five out at WLGZ

[SirRoxalot]

The situation cited for performers is DIRECTLY attributable to the nefarious actions of record companies, not radio. The record companies made a lot more money than the radio stations - AND the performers. The performers worked for the record companies, not the radio stations.

Record companies have - and continue to - court radio airplay to promote their artists. They as much as admit that radio airplay has value to them.

Radio stations promoted the careers of talent - and insisted on burdensome contracts with non-compete clauses to protect their investment. In that case, the radio station IS acting like the record company - it derives the primary benefit of the performance.

No matter how you slice it, record companies make money because artists are exposed and promoted by radio. If they want performance rights, then they need to pay promotional fees. There is an arguement that there's a lack of balance between the promotional fees and the value of the performances. I believe that an objective look might show that radio's promotional power is MORE valuable to the record companies than any particular artist's performance.

Perhaps radio should pick a record company and simply stop playing their artists until this issue is resolved. Let's see who's hurt more. My bet is that neither side wants to really find out.

 

[yugoidar]

Jay Myers, a one-time Buffalo PD, has put forth the idea that radio stations should pay the performers for the use of their recorded performances instead of the composer/songwriters/publishers that they have paid for years through their agreements with ASCAP, BMI and SESAC.

The performers should then pay the writers for the use of their songs. Makes sense to me!

 

[Savage]

So, Paul, let me make sure I understand you.

You think that radio....which provided free publicity and exposure in the form of decades of airplay of commercial music....yes, WITHOUT EVEN CHARGING for the airtime (due to FCC strictures and prevailing union-musician prejudices at the time against broadcasting "canned" music....)

....should have paid, and should pay TODAY, for the privilege of making/having made Frank Sinatra, Elvis and the Beatles the worldwide superstars they have been for generations??

Sure, radio benefitted from having pop music formats to program. But by a vast measure, the biggest benefits were bestowed on the recording artists...in the form of (mostly) free exposure on radio. This is still valid today even in this era of internet and music videos.

 

[Mark Giardina]

While at WYSL Saturday morning Bob Savage informed me that Legends GM was also given the boot after 20 years with the company. Not being aware of that, I was actually surprised; and normally I'm not one to be surprised at the goings on in broadcasting.

Is it me or does this make any sense to anyone else that a station which manages to double its audience (in the 12+ category) in a single book goes ahead and cleans house?

Now if the opposite occurred and Legends ratings dropped, I can see where the owners would want to make changes. But what Crawford did is punish success.

I have to wonder what will happen if Legends ratings increase in the Spring book.
Will every employee get canned and the station is automated?

 

[Bob1370]

Mark G. asks, "I have to wonder what will happen if Legends ratings increase in the Spring book.
Will every employee get canned and the station is automated?"

Of course. Happened to the former WVOR in stages after Jack Palvino and Bud Wertheimer sold it to Jacor (which in turn morphed into Clear Channel)...happens to all sorts of stations all the time. Results always the same...the bean counters do what bean counters always do and tell the bosses it's the format and not the people that make successful stations, so can the people and pocket the money you save as a bonus after giving us our consultant's cut.

Bean counters so such wonders when they guide companies' fortunes...just ask stockholders of General Motors, Citadel, Regent and Cumulus, they'll tell you...