Survey: XM, Sirius Should Pay More For Music - Forbes.com: "In a joint statement Thursday, XM and Sirius said: '?Consumers, artists and the recording industry all benefit from satellite radio's multi-billion dollar investment in a dynamic new promotional platform for music.
'?Together we have paid, and under our fair proposal, will continue to pay significant compensation to artists and their record companies. By contrast, our primary competition, terrestrial radio, pays nothing for the sound recordings it uses.'"
Maybe I'm missing something here, but how in hell is it fair terrestrialrial radio to pay no royalties for the music it broadcasts, while satellite radio has to pony up the bucks? Does exposure to the satellite audience cost the labels or artists anything? Puh-leeze!
And let's not forget that satellite radio offers its audience a much wider spectrum of music than is available on terrestrial radio. I reguarly and frequently buy songs from iTunes that I hear on Sirius. And the stuff I buy is stuff I will never hear on terrestrial radio.
This all smacks of yet another example that the major labels just don't have a clue. As a business move, their insistence on hanging on to the blockbuster mentality is flat-out stupid.
Bob Rhubart: Humor. Opinion. Comment. Rants. Neurosis. Sometimes all at once.
No comments:
Post a Comment