By now most have heard news of Radiohead‘s release of their new album In Rainbows. While the excitement of a new album is always an event, the media spotlight has been on the music business ramifations. The decision to forgo the major distributors and labels (or any label for that matter) and offer a download-only release for purchase definitely raised eyebrows in the industry, as did the fact that buyers can pay as much (or as little) they want; whatever amount they feel the album is worth to them.
What people are wondering though is how much impact it will have on the crumbling dinosaur music industry? Is this groundbreaking a move to go it alone or simply an isolated experiment by an elite band who has the cash security to make such a move? In the long run it will probably prove to be both.
A band of Radiohead’s caliber might have the financial means to be able bypass and even surpass anything they would’ve earned by a traditional release, how many other bands can do the same? While they are nearly giving away the download, how many other bands have a devoted enough fan base to fork over so much for the almost overly-spendy collector boxset?
Another question in people’s minds is how much the consumers will be willing to offer for the download only version. Will they take advantage of the system and donate a penny? Will they pay a normal, yet reasonable price? I suppose it doesn’t matter since any money earned by that is essentially free money from people who would have illegally downloaded the leaked album anyway. Radiohead essentially just leaked their own album.
Already people have formed their own opinion as quickly as people pre-ordered from the band’s shakey website (is this a sign of looming difficulties next week when hundreds of thousands of people try to download at the same time?), so it will be interesting to see how this will all play out in the long run. Thoughts?
How is the media reacting? Here is a quick rundown of some selected readings:
Pop Matters: Radiohead throws down the guantlet
New York Times: Radiohead Lets Fans Decide What to Pay for Its New Album
New York Times – The Lede: Radiohead Album Pricetag ‘Its Up to You’
NME: Chart Eligibility in Doubt
Village Voice: Radiohead’s Brilliant Publicity Stunt
Idolator , Cranky industry insider Bob Lefsetz , Salon , Wired, Time
UPDATE 10\4: At this point it appears that more people are willing to pay at least something for the album than stealing. Through mostly anecdotal evidence, NY Times reports that most buyers have offered reasonable amounts for In Rainbows rather than trying to go the cheap route… if for nothing else as a way to support the band on principle alone. Radiohead has also indicated that a majority of the preorders have been for the pricey box set rather than the digital download.
Interestingly, as the article cites, the album has become a great test subject in behavioral economics and ethics:
Mr. Loewenstein, whose specialty is behavioral economics and who has studied the relationship between emotions and financial decision-making, added: “It’s almost like supporting a sports team or donating to a political candidate. You’re selling to the world how much you like them by how much you pay.†Most important, he said, “how much you are willing to pay signals something to yourself about who you are: are you exploitative? Are you a tightwad?â€
some thoughts. i will pay probably 15. it’s good for the concience, and instead of getting three cents they will get, fifteen. and none will go the the ceo’s coke habit. it’s a smart, if incredibly simple idea. and somehow i think all of this mass press is probably annoying to them. but whatever, they are superstars, so it goes with the territory.
my question- does a band have to go through the big label contract phase to make this work? can someone make money and establish worldwide fame without ever having a record contract or physical distribution pipeline? if not, then does this really signal the end of the music biz as we know it? i mean, for every radiohead that jumps ship there are twenty britneys that make gobs of money. so the labels still serve that purpose, although im not sure what the purpose of britney music is. although toxic was a great single.
So far It looks like this experiment was a success. My download was super fast, and if the rumors are true, the band was able to make some dime off of the release anyhow.
Along with Prince, Cake, and a few other major bands and producers, hopefully this is signalling a change. I can only hope that this more democratic music industry will evolve and that the major labels can take their place pimping the britneys, which we can ignore and follow artist that are making real music with less and less corporate influence. Now if only they can all take on the scalpers like Garth Brooks is in Kansas City…