75% of statutory times 10 songs). Artist has no say over what is recorded. She records 15 songs written by the record label’s “affiliated publisher” who charges the full statutory rate of $.075 per song, or $1.13 for the album. The Artist now OWES the record label $0.57 per record. In five years, when the statutory rate increases to $.91 per song, but the artist’s rate stays the same, the artist will OWE $0.85 per album! Each record sold puts her deeper in the hole, and farther away from ever recouping.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clauses 6, 7, 8, 9: Returns, reserves, and other standard deductions
How do you turn a 16%royalty into a 6% royalty?
It’s easy. Standard. Industry. Deductions.
What the clauses say:
1. Definition of "Net Sales":
“…eighty five percent (85%) of gross sales, less returns, credits, and reserves against anticipated returns and credits.”
2. Container Charge: “the applicable percentage, specified below of the Gross Royalty Base applicable to the Records concerned: ...Compact discs, New Technology Configurations…25%"
3. In the royalty paragraphs:
“Not withstanding anything to the contrary herein, the royalty rate for any Record in the audio only compact disc configuration shall be eighty percent (80%) of the otherwise applicable royalty rate set forth in this agreement.” (New Tech is 75%)
4. From that same royalty section:
"No royalties shall be payable to you in respect of Records sold or distributed....as "free", "no charge", or "bonus" Records (whether or not intended for resale; whether billed or invoiced as a discount in the price to [Record Label's] customers or as a Record shipped at no charge)."
That paragraph contains a host of other carve-outs for such things as promo records, etc.
WHAT THEY MEAN:
Take care of your advance money, because it's all you'll see for awhile, unless you wrote the songs. Songwriters get a mechanical on each record sold, but they also get a reduced rate due to the controlled comp clause (see above for definition).
To start with, clause #1 indicates that the labels are going to reduce your royalty based on records that might get returned because you only get paid on royalty bearing units --which means if you don't have a cap on free/promo goods (#4), you're in trouble.
As an example, let’s think about a CD that has a value of $10. The "net sales" definition means you're only going to get paid on 85 of every 100 units shipped. However, there are further deductions. Clause #2 indicates that $2.50 cents comes off that $10 before you apply the royalty percentage. But wait, there's more. Clause #3 means that your royalty percentage (the one you apply to the dollar figure after figuring in the 85% rule and the 25% container charge) is further reduced by 20%. Have I mentioned the absurdity of a container charge for "New Tech" i.e. digital distribution where there are no manufacturing costs? (And don't forget that the reduction there is 25%, not 20% as with CDs).
Here it is important to remember that artists’ contract royalty rate is not statutory, transparent nor is it public. Traditional contract royalties begin at a much smaller “11 –13 percent” and allow for that royalty amount to be further diminished through a process of unfair deductions that are standardized within the industry.
To understand this royalty reduction, multiply an 11 percent royalty rate by 85 percent for a “free goods” deduction. Then multiply it by 75 percent for a “packaging” deduction. Then multiply it again by 75 percent for a “new media” deduction. After this process of deduction, an 11 percent royalty is effectively reduced to less than 6 percent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 10: Cross-Collateralization
No, no…the other contract…
NOTE: There is no segregation linking particular advances and particular royalties to particular albums. All advances are recoupable from all royalties.
What the clause says:“The term "Advance" shall mean prepayment of royalties. Company may recoup Advances from royalties to be paid to you or on your behalf pursuant to this Agreement or any other agreement between you and Company's affiliates. Except as otherwise set forth herein, Advances shall be non-refundable.”
What the clause means:
This clause gives the label the right to recoup advances from monies musicians receive not only under the instant document, but all others between you and the label, past and future. For example, you sign a contract in 1990 and put out a few hits. Later you sign contract #2 in 1995, and that album is huge and raises more than enough money to pay back the costs from the manufacture and promotion of that release. On the surface it would seem that you would be in a very good position as an artist to begin to make royalties and share in the financial success of your musical triumph.
It would seem, but then due to the cross-collateralization clause look what begins to happen. Label one gets to take royalties from album 2 to recover monies advanced to you under album one. This can be true if you either if you have signed two contracts with different labels or you have signed an adjusted second contract with the same label.
In other words, in the rare case that you are one of the .03 percent of artists who actually recoup then once you are successful you are risking all of your money all of the time. Once you realize that you won’t make any royalties on your second record there is certainly less incentive to make it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 11: Coupling Clause
Nickname: Pick Your Partner (Unless We Pick For You)
What the clause says:
RIGHTS:
Company (and its licensees) shall have the sole, unlimited and exclusive right to use the Master Recordings in perpetuity and throughout the Territory or any part thereof in any manner it sees fit, including without limitation, the exclusive right: (a) to manufacture, distribute and exploit the Master Recordings and records embodying the Master Recordings, in any or all fields of use, by any method now or hereafter known, on such terms and conditions as Company (and/or its licensees) may elect or, in its sole discretion, refrain therefrom; (b) to release records embodying the Master Recordings under any name, and trademark or label which Company (and its licensees) may from time to time elect.
What it means:
This paragraph is one of the few “artist friendly” places in a typical recording contract. As we’ve seen the breadth and depth of the typical “grant of rights” clause gives the label far-reaching rights to do what it wants with the artist’s music created under the contract. The coupling clause takes a bit of that discretion back, because it gives the artist the right to refuse to be placed on a compilation with other artists for whatever reason. For example, if I’m a Christian singer, I can veto a label decision to put me on a Christmas album with Eminem.
NB: Due to some recent suggestions that digital subscription services are simply huge compilations (giving artists the right to refuse the placement of their material on them), many coupling clauses now contain language to pre-empt that argument. The language will read something like: “….except in the case of a consumer selected or influenced service…”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clause 12: Reserve Limits, Accounting & Audits
“Oh, you mean those royalties… we plumb forgot about ‘em.”
What the clause says:
10.01. Company shall send to you statements for royalties payable hereunder on or before October 1st for the semi-annual period ending the preceding June 30th and on or before April 1st for the semi-annual period ending the preceding December 31st, together with payment of royalties, if any, earned by you here-under during the semi-annual period for which the statement is rendered, less all Advances and other charges under this Agreement. Company shall have the right to retain, as a reserve against charges, credits, or returns, such portion of payable royalties as shall be reasonable in Company's best business judgment. You shall reimburse Company on demand for any over-payments, and Company may also deduct the amount thereof from any monies payable to you hereunder or under any other agreement between you and Company or Company's affiliates. Royalties paid by Company on Phonograph Records subsequently returned shall be deemed overpayments.
10.02. No royalties shall be payable to you on sales of Phonograph Records by any of Company's licensees or distributors until payment on those sales has been received by Company in the United States. Sales by a licensee or distributor shall be deemed to have occurred in the semi-annual accounting period during which that licensee or distributor shall have rendered to Company accounting statements and payments for those sales.
10.03
a) Royalties on Phonograph Record sales outside of the United States shall be computed in the national currency in which Company's licensees pay to Company, shall be credited to your royalty account hereunder at the same rate of exchange at which Company's licensees pay to Company, and shall be propor-tionately subject to any withholding or comparable taxes which may be imposed upon Company's receipts.
b) If Company shall not receive payment in United States dollars in the United States for any sales of Phonograph Records outside of the United States, royalties on those sales shall not be credited to your royalty account hereunder. Company shall, however, at your written request and if Company is reason-ably able to do so, accept payment for those sales in foreign currency and shall deposit in a foreign bank or other depository, at your expense, in that foreign currency, that portion thereof, if any, as shall equal the royalties which would have been pay-able to you hereunder on those sales had payment for those sales been made to Company in United States dollars in the United States. Deposit as aforesaid shall fulfill Company's royalty obligations hereunder as to those sales. If any law, ruling or other governmental restriction limits the amount a licensee can remit to Company, Company may reduce your royalties hereunder by an amount proportionate to the reduction in Company's licensee's remittance to Company.
10.04. Company will maintain books and records which report the sales of Phonograph Records, on which royalties are payable to you. You may, but not more than once a year, at your own expense, examine those books and records, as provided in this paragraph 10.04 only. You may make those examinations only for the purpose of verifying the accuracy of the statements sent to you under paragraph 10.01. All such examinations shall be in accordance with GAAP procedures and regulations. You may make such an examination for a particular statement only once, and only within one (1) year after the date when Company is required to send you that statement under paragraph 10.01. You may make such an examination only during Company's usual business hours, and at the place where Company keeps the books and records to be examined. If you wish to make an examination you will be required to notify Company at least thirty (30) days before the date when you plan to begin it. Company may postpone the commencement of your examination by notice given to you not later than five (5) days before the commencement date specified in your notice; if Company does so, the running of the time within which the examination may be made will be suspended during the post-ponement. If your examination has not been completed within one (1) month from the time you begin it, Company may require you to terminate it on seven (7) days' notice to you at any time; Com-pany will not be required to permit you to continue the examination after the end of that seven (7) day period. You will not be entitled to examine any manufacturing records or any other records that do not specifically report sales or other distributions of Phonograph Records on which royalties are payable to you. You may appoint a certified public accountant to make such an examination for you, but not if (s)he or his/her firm has begun an examination of Company's books and records for any Person except you unless the examination has been concluded and any applicable audit issues have been resolved. Such certified public accountant will act only under a Letter of Confidentiality which provides that any information derived from such audit or examination will not be knowingly released, divulged or published to any person, firm or corporation, other than to you or to a judicial or administrative body in connection with any proceeding relating to this Agreement.
10.05. If you have any objections to a royalty statement, you will give Company specific notice of that objection and your reasons for it within one (1) year after the date when Company is required to send you that statement under paragraph 10.01. Each royalty statement will become conclusively binding on you at the end of that one (1) year period, and you will no longer have any right to make any other objections to it. You will not have the right to sue Company in connection with any royalty accounting, or to sue Company for royalties on Records sold during the period a royalty accounting covers, unless you commence the suit within that one (1) year period. If you commence suit on any controver-sy or claim concerning royalty accountings rendered to you under this agreement in a court of competent jurisdiction (as provided in paragraph 23.09 below), the scope of the proceeding will be limited to determination of the amount of the royalties due for the accounting periods concerned, and the court will have no authority to consider any other issues or award any relief except recovery of any royalties found owing. Your recovery of any such royalties will be the sole remedy available to you or the Artist by reason of any claim related to Company's royalty accountings. Without limiting the generality of the preceding sentence, neither you nor the Artist will have any right to seek termination of this Agreement or avoid the performance of your obligations under it by reason of any such claim.
10.06. Company shall have the right to deduct from any amounts payable to you hereunder that portion thereof as may be required to be deducted under any statute, regulation, treaty or other law, or under any union or guild agreement, and you shall promptly execute and deliver to Company any forms or other documents as may be required in connection therewith.
10.07. Each payment made by Company to you or the Artist under this Agreement, other than union scale payments under Article 5 hereof, shall, at Company's election, be made by a single check payable to . All payments herein are contingent upon Company receiving properly completed W-9 and/or 1001 IRS tax forms, as applicable.
What it means:
The reserve limits are some of the murkiest and therefore most fraught with potential for abuse. Briefly, they exist because of the nature of record retailing—in a hits-driven, high-risk business, the retailers insist upon being able to return product they can’t sell. The labels shift that risk/burden to the artist by holding onto a portion of royalty payments until they can verify product shipped has been scanned and sold. An artist should try to negotiate the lowest percentage possible of reserves (hint: get rid of the “label’s best business judgment” language), and pay close attention to the liquidation requirements. NB: In my mind, reserve requirements should not apply to digital deliveries.
The foreign limitations (i.e. no royalties if label gets paid in non-US dollars) are ludicrous—like a big multinational can’t figure how to convert? This auditing language is particularly onerous. For example, it states the artist only has one year from when the label should have rendered a statement to audit—i.e. if the label is 300 days late, you only have 65 days to audit. The “purpose” clause should come out—it shouldn’t matter why an artist wants to conduct the audit. Same for the “length of audit” language—what if the artist finds big problems and it takes more than a month to sort them out?
As to objections based upon the findings of an audit, the artist here is limited in several respects. The innocent looking “court of competent jurisdiction” language with reference to another subparagraph is the label’s way of snagging home court advantage—a discouragement to suit. (i.e. artist lives in Texas won’t be thrilled about having to sue in New York). Same objections as above about timing— the trigger should be from when artist actually receives a statement, not when label is supposed to render (and shoot for two years, not one). Sole remedy language is also over-reaching (although some might disagree). Artists should go for (but tough to get depending on clout) a “10% discrepancy clause”, i.e. label pays for audit if more than 10% discrepancy allowed. My negotiating technique on that is to keep increasing the percentage to test whether the label has good faith or simply won’t go for this clause no matter what (i.e. if they won’t agree to a clause with 25%, I don’t think they’re operating in good faith)
In addition, many record companies discourage audits by stipulating in the contract that no audit may be done on a "contingency" basis. The artist must actually pay the auditor, not bring an auditor in on the promise of a percentage of the audit proceeds. Paying a flat, upfront fee (as opposed to contingency) for an audit is EXPENSIVE. The cost usually exceeds by many times any discrepancy in the artist's favor
Friday, December 11, 2009
Age & Music, Is There Bias In The Biz?
This has become an industry wide practice that in my opinion needs to be put to rest. Record Distributors in the 80's had the notion that if they marketed music towards a younger demographic and also putting out artists that were younger that they could relate to, they would benefit from years of escalating proft margins of record sales which caused them to collectively raise the retail price of the cd.
What they didn't see coming down the road was the onset of the digital age with downloadiing, streaming, Live Nation, and the state of the economy, and the multitude of acts that become one hit wonders saturating the market with music that is garbage. They made this mess for themselves and now expect Congress to bail them out with the "Performance Rights Act".
I am a producer that believes in all artists getting paid for their work, but this new law would be akin to a paint shop providing Picasso with his painting tools and then wanting to receive revenue because they gave him the tools to paint his masterpieces.
There are a large number of artists with good material that get overlooked because the Big 4 has decided that it is too risky to market artists of a certain age demographic because of some of the reasons I stated above.
The UK is a totally different story altogether. One of the top selling and performing artists for years over there has been Alexander O'Neal. Can anyone remember "Fake"? Numerous domestic artists from the states enjoy years of success over there touring year round such as Public Enemy, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Ultra Nate, and a multitude of jazz and soul artists..
Does sex appeal determine success in todays music?
In this business, women are unfortunately held to a higher standard than men are, on both the talent side and the business side.
The sad part of the entertainment business is that most people outside of it, don't get to see on a daily basis, the underbelly of what young ladies who glamorize all these artists, whether rappers, singers, athletes, etc... do just to get near them, or try to get discovered just to be in a video. It's very apparent that all do not display this behavior, but for those that do, tend to make it bad for everyone. This is an element of the industry as a whole that is never going to leave because these entertainment moguls and companies know that "sex sells", always has and always will. This in turns breeds the behavior that is out there.
Many women have demanded their respect in this business from Sylvia Rhone, Latifah, Oprah, Tyra, etc.., and still there are some idiots out there that will still attempt to approach women of this caliber and disrespect them, call them out of their name, because they are not allowing themselves to be taken down a peg or two for the sake of just making it, when all of them have made it on their own strengths individually or collectively. Never get involved in anything for no amout of money if your going to have to forgo what you believe in, stand for, and carry yourself as, no matter who it may be or what they may be offering.
Men crooners have traditionally not been the prototype sex symbol until recently. There was Curtis Mayfield, Mel & Tim, Sam & Dave, Jerry Butler, Bobby Womack, Issac Hayes, etc., who just had to only open their mouths to be accepted as early sex symbols.
I've discussed this with numerous artists, especially r&b singers. Unfortunately in today's music model, companies are signing them based mostly on image. Sex sells, sex sells, sex sells, sex sells, and that is the sad tale of it all. Look at the girls they place in music videos, to model clothing lines, to showcase cars at a car show, to host events, etc...., and you have your answer. There have been some exceptions, but only because they were on American Idol, or garnered so much attention on a social networking site such as MySpace, Facebook, etc, that a bidding war was launched for their services.
Just remember that as long as consumers demand it, and across demographics those people want to see the skimpy dressed women, and over the top sexy women and drop dead gorgeous men in tight shirts, etc.., sex appeal will always matter in this industry, until we as artists, producers, managers, dj's, talent scouts, etc... do something to affect the current businsss model out there.
You have to think though that maybe this trend may be dying down with so many older artists coming onto to the scene and setting trends of their own.
Susan Boyle, the 'Britain's Got Talent' star who has taken the US Charts by storm, sold an astounding 701,000 copies of her debut album, 'I Dreamed a Dream,' in the U.S., giving her the best first week sales of 2009 and the best-selling debut album by any woman since SoundScan began tracking in 1991. She is definitely not your prototype size 6, voluptuos siren that we have gotten used to seeing as a new artist.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
The Top Pop Artists of the Decade - 2000s
It's hard enough in this business trying to sell units, much less stay on top of your game for a decade. These are the top artists of the decade according to sales, merchandising, endorsements, and popular appeal. Count them down and see if you agree.
According to record sales, awards received
10. Black Eyed Peas
Fergie joined forces with the already established Hip-Hop group in 2003, and ever since, they've been churning out the quirk-funk goodness almost nonstop. With will.i.am twisting the knobbies, they've infested the radio with party cuts like 'Let's Get It Started' and 'Pump It,' and not to mention thoroughly confusing/delighting us with weirdness like 'My Humps.' And of course you have this year's 'Boom Boom Pow':
9. Amy Winehouse
Amy took the world by storm with her signature gigantic beehive and voice right out of the 60's. Her soulful songs like 'Rehab' and 'You Know I'm No Good' are fun and catchy. They brought a new type of sound to the radio, and Amy paved the way for other female artists like Adele and Duffy. Although Amy's been involved in her share of scandals -- Get Well, Girl! -- there's no denying her talent.
8. Pink
Pink is still the same tough chick we met in 2000 with 'Can't Take Me Home.' Almost a decade and 5 total albums later, she is still giving us the in-your-face (but easy to sing) pop lyrics that speak for a generation.
7. Jay-Z
We're huge HUGE fans of Shawn Carter, who has left his imprint on popular music in the production room ('Umbrella,' 'Crazy In Love') and of course at the mic. And much of it happened after he "retired" in 2002. His versatility is renown, having worked with rockers Linkin Park and ...
6. Coldplay
Say what you want, but Coldplay has sold over 50 million records worldwide and pushed out four albums this decade including 'A Rush of Blood to the Head' and 'Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends.' Behind lead singer and songwriter Chris Martin, Coldplay gives fans mellow, emotional tracks that dig much deeper than most Top 40 hits.
5. Gwen Stefani
In the past decade, there is no doubt that Gwen proved her diverse music style with her first solo album 'Love. Angel. Music. Baby' -- and subsequently gave birth to the 'Hollaback Girl.' Her on-and-off work with No Doubt is just icing on the cake, and it's amazing how quickly her solo career surpassed her band.
4. Green Day
People will be talking about 'American Idiot' for decades to come. The 2004 album stands as the Berkeley-based punk combo's defining moment and eternal props to them for turning a rock opera about "Jesus of Suburbia" into the biggest-selling rock album of that year. To be sure, it doesn't get much better than 'Boulevard of Broken Dreams.' They followed up 'Idiot' with this year's '21st Century Breakdown,' another rock opera.
3. Justin Timberlake
Whatever Justin did, we're sure the other *NSYNC-ers wish they thought of. We don't know how he made the transition from the clean-cut boy band image to Michael Jackson-esque R&B-Pop without us batting an eye ... but he did. We'll give credit to Timbaland for much of it. Songs like 'Cry Me A River' and 'SexyBack' were new and unusual songs that we couldn't get out of our heads. And that Superbowl performance with Janet Jackson? That erased any trace of a good-boy image he had left.
2. Beyonce
The 00's have been kind to Beyonce, to say the least. While Destiny's Child was awesome, going solo was the best thing that could have happened to her. Seriously, she's so famous she doesn't even need that last name. Beyonce has proven she knows how to do a dance hit (see: Crazy in Love, Deja Vu, Single Ladies) as well as a ballad (see: Listen, If I Were A Boy), and she does them equally well. She also knows how to put on a show -- her costumes and choreography never disappoint.
1. Britney Spears
You can't deny it, Britney has dominated the decade. Her music endures on MTV and radio and her often erratic and always interesting personal life has made for endless tabloid fodder. Her musical output between 2000-2008 was astounding. She dropped a huge 'Oops!' at the dawn of the decade and followed that with 'Britney' a year later. In 2003, she delivered what we think is one of the best pop songs of the decade, 'Toxic' (complete with an insanely sexy music video). Two more albums followed, with the latest dropping last year. True, it's impossible to ignore her personal woes (marriages, divorces, drinking, weird boyfriends, shaved heads, rehab ...), but in the end this was all about a former Mouseketeer developing into the world's biggest star.
According to record sales, awards received
10. Black Eyed Peas
Fergie joined forces with the already established Hip-Hop group in 2003, and ever since, they've been churning out the quirk-funk goodness almost nonstop. With will.i.am twisting the knobbies, they've infested the radio with party cuts like 'Let's Get It Started' and 'Pump It,' and not to mention thoroughly confusing/delighting us with weirdness like 'My Humps.' And of course you have this year's 'Boom Boom Pow':
9. Amy Winehouse
Amy took the world by storm with her signature gigantic beehive and voice right out of the 60's. Her soulful songs like 'Rehab' and 'You Know I'm No Good' are fun and catchy. They brought a new type of sound to the radio, and Amy paved the way for other female artists like Adele and Duffy. Although Amy's been involved in her share of scandals -- Get Well, Girl! -- there's no denying her talent.
8. Pink
Pink is still the same tough chick we met in 2000 with 'Can't Take Me Home.' Almost a decade and 5 total albums later, she is still giving us the in-your-face (but easy to sing) pop lyrics that speak for a generation.
7. Jay-Z
We're huge HUGE fans of Shawn Carter, who has left his imprint on popular music in the production room ('Umbrella,' 'Crazy In Love') and of course at the mic. And much of it happened after he "retired" in 2002. His versatility is renown, having worked with rockers Linkin Park and ...
6. Coldplay
Say what you want, but Coldplay has sold over 50 million records worldwide and pushed out four albums this decade including 'A Rush of Blood to the Head' and 'Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends.' Behind lead singer and songwriter Chris Martin, Coldplay gives fans mellow, emotional tracks that dig much deeper than most Top 40 hits.
5. Gwen Stefani
In the past decade, there is no doubt that Gwen proved her diverse music style with her first solo album 'Love. Angel. Music. Baby' -- and subsequently gave birth to the 'Hollaback Girl.' Her on-and-off work with No Doubt is just icing on the cake, and it's amazing how quickly her solo career surpassed her band.
4. Green Day
People will be talking about 'American Idiot' for decades to come. The 2004 album stands as the Berkeley-based punk combo's defining moment and eternal props to them for turning a rock opera about "Jesus of Suburbia" into the biggest-selling rock album of that year. To be sure, it doesn't get much better than 'Boulevard of Broken Dreams.' They followed up 'Idiot' with this year's '21st Century Breakdown,' another rock opera.
3. Justin Timberlake
Whatever Justin did, we're sure the other *NSYNC-ers wish they thought of. We don't know how he made the transition from the clean-cut boy band image to Michael Jackson-esque R&B-Pop without us batting an eye ... but he did. We'll give credit to Timbaland for much of it. Songs like 'Cry Me A River' and 'SexyBack' were new and unusual songs that we couldn't get out of our heads. And that Superbowl performance with Janet Jackson? That erased any trace of a good-boy image he had left.
2. Beyonce
The 00's have been kind to Beyonce, to say the least. While Destiny's Child was awesome, going solo was the best thing that could have happened to her. Seriously, she's so famous she doesn't even need that last name. Beyonce has proven she knows how to do a dance hit (see: Crazy in Love, Deja Vu, Single Ladies) as well as a ballad (see: Listen, If I Were A Boy), and she does them equally well. She also knows how to put on a show -- her costumes and choreography never disappoint.
1. Britney Spears
You can't deny it, Britney has dominated the decade. Her music endures on MTV and radio and her often erratic and always interesting personal life has made for endless tabloid fodder. Her musical output between 2000-2008 was astounding. She dropped a huge 'Oops!' at the dawn of the decade and followed that with 'Britney' a year later. In 2003, she delivered what we think is one of the best pop songs of the decade, 'Toxic' (complete with an insanely sexy music video). Two more albums followed, with the latest dropping last year. True, it's impossible to ignore her personal woes (marriages, divorces, drinking, weird boyfriends, shaved heads, rehab ...), but in the end this was all about a former Mouseketeer developing into the world's biggest star.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Rihanna Gets Backwards Tattoo
Rihanna got her life's motto tattooed on her chest, which reads: "Never a failure, always a lesson." RiRi even had the folks at East Side Ink tattoo the phrase backwards so she can read it when she looks in the mirror. She is rumored to still be in love with Chris Brown, and the couple may be sneaking around with one another.
R. Kelly Working On Book To Be Released in 2011
R. Kelly is writing more chapters, only this time, it's not for his "Trapped" saga, but for a new memoir.
The 42-year-old singer, writer and producer is working on an autobiography with David Ritz that will "tell it like it is."
Hmmm, I'm wondering if any more infamous video footage will be leaked with the release of the book?
The Pied Piper Of R&B one of the best-selling recording artists in history but also one of the most controversial short of Michael Jackson.
The book is rumored to include all the goods that everyone has been wondring about, and already know of since his acquittal on child pornography charges.
The autobiography is untitled right now, just like his new CD. It's scheduled for release by Tavis Smiley's SmileyBooks in 2011.
Pembroke Pines, Florida weighs bid to build film studio complex
Looking to boost job prospects in South Florida, Broward County is currently optomistic that two film production studios, Pas Media and The Studios Of The Americas plan to open up a facility in Pembroke Pines that will not boost the city's economy, but save them from a failed investment. The plan would rescue a white elephant from the city, City Center, a once envisioned downtown hub for the sprawling suburban community.
The companies, based in South Florida, will need an estimated $600 million to build their vision, in a proposal set to be reviewed in a planned workshop, in the city commission's chambers.
If the proposal works, it would help bail out Pembroke Pines from a $66 million dollar hole it dug for itself by investing in the 115 acres at the soutwest corner of Pines Boulevard and Palm Avenue.
Pas Media and Studios of the Americas are relatively recent arrivals to the Florida filmmaking industry.
Based in Pembroke Pines, Pas Media incorporated with the Florida Secretary of State's office in March 2008; Studios of the Americas incorporated this October.
Pas Media's Metz could not immediately name a TV or film project the group has produced and distributed widely.
If this works out it could be a boon to the South Florida economy, although just as optomistic as Pembroke Pine officials are, so am I.
In order to succeed, though, a major motion picture studio must rely on robust financial partnership from the state and local governments, said Elizabeth Wentworth, who recruits productions for the Broward Alliance, the county's economic development arm.
``The South Florida region could not support a studio at this time,'' she said, ``because the size of the studio they're talking about is for major features, and the state is not offering the level of incentives that's going to be attractive for major features to come here and film.''
Florida's film industry incentive program is budgeted this year to spend about $10.4 million in cash rebates for producers who use state crews and vendors, and meet other requirements.
That amount is less than the financial incentives offered by most of the 43 states that lure filmmakers with cash, said state Film Commissioner Lucia Fishburne.
``Incentives play a huge role now,'' Fishburne said. ``They are used to secure financing. They are used to keep down costs, and increase the profit margin.''
But Florida's program has a spotty history of funding, swinging from a low of $2.5 million at its inception in 2004-05, to a high of $25 million in 2007-08. Last year, Florida paid about $8.5 million in rebates to filmmakers working on 29 productions.
PAS Media, Inc. is a Feature Film and Television production company based in Pembroke Pines, Florida. The Executive Officers and Staff of PAS Media, Inc. take an aggressive stance on creating and producing quality projects. We wholeheartedly believe when a project is entrusted to us, we need to assure our clients they will receive the best quality project on-time and on-budget every time.
MIAMI MUSIC FESTIVAL 09'
600 performances. 25 stages. One wristband.
In a nutshell, that's the Miami Music Festival, which runs from Thursday, Dec. 10 through Saturday, Dec. 12. The nation's newest showcase and conference for emerging musical acts, features a variety of musical genres from Florida and across the nation, including Rock, Alternative, Pop, Latin, Urban, Caribbean and Jazz.
Miami.com will host a showcase at the tents behind Transit Lounge and feature a variety of established local bands.
At the showcase tents (which are more standing room only than bring a blanket and relax) snacks like pretzels, chips, and fruit will be available, along with beer and bars featuring vodka, rum, and whisky.
A two-day conference (December 11-12) at Riverfront Hall in The Miami Convention Center will feature a variety of interactive sessions, master classes and keynote interviews. Record label A&R executives, music publishing and touring executives, technology, media and marketing executives, radio program directors, film and TV music supervisors, advertising executives and other buyers of music will be on site to participate in the conference and to attend showcase performances.
One-Day and Three-day MMF wristbands give attendees access to Festival performances* and will only be available at the door of each participating venue during the Festival.
A three-day wristbands goes for $50 ($35 for students) and a one-day wristband goes for $25 ($20 for students.
Advanced online sales have concluded. If you have already purchased your wristband online, it will be available for pickup at The Miami Music Festival Registration desk outside Riverfront Hall in the Miami Convention Center (400 SE Second Ave. Miami, FL 33131) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on December 10, 11, and 12.
MMF venues will admit wristband holders at each performance on a "first-come, first-served" basis. Conference badge-holders receive preferred admission. Venues will admit attendees without wristbands as space is available for $10 at the door.
Note: Must be 21 yrs or older to enter Red Bar, Blue Martini, and Tobacco Road. All other stages are 18-and-over to enter
http://www.miami.com/miamicom-showcase-miami-music-festival-article
Sunday, December 6, 2009
MovieClips.com Debuts Library of 12,000 Licensed Clips
Santa Monica, Calif. - MovieClips.com on Thursday announced the beta launch of its online library of more than 12,000 movie clips, licensed from six Hollywood movie studios. The two-minute-long streaming clips were licensed from 20th Century Fox, MGM, Paramount, Sony Pictures, Universal Pictures and Warner Bros. Pictures for distribution on the free, ad-supported site. The site also allows users to embed the MovieClips player on Facebook, MySpace and other sites, and includes links to third-party sites where consumers can rent or purchase full-length versions.
Related Links:
http://snipurl.com/tjsi3
http://www.movieclips.com
DSA KICKS OFF 20TH ANNUAL SONG CONTEST
DSA KICKS OFF 20TH ANNUAL SONG CONTEST
$5,000 in Prizes go to Top Winners
11.23.2009 – Contact: Steve "Buck" Morgan
972 345 2133
wmsmorgan@verizon.net
DSA KICKS OFF 20TH ANNUAL SONG CONTEST
$5,000 in prizes go to top winners
DALLAS--Amateur songwriters from around the world can compete in the 20th Annual Song Contest hosted by the Dallas Songwriters Assoc. (DSA). This year's contest features 10 categories judged by music industry professionals and will offer more than $5,000 in prizes to the top winners in each category.
Contestants can enter online via either DSA submission partner, www.broadjam.com or www.sonicbids.com, through Feb. 15, or by mail with entry forms (CDs only, cassette tapes will not be accepted) mailed to: DSA 2009 Song Contest, Sammons Center for the Arts, 3630 Harry Hines Bld. #20, Dallas, TX 75219. Entry fees are $20 per song.
Winners last year came from Massachusetts, California, New Hampshire, Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Maryland, Virginia and North and South Carolina. Additional winners came from Canada, Portugal and the United Kingdom.
"The best way to appreciate the talent in this contest is to look to our 2008 grand prize winner, Mark Wayne Glasmire, who is a 2009 Grammy qualifier," said DSA President Steve Sullivan. "He's testimony to the level of talent in the DSA Song Contest."
Song categories for 2009 are:
1. Christian/Inspirational
2. Country
3. Americana/Folk/Bluegrass
4. Pop/Rock/R&B/Alternative
5. Love Songs/Easy Listening
6. Children's/Novelty
7. Singer/Songwriter
8. Instrumental
9. Music Video
10. Bare Bones
"Each year, this contest is a success because of our sponsors," Sullivan said. Sponsors include Broadjam.com, Sonicbids, Gibson, The Gibson Foundation, WM Sales, Beaird Music Group, Texas Music Group, River Sounds Recording Resort and Kim Copeland Productions.
For more information log onto http://www.dsasongcontest.blogspot.com.
Dallas Songwriters Assoc. is a 501c3 non-profit organization dedicated to providing information about the craft and business of songwriting. All styles of music are welcome in the DSA, and membership includes writers of all ages. DSA monthly activities include meetings with guest speakers, song critiques and performance showcases that are open to the public. In addition, the DSA supports and promotes workshops and contests and publishes a monthly newsletter. For more information, visit www.dallassongwriters.org.
###
Press Release Provided by My PR Music Wire: Affordable Press Release Distribution for Musicians
Friday, December 4, 2009
MUSIC ARTISTS: KNOWLEDGE EQUALS SUCCESS
I have been in the industry for over 18 years now, have seen many trends come and go, and the industry as a whole completely change several times., from a legal, marketing, promotions, radio airplay and distribution perspective, the use of the internet as a viable marketing and non traditional sell through resource, the new businesses created from branding, and an even more concentrated effort industry wide to further expand these new more profitable platforms, and continue research to create more.
There is no one true way to market, promote, or sell your art, what works for one will not work for another. Who knew that the song, "Who Let The Dogs Out", would go on to become such a huge hit and a marketing ploy by SONY for professional sports teams? I remember the SONY rep coming to our building and asking me what I thought about the song, and honestly I told him it was not something I would be interested in, but it was a very catchy song.
Knowledge is "key" in this business, whether you are a producer, song writer, music artist, model, actor, ect... You must learn how your art earns money, and what are the areas you should concentrate on initially to maximize the earning potential of your art, especially if you have very limited resources and an even tighter budget.
There are tons of self help resources on the internet, numerous books, but you still will have to get out of your bedroom, basement studio, and get out there and do it. I remember in college, a professor of mine, who taught music marketing, told us that "You can always have 100 percent of nothing if we kept our artistry to ourselves, until we decided to share it with the world".
It is not ok to have some big name industry professional (A&R, attorney, executive, ect), a seemingly legitimate marketing company, and management company take over your career and make all the important decisions for you, unless you first know what you are getting yourself into. You must take the initiative, get out here, and learn something about the business. What is a "copyright"? What is a "performance right" under the copyright law? What are "performance rights agencies", and how do they protect my music? What is "music publishing"? What is a "mechanical royalty"? What is a "statutory royalty rate" and what is the current rate? What is "distribution", and how does this help me as an independent artist? What is "bds"? What is "soundscan"? What is a "one sheet"? What does "recoupable" mean, and how will it affect me as an artist if I'm signed to a label? These questions and so many more are the questions that you first need to ask of yourself before you take on any kind of professional advice. "LEARN THE "BUSINESS OF MUSIC", and at least get some basic knowledge.
There is nothing worse than seeing an artist fall for the "shark", the slick talking, sharply dressed individual who throws names around to raise his/her level of legitimacy, and you find out later on down the road that your best interest and career was not their first priority. I see so many artists fall as easy prey in this business daily. Get the knowledge and all else will fall into place. Begin treating this as a business, and there are those who will say "my music, my music", but this is a business first...nothing less.
Can Anyone Stop Facebook?
Twitter couldn't. Google couldn't…
As I was browsing out in cyberspace as I always do to find informative stories, and breaking news, I came across this article by Farhad Manjoo. The reason I think this story is relevant to this blog and the music industry as a whole, is because so many music artists are utlizing this viable tool either as a promotional vehicle, a conduit to a social networking account or a blog they host.
I think it is crucial for all artists to be using this tool in conjunction with Twitter, MySpace, Iseecolor, Itunes, Jamgroove, Black Planet, and so many other social networking sites that are out on the "Cyber Space Highway".
By Farhad Manjoo
Posted Thursday, Dec. 3, 2009, at 5:20 PM ET
Nearly a year ago—in the course of cajoling people into joining the ubiquitous social network—I marveled at Facebook's astonishing growth rate: The site had just signed up its 150 millionth member, and about 370,000 people were joining every day. "At this rate," I wrote, "Facebook will grow to nearly 300 million people by this time next year." I confess, though, that I didn't think it was possible for the site to keep growing at that rate. Every hot Web site begins to fade at some point, and back then, the tech world was enamored of an upstart that was gaining lots of attention from celebrities and the media—Twitter. Even Facebook seemed scared of the micro-blogging site. In June, it redesigned its user pages to display updates as quickly as Twitter does, a move that prompted a barrage of threats to quit.
Those threats were empty. And so, it seems, was any threat posed by Twitter. Facebook's growth rate has actually accelerated during the past year. In September, it announced that it had reached 300 million members, and this week, it passed 350 million. About 600,000 people around the world now sign up every day. Twitter hasn't released any recent usage numbers, but traffic to its site is flattening. Indeed, it's likely that Twitter has fewer members than the number of people who play the Facebook game FarmVille (69 million!).
But it isn't just that Facebook is racking up a lot of members. With Facebook Connect, the company is expanding its footprint beyond Facebook.com, spidering into every far-flung corner online. You can now update your Facebook status, add comments, or chat with your friends while surfing CNN, the Huffington Post, Yelp, Digg, and Slate, among other sites. On Wednesday, Yahoo announced that it would integrate Facebook Connect with all of its services. Though Yahoo hasn't explained how the partnership will work, you'll presumably be able to share your photos between Flickr (owned by Yahoo) and Facebook or comment on stories at Yahoo News using your Facebook profile. This huge partnership will bring Facebook closer to becoming what has long been a holy grail in the Web business—a kind of universal sign-on service, the one place that stores the world's social information.
Facebook's continued rise prompts several questions. Why do people keep joining? Will it peak and begin to decline, like so many social networks that came before? And more importantly, do we want a universal sign-on service, a single Web site that stores all our relationships, comments, pictures, and status updates?
Yes, I think we do. In fact, I'd argue that's why Facebook keeps growing and won't peak anytime soon—it is becoming part of the infrastructure of the Web, every bit as indispensible to our daily wanderings as Google or e-mail. When I pushed people to join Facebook in January, I reasoned that the site had become "a routine aide to social interaction, like e-mail and antiperspirant." In the months since, that has only become more true. It's the first place you think of to find new pictures of your nephew, to share an amusing anecdote with your college friends, or even to look for a job. The New York Times' Nick Bilton points out that Facebook's mutual-friends list transforms new relationships: "When I go to a meeting or party, I take a minute to look up who's attending and quickly explore friends we might share," he writes. "It's the perfect digital icebreaker."
Facebook gets better as more people join it, meaning that the site's very growth is its main selling point to new members. What's more, Facebook's size makes it extremely resistant to rivals and increases the likelihood that it will spread to more places online. The Web is full of annoying redundancy. I've got a username and password to post on Slate's message board, as well as ones to read the New York Times, rate movies on Netflix, and comment on pictures at Flickr. What I do on those sites usually remains there, which isn't ideal—if I comment on a Times story, I'd prefer that my friends see it along with the strangers at Nytimes.com.
Facebook Connect acts as a glue between all those duplicated features. A comment on a news site becomes the start of a conversation with your friends—which is much more interesting than what happens today. The system is a boon to Web publishers, too. Slate uses Facebook Connect to power the comments on its news aggregator, The Slatest. Every time someone posts a comment there, a link to the story appears on that person's Facebook page. In other words, it advertises the site to the commenter's friends, driving traffic back to Slate.
Facebook skeptics will note the obvious downside to the site's expansion—a potential loss of privacy. Sometimes we do things online that we don't want advertised to all our friends. Truth be told, you loved Porky's Revenge, but you'd prefer that your five-star rating stay between you and Netflix. But those situations are rare and getting rarer. The Internet has made sharing habitual; the whole point of commenting on a news story or posting a picture is to share your views and your life with the world. It's unlikely that we'll become less inclined to share with our friends.
Indeed, it is precisely our desire to share stuff that will give Facebook Connect an edge over Google Friend Connect, the search company's competing (and confoundingly similarly named) sign-on service. There are technical differences in how the two services work. Google's plan is more open—when you come across a site that uses Friend Connect, you can sign in using not just your Google login but your login to Twitter, Yahoo, or a number of other online services. This is very convenient for surfers; if I want to join a Google Friend Connect-enabled site, I don't have to bother about remembering a new log-in or password. But because it uses many different online services, Google—unlike Facebook—doesn't let you share what you do on third-party sites in one central place. That's what makes Facebook Connect so important and such a strong statement of the site's ambition. Perhaps one day not long from now, everything on the Web will be a mere extension of Facebook.
Farhad Manjoo is Slate's technology columnist and the author of True Enough: Learning To Live in a Post-Fact Society. You can e-mail him at farhad.manjoo@slate.com
Illustration by Robert Neubecker.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)