• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Lady Antebellum drops "Antebellum" from band name due to slavery connotations

Y2kTheNewOldies

Y2kTheNewOldies

Lady Antebellum drops "Antebellum" from band name due to slavery connotations

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lady-antebellum-changes-name-racist-origins/

This is similar to how some of the label management were in debates to change Urban AC to R&B as a radio format branding.

Now a Country Music band is renaming their band in response to recent Police brutality issues around the nation and its origins in racism.

Country group Lady Antebellum is making a huge change to their band – they are changing its name. On Thursday, the band announced on social media it would drop the word "Antebellum," due to its association with slavery.

"When we set out together almost 14 years ago, we named our band after the Southern 'antebellum' style home where we took our first photos," the band said in their statement. "As musicians, it reminded us of all the music born in the South that influenced us…Southern Rock, Blues, R&B, Gospel and of course Country. But we are regretful and embarrassed to say that we did not take into account the associations that weigh down this word referring to the period of history before the Civil War, which includes slavery."

The band — which consists of members Charles Kelley, Hillary Scott and Dave Haywood — said that they are "deeply sorry for the hurt this has caused and for anyone who has felt unsafe, unseen or unvalued. Causing pain was never our hearts' intention, but it doesn't change the fact that indeed, it did just that. So today, we speak up and make a change. We hope you will dig in and join us.⁣⁣⁣"
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the news. My question(s) is why was the named picked to begin with and if its meaning has nothing to do with why its being changed, why does it have to be changed at all?

God bless you and them always!!!

Holly
 
TheBigA said:
Only one problem is there is another artist using the name "Lady A." It's a blues singer based in Seattle. Apparently she's not amused:
Click to expand...

Has she ever released a recording nationally, so that she's at least somewhat famous? If not, lotsa luck to her.

This is similar to a name conflict from the mid '60s, where the Chicago-based garage band the Shadows had to change their name to the Shadows of Knight to avoid a conflict with Cliff Richard and the Shadows. By the time the Shadows of Knight had their first hit with Gloria, they'd already changed their name.

Another one from that era was a Phoenix-based band called the Nazz, featuring lead vocalist Vincent Furnier. They had to change their name because Todd Rundgren's band of the same name that came first. They (and he) changed their name to Alice Cooper, and the rest is history.

Then, there was David Jones, who had to change his stage name to David Bowie to avoid conflicts with the Monkees' singer.

The band (or person) who became famous first usually gets to keep the name. I can't think of any exceptions.
 
KeithE4 said:
Has she ever released a recording nationally, so that she's at least somewhat famous?
Click to expand...

In the linked article, she says her music is on Spotify. I don't use Spotify, I have Amazon. I searched for her on Amazon, and found no other Lady A besides the country band.

Did she trademark the name? My guess is no, since the domain name was available. If she has no trademark, the name is available.
 
TheBigA said:
In the linked article, she says her music is on Spotify. I don't use Spotify, I have Amazon. I searched for her on Amazon, and found no other Lady A besides the country band.

Did she trademark the name? My guess is no, since the domain name was available. If she has no trademark, the name is available.
Click to expand...

I understand her point, but the fact remains that The Trio Formerly Known As Lady Antebellum has been a Top 10 hit maker for 13 years. Anita White may have come up with the Lady A moniker first, but she is apparently more popular in Europe than in most of the US, outside of the Pacific Northwest. She has released several albums that are available via the Dutch website qobuz.com. I don't know how well they've sold or the number of downloads.

Being a blues fan, I'm going to check out her music. Maybe this controversy will be good for her career and/or wallet. There's nothing wrong with the name Anita White, unless somebody else with that name claimed/trademarked it first.
 
Our AC variety station plays Lady Antebellum. I sometimes refer to them on air as Lady A, sometimes Lady Antebellum.. just whatever flows at the moment

In a facebook group im in, one dj asked "so how many of your stations will change the groups name in your databases, music scheduling and automation? (our RDS even outputs song title artist data from automation)

my reply "I guarentee you the changing of the groups name in our computer systems isnt even a damn thought to anyone at our station"

And it wasnt. Not because we dont care about the world, but we have much bigger fish to fry right now at our standalone FM
 
SomeRadioGuy said:
In a facebook group im in, one dj asked "so how many of your stations will change the groups name in your databases, music scheduling and automation? (our RDS even outputs song title artist data from automation)
Click to expand...

Here's a question: The past hits were done as "Lady Antebellum" and not "Lady A". Will everyone, including radio, change those recorded by the original name to the new one even though they were not released under the new name.

Or is this sort of like John Mellencamp > Johnny Cougar > John Cougar > John Cougar Mellencamp to John Mellencamp?
 
Holly has a good point in asking why they picked "Antebellum" in the first place. If the group really wants to get more exposure Hillary needs to dump her association with SESAC and go with BMI or ASCAP. There are a significant number of small market radio stations that choose not to pay SESAC's monthly fees. That means that the majority of Lady A songs can't be played on those stations. There's a similar problem with the Zac Brown Band, Runaway June and a few other country groups.
 
^^^ Thank you. Since the original meaning of the word is not a good one obviously, why not give it a more positive meaning? Rainbows were eventually given another meaning besides the Lord's promise concerning floods and so if they can have more than one, so can the word "Antebellum". I've never associated it with anything else other than the singing group anyway.

God bless you always!!!

Holly
 
CAVEMANager said:
Holly has a good point in asking why they picked "Antebellum" in the first place. If the group really wants to get more exposure Hillary needs to dump her association with SESAC and go with BMI or ASCAP. There are a significant number of small market radio stations that choose not to pay SESAC's monthly fees. That means that the majority of Lady A songs can't be played on those stations. There's a similar problem with the Zac Brown Band, Runaway June and a few other country groups.
Click to expand...

How much do artists get from radio airplay fees any more? How does it compare with what they get from streaming?

I do no have that data, but I suspect that on fee basis, it makes no difference. Some missed spins on stations that don't count in the national totals because of tiny audiences is minimal if the deal with SESAC overall produces more income.
 
DavidEduardo said:
How much do artists get from radio airplay fees any more?
Click to expand...

Artists get nothing. He's talking about as songwriters. Songwriters get 100% of the royalty from airplay. Hillary is a co-writer on most of their hits. SESAC claims they pay more than BMI or ASCAP. Global Music Rights claims to pay the most. Global has become a bigger issue than SESAC because they sued the the RMLC. There are a number of stations trying to avoid GMR songs.
 
TheBigA said:
Artists get nothing. He's talking about as songwriters. Songwriters get 100% of the royalty from airplay. Hillary is a co-writer on most of their hits. SESAC claims they pay more than BMI or ASCAP. Global Music Rights claims to pay the most. Global has become a bigger issue than SESAC because they sued the the RMLC. There are a number of stations trying to avoid GMR songs.
Click to expand...

Sorry... my bad. Of course artists get nothing. And SESAC does not represent artists, but composers.

Are all Lady Antebellum songs SESAC?

Again, the questions, how much do SESAC members (the word I should have used) get from radio play vs. the amount from ASCAP and BMI for the same song and the same number of plays?

Do small market plays matter at all?

I know that stations that are monitored electronically don't fill in those horrible ASCAP and BMI reports any more. But do secondary and small market stations that are not monitored still have to do it? I have little recent small market experience, so I don't know.
 
DavidEduardo said:
Are all Lady Antebellum songs SESAC?
Click to expand...

No just the ones where Hillary is listed as writer.

DavidEduardo said:
Again, the questions, how much do SESAC members (the word I should have used) get from radio play vs. the amount from ASCAP and BMI for the same song and the same number of plays?
Click to expand...

It's complicated, but it's a negotiated rate done through the RMLC. SESAC is a for-profit PRO, while BMI and ASCAP are non-profits. As I said, SESAC claims to get its writers a better rate. I don't know if it's true.

DavidEduardo said:
But do secondary and small market stations that are not monitored still have to do it? I have little recent small market experience, so I don't know.
Click to expand...

Yes but I believe it's a quarterly report, using one week's worth of playlists to base the rate. Far easier process than what's required for SoundExchange.
 
TheBigA said:
It's complicated, but it's a negotiated rate done through the RMLC. SESAC is a for-profit PRO, while BMI and ASCAP are non-profits. As I said, SESAC claims to get its writers a better rate. I don't know if it's true.
Click to expand...

That is what Azoff's new agency promises authors and composers, too. Again, I plead ignorance since I am not involved in the recording and licensing side, but I wonder of the now two for-profit groups actually do benefit the composers. I've been told by SESAC authors that it only benefited those with large catalogs of songs, while those with single big hits don't believe they did well with SESAC... but that experience is almost all with Spanish language songs.

Yes but I believe it's a quarterly report, using one week's worth of playlists to base the rate. Far easier process than what's required for SoundExchange.
Click to expand...

Of course, most stations use their MusicMaster or RCS software logs for reporting. In most cases, stations "over program" each sweep and if the station does not reconcile music logs, lots of un-played songs get reported.
 
DavidEduardo said:
That is what Azoff's new agency promises authors and composers, too.
Click to expand...

In Azoff's case, it's personal. He campaigned to get artists (mostly HIS artists) a performance royalty from FM radio. When he failed at that, he decided to use the existing composer royalty to benefit his artist clients who are also writers. He's been quick to sue any station that plays his music without an agreement. And as I said he's suing the RMLC, calling them a cartel. As though holding exclusive rights to certain songs isn't a cartel.
 
For over a year there has been an effort to get Congress to force radio stations to pay royalties to both performers and record labels. The N.A.B. is vigorously opposing this. Most major recording companies have close to zero interest in whether their music is played on small market radio stations. If a typical small town radio station told MCA Records that they would play all their new releases for a fee of 25 cents MCA would save the quarter. Similarly, song writers have little interest in small market radio. Perhaps they should but they don't. SESAC in recent years has made significant inroads into country music and their composers co-write about 25% of all new releases nowadays. Azoff calls his company GMR and they have signed up a song writer named Shane MacAnally. Shane has hardly ever written a song by himself but co-writes hundreds of them. It is possible that he writes three words of a song's lyrics but if a station doesn't pay GMR all those songs can't be played. Shane is credited with about 10% of all songs that appear on Billboard's Country Airplay chart. It's a fair amount of effort for a Music Director to find out who licenses each song for broadcast but a small market radio station can save thousands yearly by not playing SESAC or GMR. No listener will know or care. Nor will any advertiser. If you get your music from a syndication service you can't control these costs and must pay them.
My final comment on this subject is that the typical country music song today claims about four or five writers. To me it is inconceivable that it would take that many people to compose such crap.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom