Here's why MTV doesn't show videos anymore.
http://1033ampradio.cbslocal.com/2012/11/12/why-mtv-doesnt-play-music-videos-anymore-video/
http://1033ampradio.cbslocal.com/2012/11/12/why-mtv-doesnt-play-music-videos-anymore-video/
-
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
MTV answers the question "Why don't you show videos anymore?"
- Thread starter MarcB
- Start date
MTV was phasing out music videos way before the internet as we know it. So whoever was interviewed at MTV is lying about why they no longer play music videos. They could still play them, but choose instead not to. VH1 & CMT are the same way, though those channels took longer to migrate away from music videos.
Dave said:
This video is parody, not reality. The reason given then, I assume holds today, was that they wanted to increase ratings, especially during prime time.
Although I will agree with them on this. There is absolutely no reason to show music videos on TV anymore. Youtube, Vimeo, and countless other websites now show them on-demand.
BET has stopped running videos a few years ago except for on 106 and Park. Most of its video library from the past 30 years has been disbursed to Centric (which runs them in the mornings), VH1 Soul and MTV Jams.
Clearly it was parody.
mnradiofan said:
No video screen popped up when I browsed the webpage. I only got to read the story. As for not being needed to be seen on TV is something I disasgree with you on. Yes, the internet makes it easier for us to see most music videos. Not all of us want to sit in front of a computer watching them. Not all of us have Roku or other internet boxes that hook to our TV's either. It would still be nice to see more videos on TV. Even MTV 2 shifted away from music videos.
Quote from: Dave on Yesterday at 10:42:15 AM
And even the broadcast subchannels trying to do all videos are doomed; it's easily the worst subchannel format that guarantees you little advertising. Bohemian Music Project and The Tube have already died, TheCoolTV is on life support after the mass Sinclair/Jourrnal drop, and The Country Network looks to be the same way. When a YouTube search provides you instant gratification, it's a better choice for sure rather than waiting through a Leann Rimes megaset to get to Carrie Underwood's new video. And generally I completely loathe MTV and CMT's "you can't tell who this is without a name in front of your face through the whole video because you're an idiot" presentations of videos on their networks, along with their moronic refusals to upgrade their master controls to play HD videos until this August.
And even the broadcast subchannels trying to do all videos are doomed; it's easily the worst subchannel format that guarantees you little advertising. Bohemian Music Project and The Tube have already died, TheCoolTV is on life support after the mass Sinclair/Jourrnal drop, and The Country Network looks to be the same way. When a YouTube search provides you instant gratification, it's a better choice for sure rather than waiting through a Leann Rimes megaset to get to Carrie Underwood's new video. And generally I completely loathe MTV and CMT's "you can't tell who this is without a name in front of your face through the whole video because you're an idiot" presentations of videos on their networks, along with their moronic refusals to upgrade their master controls to play HD videos until this August.
I always thought it was the growing cost of music royalties that led (M)TV, C(M)T and (VH)1 to shift their music videos to the morning hours, as opposed to the late afternoons/evenings when there are more eyeballs. First I heard of this was right around the time MTV canned "Total Request Live."
DToTheJ said:
I think thats a much larger part of the story, that is completely neglected by the parody video (understandably, because its a boring business answer).
MTV and the other "video" networks, though, are in the business of providing content. Creating and providing content has shown to be more lucrative than to be the shill for the record labels, and plugging someone else's product.
What would have been interesting is if individual record labels had started their own cable music video channels back in the 80s, that only played their artists. It would have fostered an interesting competition.
justpassingthough said:
The history here is interesting. Warner Amex was the company that founded MTV. It was a joint venture of Warner Communications(owner of Warner Brothers Records and a bunch of cable companies) and American Express. I've heard that Warner artists never received any preferential treatment even though their parent company owned MTV. Because of the way it was run, MTV was fair to all labels. At the time, RCA Records was still owned by RCA and NBC, Columbia Records was still owned by CBS, and MCA Records was owned by MCA Universal. All American media entertainment companies. Each or all of them could have started their own cable channel, but they didn't. And Warner Amex sold MTV to Viacom in 1984.
Record labels have really been unable and unwilling to broaden themselves into other businesses. You'd think they would have gotten into the retail business, so they could own their own sales platform. But they put all their marbles in outside distributors and retail chains, and ended up losing big when consumers wanted to download. Today they still don't own a sales platform, and depend on other companies to sell their content. They have tried to build their own internet platforms, and invested heavily in Vevo, and it has really been a flop. Sure all their artists use it, but it's a cumbersome platform that takes too long to load, and the advertising is more annoying than YouTube.
It's one of those things where proprietary systems and greed have interfered with logical synergies. Today, only Disney has figured out how to synergize content and delivery.
The music industry has shown to be the least flexible to the changing market landscape, and obviously to their own detriment. If they would have been wise, they would have diversified into record stores, cable music channels and eventually, into online distribution. Their lack of ability to evolve is somewhat appalling, and it even stands out compared to the ways other media (primarily TV and movie studios) have evolved and responded to changes in the way that their products are delivered.
What is even more baffling is that, as was pointed out, the owners of music labels, especially under corporate consolidation, are giant corporations with deep pockets and the ability to diversify. Its not like we are talking about the mom and pop record labels starting a chain of 2,000 nationwide record stores. Interestingly, these same mom and pop record labels now seem to be in a better position to respond to the changing market, as they're actually willing to try something so daring like ditching retail for straight online sales (see Radiohead's last album).
What is even more baffling is that, as was pointed out, the owners of music labels, especially under corporate consolidation, are giant corporations with deep pockets and the ability to diversify. Its not like we are talking about the mom and pop record labels starting a chain of 2,000 nationwide record stores. Interestingly, these same mom and pop record labels now seem to be in a better position to respond to the changing market, as they're actually willing to try something so daring like ditching retail for straight online sales (see Radiohead's last album).
TheBigA said:
Thats an interesting argument. Largely, non American (mostly European) corporations buying American media companies has been disastrous. Vivendi's purchase of Universal comes to mind.
I go to libraries a lot and it appears a lot of people who use the Internet, many of them black, do just that.ansky212 said:
- Status