This is a very interesting question I have been wanting to ask, and this looks like the perfect place to ask it since there are so many people here to learn from. This issue involves whether radio stations are supposed to be paying music services for playing their songs.
Now before we go any further, I admit I don't know all the details, which is why I am asking you, but it was in issue that had been bugging me for years. I hope I can get an answer here. So let me set this up:
When I first got in radio at WWCU, I spent 3 and a half years learning as much about radio as I could. My major was RTV so I spent a huge amount of time in radio. From radio announcer to Sports Director and other things, I learned a ton about radio. We always got promotional material from record labels and it just seemed like that was the way it works. They want play, they send free...I say again... FREE music so the stations could push it.
When I graduated and worked for a station in Goldsboro, it kinda worked the same way, but I wasn't as involved in the station as I was in college. I actually ended up leaving the station because it was costing me more to go back and forth, and the owner was cheap (pardon me while I laugh, that is kinda like several other local radio stations).
I then went to WVOT the Beach and Shag station for awhile and had more fun there, and learned more about how the business of radio works. This was stuff I didn't learn in college, but much of it was based off fundamentals. I worked there for a bit, then left radio for a bit, and came back later, and found that WVOT was now run by a church. I was hired to help them out, and it was THEN that I saw something I had not seen before.
They were paying some music information business based on the songs they were playing.
I didn't understand that. Why was the radio station PAYING for the songs they play? I had never heard that before, and I asked the General Manager about that. He said that is what they was supposed to do, but it didn't make sense to me. Record labels send music free to radio stations so they can get free promotion, why then must radio stations pay for playing the songs that were originally sent free?
The way I understood it, we had to, on a certain time of the year, write down EVERY song we play on shift, for the duration I think of a week. After that, the GM sends the list in and I think BMI or some representive decides how much the station would have to pay. It wasn't like $3 a song or anything like that, more like I think 5 cents per song depending on if those artists, or to be more precise, the writers of those songs, were members of BMI or some other music industry.
I don't know how much it came out to be,but I assume the station paid it, and I was stumped as to why the station was being charged for that. It just seemed like the people working there assumed that was the way it was.
Now, I understand in part the idea that when it comes to royalties, it is the author of the song that should be paid, but I was also under the understanding that when a record label sends you free music, it is in promotion to their artists.
For example, if I had a song (yeah, right) and I was with a record label, they might send two or three promotional copies to a radio station, in hopes that they would play my song. It's a gamble because they station does not have to, but if they did, then it would be possible that the record label could make some sales off that transaction.
If a radio station serving 10,000 people plays a song, even if a half of one percent like it enough to buy that CD, that means 50 people buying that particular CD...which would be worth the free promotional CD the record label sent.
Now, if that is true, then the idea is that there is a free exchange of services and products...a barter. The record label gets free airplay, the station gets free music. So why then does the station have to turn around and pay BMI or services like that for products they are promoting free of charge?
I have talked to some people on this, and some say they have never heard of that before, some say that yes, you have to pay royalties. It's not like when a movie uses a song and must pay royalties, or if an artist samples from another artist, radio stations play those songs for promotional use (in theory). But I suppose that because stations DO make money off the music they play (via spots and time) then technically they are making money off those artists, and thus should pay some form of royalties.
So I just don't know. What is the reasoning on this?
Now before we go any further, I admit I don't know all the details, which is why I am asking you, but it was in issue that had been bugging me for years. I hope I can get an answer here. So let me set this up:
When I first got in radio at WWCU, I spent 3 and a half years learning as much about radio as I could. My major was RTV so I spent a huge amount of time in radio. From radio announcer to Sports Director and other things, I learned a ton about radio. We always got promotional material from record labels and it just seemed like that was the way it works. They want play, they send free...I say again... FREE music so the stations could push it.
When I graduated and worked for a station in Goldsboro, it kinda worked the same way, but I wasn't as involved in the station as I was in college. I actually ended up leaving the station because it was costing me more to go back and forth, and the owner was cheap (pardon me while I laugh, that is kinda like several other local radio stations).
I then went to WVOT the Beach and Shag station for awhile and had more fun there, and learned more about how the business of radio works. This was stuff I didn't learn in college, but much of it was based off fundamentals. I worked there for a bit, then left radio for a bit, and came back later, and found that WVOT was now run by a church. I was hired to help them out, and it was THEN that I saw something I had not seen before.
They were paying some music information business based on the songs they were playing.
I didn't understand that. Why was the radio station PAYING for the songs they play? I had never heard that before, and I asked the General Manager about that. He said that is what they was supposed to do, but it didn't make sense to me. Record labels send music free to radio stations so they can get free promotion, why then must radio stations pay for playing the songs that were originally sent free?
The way I understood it, we had to, on a certain time of the year, write down EVERY song we play on shift, for the duration I think of a week. After that, the GM sends the list in and I think BMI or some representive decides how much the station would have to pay. It wasn't like $3 a song or anything like that, more like I think 5 cents per song depending on if those artists, or to be more precise, the writers of those songs, were members of BMI or some other music industry.
I don't know how much it came out to be,but I assume the station paid it, and I was stumped as to why the station was being charged for that. It just seemed like the people working there assumed that was the way it was.
Now, I understand in part the idea that when it comes to royalties, it is the author of the song that should be paid, but I was also under the understanding that when a record label sends you free music, it is in promotion to their artists.
For example, if I had a song (yeah, right) and I was with a record label, they might send two or three promotional copies to a radio station, in hopes that they would play my song. It's a gamble because they station does not have to, but if they did, then it would be possible that the record label could make some sales off that transaction.
If a radio station serving 10,000 people plays a song, even if a half of one percent like it enough to buy that CD, that means 50 people buying that particular CD...which would be worth the free promotional CD the record label sent.
Now, if that is true, then the idea is that there is a free exchange of services and products...a barter. The record label gets free airplay, the station gets free music. So why then does the station have to turn around and pay BMI or services like that for products they are promoting free of charge?
I have talked to some people on this, and some say they have never heard of that before, some say that yes, you have to pay royalties. It's not like when a movie uses a song and must pay royalties, or if an artist samples from another artist, radio stations play those songs for promotional use (in theory). But I suppose that because stations DO make money off the music they play (via spots and time) then technically they are making money off those artists, and thus should pay some form of royalties.
So I just don't know. What is the reasoning on this?