It has been a pet gripe of mine hearing radio presenters complain about money that their radio station plays to musicians to use their music.
It goes something like this:
‘without the radio station there would be no exposure for artists…’
What they’re actually saying is:
‘Music is the filler between the ads, and of course, between hearing those incredible DJ’s and their always-witty banter.’
How could musicians survive without the radio?
The first example I can think of is Norah Jones -without radio support she reached the international top 40 charts. Radio stations were left playing catch up when feeding their audiences with the Music she wrote
Another big influence is the new modes of communication. The internet now has lessened the audience that radio has and so lessened the impact that radio has on your success as a musician.
it would seem that without music, there would be less radio stations.
Radio stations chose their content and many of them do chose to talk only -but when the station chooses to play music, then -like paying presenters and radio DJ’s for their contribution, musicians should also be paid. As if a radio station can say ‘You are an important part of the radio station content’ but not important enough to be paid.
There are certainly positives for both parties to be working together, the radio allows music exposure to a geographically targeted audience while the music distracts and entertains between the DJ drival and the commercials. What really is frustrating is when either party thinks that they owe nothing to the other.
Lets try and find the balance for this process -after all, with the internet having such an impact on our industry, both of our income streams are changing.