I know I'm going to open a can of worms, but what the heck - this is radio, and worms are abundant!
Payola scandals surface about every 10 years. A new generation of programmers and a new generation of promo folks re-invent it about once per decade. And every time, John Law takes umbrage at this "serious ethical offense" and goes on a witch hunt; media companies are shocked - SHOCKED - at their employees actions, and a new crop of heads roll.
Now let me digress with a history lesson. The payola hearings of the Fifties (where all of this started) were begun by a bunch of old-lady Congressmen who couldn't stand rock 'n roll. They wanted with all their hearts to squash the life out of the "delinquent's music" that was sending the US of A straight to HELL! And so they started the first such witch hunt and destroyed the lives and careers of many good radio people. Remember that at the time, payola was NOT ILLEGAL - there was no regulation at Federal or local levels against it. But these fossils just couldn't understand how ANYone would play rock because they LIKED it - it just HAD to be an evil conspiracy fueled by filthy lucre and shifty record labels. And of course, after the hearings were over, they did make it illegal.
Now, radio has always been a penny-pinching industry. We squeeze people until they're dry husks, throw them away and go searching for fresh new juicy ones. And the compensation has always been minimal - how many good jocks have we all known who went hungry, fed their kids on spaghetti 6 nights a week and drove '72 Vegas while doing six-day-a-week midday shifts, doubling as Production Directors and holding a weekend overnight job at the 7-11 just to make ends meet?
So it's no wonder that every so often, with the labels still producing more product than a spectrum full of radio stations could expose in a hundred years' time, they resort to trying to pay programmers to get a little more exposure for their product versus their competition. To them, it's just a way to get a leg up.
And it's likewise no wonder that underpaid, overworked talent sometimes take the opportunity to augment their meager incomes and maybe take a little piece of the good life for themselves that the lizards in the sales cubes always seem to be enjoying.
Also remember that commercial markets are self-levelling. No amount of exposure or promotion for a bad product will cause the public to spend money on that product. As recent examples, I cite the Cadillac Catera, Pepsi Clear and Polaroid cameras that produce wallet-size instant prints. Those of us in the business for a while will easily remember "turntable hits" that charted high but achieved no sales ("Jesse" by Carly Simon comes quickly to my mind).
So here's my question for debate: Does the brouhaha over Payola really matter in terms of the marketplace? Or is it just one more way for posturing politicians to supply a sound bite full of moral indignation whilst they back-room yet another pork-barrel public works project themselves?
Let the flames begin :^)
- Doc
Payola scandals surface about every 10 years. A new generation of programmers and a new generation of promo folks re-invent it about once per decade. And every time, John Law takes umbrage at this "serious ethical offense" and goes on a witch hunt; media companies are shocked - SHOCKED - at their employees actions, and a new crop of heads roll.
Now let me digress with a history lesson. The payola hearings of the Fifties (where all of this started) were begun by a bunch of old-lady Congressmen who couldn't stand rock 'n roll. They wanted with all their hearts to squash the life out of the "delinquent's music" that was sending the US of A straight to HELL! And so they started the first such witch hunt and destroyed the lives and careers of many good radio people. Remember that at the time, payola was NOT ILLEGAL - there was no regulation at Federal or local levels against it. But these fossils just couldn't understand how ANYone would play rock because they LIKED it - it just HAD to be an evil conspiracy fueled by filthy lucre and shifty record labels. And of course, after the hearings were over, they did make it illegal.
Now, radio has always been a penny-pinching industry. We squeeze people until they're dry husks, throw them away and go searching for fresh new juicy ones. And the compensation has always been minimal - how many good jocks have we all known who went hungry, fed their kids on spaghetti 6 nights a week and drove '72 Vegas while doing six-day-a-week midday shifts, doubling as Production Directors and holding a weekend overnight job at the 7-11 just to make ends meet?
So it's no wonder that every so often, with the labels still producing more product than a spectrum full of radio stations could expose in a hundred years' time, they resort to trying to pay programmers to get a little more exposure for their product versus their competition. To them, it's just a way to get a leg up.
And it's likewise no wonder that underpaid, overworked talent sometimes take the opportunity to augment their meager incomes and maybe take a little piece of the good life for themselves that the lizards in the sales cubes always seem to be enjoying.
Also remember that commercial markets are self-levelling. No amount of exposure or promotion for a bad product will cause the public to spend money on that product. As recent examples, I cite the Cadillac Catera, Pepsi Clear and Polaroid cameras that produce wallet-size instant prints. Those of us in the business for a while will easily remember "turntable hits" that charted high but achieved no sales ("Jesse" by Carly Simon comes quickly to my mind).
So here's my question for debate: Does the brouhaha over Payola really matter in terms of the marketplace? Or is it just one more way for posturing politicians to supply a sound bite full of moral indignation whilst they back-room yet another pork-barrel public works project themselves?
Let the flames begin :^)
- Doc
By the way, that's how I was able to be the first Announcer in America to play "Every Breath you Take", and no, I wasn't paid for it!