Browsing Category

News

Who Gets the Royalties When You Buy Band Merch in High Street Shops?

Posted on 13 September 2024

Ever wondered where the cash goes when someone picks up a Ramones, Rolling Stones or Nirvana t-shirt in high street stores such as H&M or Primark? The answer to who receives the royalties when a band’s brand almost becomes bigger than its sound mostly boils down to whether or not the artist kept hold of their merchandising rights.

Bands like the Ramones, or more specifically, the estates or surviving members of the band, generally receive royalties from the sale of merchandise featuring their name, likeness, or logos, depending on the legal agreements in place. However, the situation is often more complex than it appears for iconic bands which tend to have diverse approaches to managing their merchandise rights. How they handle these rights varies based on factors like their business acumen, the management they had during their peak, and the longevity of their popularity.

Here’s how other notable bands have managed their merch:

The Beatles

The Beatles were pioneers not just in music but also in merchandising. Their legacy is one of the most heavily controlled and protected in the music industry. Apple Corps Ltd., the company founded by the band in 1968, still manages their branding and image. Any official Beatles merchandise, from T-shirts to toys, must be licensed through Apple Corps, which means the band’s estate or surviving members still receive a cut from sales.

In fact, The Beatles are so protective of their image that Apple Corps has been known to pursue legal action against unauthorised use of their name or likeness. Consequently, any Beatles-themed merchandise in shops like Primark or H&M is almost certainly licensed, and the band’s estate profits from it.

Nirvana

Nirvana’s branding, including their iconic smiley face logo, is another example of heavily managed merchandising. After Kurt Cobain’s death, Courtney Love (his widow) initially controlled much of the rights to Nirvana’s name and likeness. Over time, those rights have been shared with surviving members, like Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic, and Cobain’s estate.

Nirvana merchandise continues to sell well in mainstream fashion retailers. This success has led to disputes over trademark ownership. In 2020, Love sued Marc Jacobs for allegedly using the smiley face logo without proper licensing. This highlights the legal complexity behind who profits from band merchandise, particularly when the members have passed away or the band has disbanded.

Led Zeppelin

Led Zeppelin has taken a very careful and selective approach to licensing their brand. The band controls their merchandise through their company, Warner Music Group’s Warner Music Artist Services. Their merchandising strategy has been somewhat minimalist, focusing on premium products and collaborations with high-end designers. While you might not find their merchandise as easily in stores like H&M, the band and their representatives likely receive significant royalties from the more exclusive deals they make.

The band members, particularly Jimmy Page and Robert Plant, have been notoriously strict about licensing. This ensures that any merchandise sold is not only officially licensed but also provides a solid revenue stream for them.

KISS

If there’s one band synonymous with the concept of merchandising, it’s KISS. From action figures to coffins (yes, really), KISS has mastered the art of turning their image into an empire. Gene Simmons, the band’s co-founder, is known for his entrepreneurial spirit and has made merchandising a core part of KISS’s business model.

KISS doesn’t just license merchandise—they actively seek out new opportunities for branded products. As a result, the band reportedly earns more from merchandise sales than from music itself. In retail settings like Primark or H&M, you’re likely to find a wealth of KISS-branded items, all officially licensed with royalties funnelling back to the band.

The Rolling Stones

The Rolling Stones’ iconic “tongue and lips” logo is one of the most recognisable in music history, and the band has capitalised on it extensively. Managed by Bravado, Universal Music Group’s merchandising division, their branding is seen across a wide range of products, from high-end fashion collaborations to budget-friendly apparel in mainstream retailers.

The Stones have maintained strict control over their image and branding, ensuring that they see revenue from all officially licensed products. The band’s management is highly protective of their intellectual property, and Mick Jagger and Keith Richards have long been known for their business savvy, ensuring a steady stream of income from merchandise sales.

Metallica

Metallica is another band that has managed to maintain strong control over their merch. Through their company, Metallica’s Blackened Recordings, they’ve taken steps to ensure their branding is protected and well-managed. Like The Beatles and Nirvana, Metallica actively seeks out partnerships with major retailers and ensures that their brand is represented officially.

Interestingly, Metallica has also embraced more affordable merchandise lines, allowing their fans to access products at various price points. This strategy helps keep their name visible and ensures that they receive royalties from a broad range of retail outlets.

Summary of Merchandise Management Approaches:

Strict Control: Bands like The Beatles and Led Zeppelin manage their merchandising carefully, often working through established companies like Apple Corps or Warner Music Group to ensure quality control and royalty protection.
Aggressive Licensing: KISS, in particular, is a master of aggressive merchandising, turning every aspect of their brand into a product. Their approach is more entrepreneurial, focusing on volume and visibility.
Legacy Protection: Bands like Nirvana and Ramones face complex legal scenarios when it comes to their merch. Often, the rights are split among estates and surviving members, leading to occasional disputes or inconsistent financial returns.

Each band’s situation is unique, but in general, the more control they’ve maintained over their brand and image, the more they can benefit from merch sales in major retailers.

If you’re an independent artist looking to increase your revenue streams through merch, read our guide on how to boost sales.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

How Starmer’s Proposed Smoking Ban Could Harm the Live Music Industry and Nightlife Economy

Posted on 2 September 2024

That brief glimmer of hope we had when Starmer’s Labour Party became the new sitting government has been drastically obscured by his new proposed plans to introduce an outdoor smoking ban in the UK. Of all the issues he could have turned his immediate attention to, this is what he chose to introduce into public discourse after giving us the bleak promise that things are going to get worse before they get better, something I am sure the record-breaking number of people using foodbanks in the UK were delighted to hear.

While details of his plan remain unclear at present, many key figures in the hospitality sector have expressed their concerns about the new proposed measures, given that many hospitality venues are still recovering from the COVID-19 lockdowns. The anxieties are hardly unfounded given that after the indoor smoking ban was introduced in the UK, approximately 7,000 pubs were closed between 2007 and 2015.

If a smoking ban is to be introduced to pub beer gardens, outside hospitality, sports grounds and nightclub smoking areas, it is highly unlikely that people will be able to nip out for a smoke between sets if they see a gig at a pub, grassroots venue, arena or stadium.

Yet, the issue runs much deeper, as discussed below, the music industry depends on the nightlife economy; if anything tips the balance and reduces footfall in venues where music is the primary source of entertainment, we could be saying goodbye to far more of our favourite venues.

So, even if you think that it is a disgusting habit, disregard the news by reasoning that most people vape nowadays or look forward to a future when you never have to go out in public and get caught in someone’s second-hand smoke, the ramifications of the proposed ban could seriously harm the late night economy, and in turn, the music industry.

How a Dwindling Nightlife Economy Could Harm the Music Industry

To understand the severity of the implications of the proposed ban, it is crucial to understand that the music industry functions as a complex ecosystem, with every component intricately connected to another. Live music venues, including clubs and bars, are crucial hubs within this system, where emerging and established artists alike engage with their audiences. These spaces are cultural incubators where new sounds and trends are born and thrive.

If the proposed smoking ban in the UK discourages people from frequenting these places, the impact could ripple across the entire industry. Reduced footfall in clubs and live music venues could lead to fewer opportunities for artists to perform, resulting in less exposure and, consequently, fewer chances to grow their fanbase. This would not only stifle the growth of upcoming talent but also affect the viability of venues that rely heavily on regular patrons.

Moreover, the knock-on effect could harm related sectors within the industry, such as event promoters, sound engineers, and even record labels that depend on the vibrancy of live music to scout and develop new artists. In this interconnected ecosystem, any decline in one area—such as club attendance—can have far-reaching consequences, ultimately weakening the entire music industry’s ability to innovate and thrive.

How Hard an Outdoor Smoking Ban Could Hit the Music Industry

An outdoor smoking ban in the UK, particularly one that encompasses areas around music venues, could have several unintended negative consequences for the music industry beyond the obvious decrease in club attendance and reduced exposure for artists.

Firstly, the social aspect of smoking plays a significant role in the live music experience. For many, stepping outside for a cigarette is not just a personal habit but an opportunity to socialise, network, and discuss the music they are hearing. If this aspect is curtailed, the sense of community that thrives in live music settings could diminish, leading to a more isolated experience. This could alter the atmosphere of live events, making them less appealing and vibrant, which could, in turn, reduce overall attendance.

Secondly, the financial implications for venues could be severe. Many live music venues, particularly smaller ones, operate on tight margins. If fewer people attend because they are discouraged by the smoking ban, venues might struggle to stay afloat. This could lead to a reduction in the number of available spaces for live performances, which would limit opportunities for musicians to play, especially emerging artists who often rely on smaller, independent venues to launch their careers.

Another potential consequence is the impact on event planning and logistics. Smoking areas, often outside the main venue space, are places where patrons can briefly escape the crowded, noisy environment inside. If outdoor smoking is banned, the lack of designated areas might lead to crowding issues indoors, impacting the overall experience. This could lead to stricter venue capacity regulations and increased operational costs, further squeezing the profitability of events.

In summary, an outdoor smoking ban could have far-reaching implications, not only by reducing attendance but also by affecting the social dynamics, financial stability, and operational logistics of the live music scene in the UK.

In Conclusion

While the proposed outdoor smoking ban may seem like a well-intentioned public health measure, its broader implications could be far more damaging than anticipated, particularly for the live music industry and the nightlife economy.

The ban threatens to disrupt the delicate ecosystem that the music industry relies on, potentially leading to fewer opportunities for artists, financial strain on already struggling venues, and a less vibrant and connected social atmosphere at live events.

As we navigate these financially tenuous times, it’s crucial to consider the far-reaching consequences of such policies, not just for individual habits, but for the cultural fabric that binds our communities together. Ignoring these potential outcomes could lead to a significant loss for both the music industry and the public, stripping away the venues and experiences that are the last source of serotonin for most.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

How to Increase Monthly Listeners on Spotify

Posted on 24 August 2024

After the industry rushed to celebrate Billie Eilish becoming the third artist to reach the 100 million monthly Spotify listeners milestone which led to the Weeknd being knocked off his pedestal as the most popular artist on the platform, it became irrefutably clear that monthly listeners matter just as much as the number of streams you are able to amass on your most popular tracks.

However, it is extremely likely that independent artists vastly overestimate how many monthly listeners they need to be revered as among the most popular artists on Spotify.

If you have 1,000 monthly listeners on Spotify, you’re officially in the top 8% of musicians on Spotify. If that number grows to near the 100k monthly listeners mark, you can celebrate being in the top 1% of artists on Spotify. Achieving those kinds of figures as an independent artist may be difficult, but it isn’t a pipe dream.

This article will cover why paying attention to metrics such as your monthly listeners on Spotify is important, and most crucially, share tips on how to ensure your monthly listener count doesn’t plateau or drastically diminish following promotional campaigns.

Why Monthly Listener Metrics Matter

Metrics such as monthly listeners, streams, and likes provide unique insights into different aspects of reach and engagement. Here’s a breakdown of why monthly listeners matter and how they compare to streams and likes:

Monthly Listeners: Reach and Active Audience

Monthly listener metrics indicate the number of unique listeners who have streamed an artist’s music at least once within 28 days. This figure is crucial because it reflects the breadth of an artist’s audience and gives a sense of how many people are actively engaging with their music regularly.

Audience Scope: Monthly listeners provide a snapshot of how many people are tuning in to an artist’s music over a specific period, highlighting the artist’s overall reach. A high number of monthly listeners suggests a wide audience that isn’t just concentrated among a few loyal fans but spans across various demographics and regions.
Engagement Over Time: While streams can fluctuate based on releases or promotional efforts, monthly listeners offer a more stable view of an artist’s ongoing appeal. It’s possible for an artist to have high streams from a viral hit but fewer monthly listeners if most of those streams come from a small, dedicated fanbase repeatedly playing the track.

Streams: Depth of Engagement

Streams represent the total number of times an artist’s songs have been played. This metric is essential for understanding how popular a specific track or body of work is, as it counts every individual play, regardless of whether it’s from the same listener or different ones.

Track Popularity: High stream counts often indicate a hit song or successful album. However, streams don’t differentiate between a song that a few people play on repeat and one that is played by a wide audience.
Monetary Value: Streams are also tied directly to royalties. More streams typically mean more revenue for the artist, though the per-stream payout is often low. Therefore, streams are vital from a financial standpoint, even if they don’t necessarily reflect the breadth of the audience.

Likes: Fan Loyalty and Fandom

Likes on Spotify, typically seen as the number of times users have “liked” or “saved” a song or album, are a direct indicator of fan loyalty. When a user likes a track, it’s often added to their personal library or playlist, meaning they are likely to return to it regularly.

Long-Term Engagement: Likes can be an indicator of how many listeners are committed fans. If a listener takes the time to like a track, they’re signalling a deeper level of engagement and an intention to revisit the music, which could indicate potential for future streams and continued support.
Algorithmic Boost: Likes can also influence Spotify’s algorithm, making it more likely that the song will be recommended to other users, thereby potentially increasing both streams and monthly listeners.

Why Monthly Listeners Matter Most:

In the context of overall reach and potential growth, monthly listeners might be the most significant metric because it reflects how many people are being exposed to an artist’s music on an ongoing basis. It’s a broader measure of an artist’s active audience and potential market. While streams and likes are important, especially in terms of financial gain and gauging fan loyalty, monthly listeners provide a clearer picture of an artist’s relevance and ability to maintain an active and expanding fanbase.

How to Increase Monthly Listeners on Spotify

Increasing monthly listeners on Spotify as an independent artist involves a combination of promotion, engagement with your audience, and leveraging the platform’s features. Here are some effective tactics:

Consistent Release Schedule:
- Release new music regularly to keep your audience engaged.
- Drop singles before an album to build anticipation and maintain visibility.
Leverage Social Media:
- Promote your Spotify tracks on social media.
- Use stories and posts to direct followers to your Spotify profile.
- Engage with your audience through live sessions or Q&A to build a stronger connection.
Collaborate with Other Artists:
- Partner with other musicians for features or joint tracks to tap into their fanbase.
- Consider remixing tracks with different artists to reach diverse audiences.
Pitch to Spotify Playlists:
- Submit your tracks to Spotify’s editorial playlists through the Spotify for Artists dashboard.
- Aim for inclusion in user-generated playlists by networking with playlist curators.
- Create your own playlists, featuring your music alongside tracks by popular artists in similar genres.
Optimise Your Spotify Profile:
- Ensure your artist profile is complete with a professional bio, high-quality images, and links to your social media.
- Use Spotify Canvas (the short looping visuals) to make your tracks more engaging.
- Update your profile regularly with new releases and relevant content.
Engage with Your Audience:
- Use Spotify’s built-in tools like Marquee to promote your new releases.
- Send updates to your fans through Spotify’s email and push notifications.
- Encourage fans to follow your profile and save your music to their libraries.
Cross-Promote with Other Platforms:
- Share your Spotify links in newsletters, blogs, and other music distribution platforms like Bandcamp or SoundCloud.
- Use music blogs, podcasts, and YouTube channels to promote your music and direct traffic to Spotify.
Focus on Quality and Uniqueness:
- Invest in high-quality production to make your tracks stand out.
- Develop a unique sound or brand that makes you distinctive and memorable.
Engage with Local and Niche Communities:
- Participate in local music events or online communities that align with your genre.
- Build relationships with local radio stations or DJs who can play your tracks and promote your Spotify profile.
Use Paid Advertising:
- Invest in targeted ads on social media platforms, directing users to your Spotify tracks.
- Consider using Spotify Ads Studio to create audio ads that promote your music directly to listeners on Spotify.

By integrating these strategies, you can steadily grow your monthly listeners, increase your visibility, and build a loyal fanbase on Spotify.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Can We Ever Be Entirely Objective About Music?

Posted on 15 August 2024

The question of whether we can ever be entirely objective about music goes beyond personal taste, touching on the intersections of psychology, culture, and personal experience. After all, Music is an art form deeply intertwined with human emotion, identity, and societal context, which complicates the notion of pure sonic objectivity.

Firstly, it’s crucial to acknowledge that music, by its very nature, is subjective. It is an art form that is designed to evoke emotions, provoke thought, and connect with individuals on a personal level. The interpretation of music is inherently influenced by the listener’s personal experiences, cultural background, and emotional state at the time of listening. For instance, a piece of classical music might be appreciated for its technical complexity by one person, while another might find it dull or overly complex based on their tastes and exposure to different music genres. On the flipside, house music can be appreciated for its hypnotically infectious rhythms which are built on repetitive beats and basslines, while others, who prefer variation in melody, rhythm and structure, will find the 4/4 beat monotonous and the lack of narrative disengaging.

The Complexity of Objectivity in Music: Navigating Personal, Cultural, and Emotional Influences

Even music critics, myself included, who often strive for objectivity in their analyses, are not immune to these influences. While we can apply criteria such as technical skill, originality, production quality, the sharpness of the hooks and lyrical content, these reviews are still filtered through their own personal biases and cultural lenses. A critic’s background, preferences, and even mood can influence their interpretation and review of a piece of music. This is why reviews can vary widely from one critic to another; what one considers a masterpiece, another might find underwhelming or pedestrian.

Moreover, the cultural context cannot be overlooked. Music is often a reflection of the society in which it is created, and different cultures have different musical traditions, scales, and rhythms that may appeal to some and not others. What might be considered beautiful and innovative in one culture could be perceived as discordant or alien in another. This cultural subjectivity means that complete objectivity is elusive, as music cannot be separated from the cultural and social contexts that shape both its creation and reception.

Furthermore, the emotional impact of music is highly personal. A song that resonates deeply with one individual might leave another unmoved. This is because music often acts as a trigger for memories and emotions, making the experience of listening unique to each person. The subjective nature of this experience means that different people will always have different opinions on the same piece of music.

Emotional Connections and Personal Relationships

Music has the uncanny ability to act as a bridge between individuals, linking us to the people who matter most in our lives. A single melody can recall a special moment shared with a loved one or reignite feelings from a past relationship. These emotional associations often develop from experiences such as listening to a parent’s favourite songs, celebrating with friends, or even mourning losses. The tracks that soundtrack these moments become more than just sounds; they are imbued with memories and emotions that shape our personal music landscape.

The Impact of Timing in Musical Discovery

The circumstances under which we discover a piece of music significantly colour our perception of it. For many, a song that serves as a solace during a challenging period may hold a special place in their heart long after the difficulty has passed; this is why our coming-of-age soundtracks stick with us throughout our lives. The music which salved growing pains continues to bring us comfort when the disorientating confusion of adolescence is far behind us in the rearview mirror. This phenomenon is a testament to music’s role as a therapeutic tool, not just an auditory experience. The timing of a song’s introduction into our lives can make it almost impossible to detach the music from the context, thus influencing our judgement about its value and meaning.

The Influence of Discovery Mode

How we come across new music can also affect our appreciation of it. When a song comes recommended by a friend whose taste we respect, we are more likely to give it a chance with a positive predisposition. Conversely, when we feel pressured to enjoy certain tracks, perhaps due to their popularity or critical acclaim, our natural inclination might be to resist. This resistance can stem from a desire for autonomy in our choices or from a backlash against perceived mainstream coercion. The mode of discovery, therefore, plays a crucial role in shaping our emotional engagement with music. Few music discovery experiences match the moments when we catch a track by chance and instantly connect with it on a visceral and intrinsic level.

The Cultural and Societal Context

Beyond personal and situational factors, the cultural and societal context in which we experience music also plays a significant role in our subjective interpretations. Music often reflects the values, struggles, and aspirations of the culture it originates from.

Listeners from different backgrounds may therefore react uniquely to the same piece of music, influenced by their own cultural narratives and societal norms. This diversity in reception highlights the difficulty in establishing a universal, objective standard for music appreciation. While there are some artists who can appeal to a broad spectrum of people from all walks of life, and transcend age, genre and cultural boundaries, such as The Beatles, for the most part, universal appeal is unviable, and it is unrealistic and counter-productive for artists to attempt to appeal to the masses.

Conclusion

The depth of our interaction with music is influenced by a mosaic of factors, from deeply personal connections to broader cultural contexts. These elements intertwine to form a unique auditory experience that is profoundly personal and subjective. Given this complexity, it seems unlikely that we can ever truly detach our evaluations of music from our individual experiences and cultural backgrounds. Thus, while objectivity in music appreciation is an appealing concept, it remains largely unattainable. Music, by nature, is destined to be experienced subjectively, resonating differently with each listener, shaped by the myriad threads of their lives.

The beauty of music lies in its ability to mean different things to different people, and it is this diversity of interpretation that makes music such a rich and vital part of human culture.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

If Film & TV is ‘Second Screen’ Content, What Hope is There for Music?

Posted on 11 August 2024

If you’re no longer content to consume one mode of media, you’re not alone. The prospect of consuming media through a single mode feels increasingly antiquated due to the profound influence of technology on our attention spans and habits.

The surge of smartphones and the internet has reshaped expectations, fostering an environment where constant stimulation and instant gratification are the norms. Gone are the days when people truly invested in music by tuning out from the world and tuning into the sound by letting the thematic nature of the instrumentals wash over them, allowing the lyrics to resonate, and feeling the emotion conveyed in the vocals.

It is becoming increasingly evident that it isn’t possible to truly connect to a track or an album if your attention is divided between the sonic experience and doomscrolling on social media, browsing the internet for your new material dopamine fix or sharing the latest viral video.

With that in mind, this article will examine how our tendency to constantly seek distraction through digital stimuli is reshaping the entertainment industry and diminishing the connections we forge with music and media.

The Rise of the Scattered Attention Phenomenon

Our inability to fully engage with one mode of media is largely driven by the endless expanse of information and entertainment options readily available at our fingertips, encouraging a culture of multitasking and continuous partial attention. People now often find themselves seeking additional stimuli, even if the content they are engaging with has the capacity to fully immerse them in the experience.

The urge to reach for a phone or browse on a laptop while watching a show or listening to music can be attributed to an evolved consumer behaviour that values efficiency—engaging in multiple activities simultaneously is seen as making the most of one’s time. Social media platforms fuel this trend by integrating content consumption with social interaction, making solitary media consumption seem less appealing. Platforms encourage users to share reactions, participate in discussions, and connect with others over shared media experiences in real-time.

This shift also reflects deeper psychological needs for social connection and validation, which are satisfied by online interactions. The desire to be part of a community discussion or to not miss out on real-time events has transformed the way media is consumed, making dual or multiple modes of media consumption the new standard.

What Is Second Screen Content and How is it Relevant to the Music Industry?

The concept of “second screen” content is increasingly relevant in an era where streamers are shaping their narratives to accommodate the divided attention of viewers. This adaptation stems from a recognition that many viewers engage with multiple devices simultaneously, often treating the television as a second screen rather than the primary focus of their attention. The phenomenon reflects a broader shift in media consumption habits, where audiences expect to multitask and consume content across various platforms without fully engaging with any single one.

As Justine Bateman highlights in her interview with The Hollywood Reporter, there is a growing trend among streamers to produce what can essentially be described as “visual muzak.” This approach is designed to ensure that television shows do not require full attention from viewers, allowing them to split their focus between a second screen without losing track of the narrative. Such content is crafted to be straightforward and easy to follow, minimising the risk that viewers will feel lost if they shift their primary focus away from the TV to another device.

This approach, while pragmatic from a viewership retention standpoint, poses significant challenges for storytellers and creatives who are pressured to simplify their narratives. It potentially undermines the depth and complexity that can be achieved in storytelling, as the content must be accessible to someone who is not fully engaged.

Traditionally, music has been enjoyed as both an immersive and a background experience. However, today, it is becoming increasingly the latter, with the exception of watching music live. Yet, even when people pay for gig tickets and go out of their way to experience the music unfolding before them, how many people can last the full set before they reach for their phone to document the experience for social media or seek validation by checking for notifications?

This shift towards viewing music as a secondary form of stimuli or entertainment has significant implications for how deeply listeners connect with music. When music becomes just another element in the multitasking environment, listeners may be less likely to forge deep emotional connections with what they hear, impacting everything from fan loyalty to the cultural impact of new releases.

How Can the Music Industry Adapt to Accommodate Concentration Decay?

In response to the growing phenomenon of concentration decay, where listeners find it increasingly challenging to engage deeply with lengthy content due to fragmented attention spans, the music industry must innovate to retain relevance and engagement. Here are key strategies it can adopt. While they’re not perfect, they can help artists to make more of an impact with their releases.

Embrace Shorter Formats: Artists could focus on creating shorter tracks that capture attention quickly and fit more comfortably into the fragmented listening habits of today’s audience. This mirrors the trend seen on platforms like TikTok, where brief, catchy snippets can go viral, paving the way for broader interest in an artist’s work.
Introduce Interactive Experiences: Leveraging technology to make music listening a more interactive experience can help engage listeners. This could include interactive music videos, virtual reality concerts, or apps that allow listeners to customise aspects of a track. Such innovations can transform passive listening into an active, engaging process that holds the listener’s attention for longer.
Foster Community and Participation: Encouraging listener participation through social features, such as shared playlists, live streaming events, and fan voting on setlists or unreleased tracks, can increase engagement and prevent consumers from reaching for a second screen. Building a community around music listening helps counteract the isolation of digital consumption and encourages more devoted listening.

By adopting these strategies, the music industry can better accommodate listeners’ dwindling concentration spans and continue to thrive in a digital, distraction-filled world which has necessitated the term ‘second screen content’. However, the onus is also on the individual to rectify the damage smartphones and social media have done to their attention spans.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Should ‘Cancelled’ Artists in the Vein of Marilyn Manson Get a Second Shot of Redemption?

Posted on 3 August 2024

Marilyn Manson is back on the scene after getting sober, but even if he never touches another drop, there’s no way of his reputation coming clean after the spate of emotional, physical and sexual abuse allegations brought against him.

The most notable allegations came to light in February 2021 when actress Evan Rachel Wood publicly named Manson as her abuser on social media. Wood had previously spoken about being a survivor of domestic violence in her testimony before a House Judiciary Subcommittee in 2018, aiming to get the Sexual Assault Survivors’ Bill of Rights passed in all 50 states. However, it wasn’t until 2021 that she explicitly named Manson as her abuser. In her statement, Wood claimed that Manson had “horrifically abused [her] for years,” including manipulation, brainwashing, and various other forms of coercion, starting when she was a teenager.

Following Wood’s public disclosure, several other women came forward with their own allegations against Manson, echoing similar themes of manipulation, psychological abuse, and sexual misconduct. Among these accusers were Ashley Walters, Sarah McNeilly, and Ashley Lindsay Morgan, who shared their experiences via social media platforms, detailing disturbing accounts of their time with Manson. These women described a pattern of behaviour that involved Manson using his celebrity status to manipulate, control, and harm them in various ways.

How Marilyn Manson Reflected the Emepheral Nature of Accountability and Justice

The fallout from these accusations was swift in some respects, with Manson being dropped by his record label, Loma Vista Recordings, and being removed from television projects like American Gods and Creepshow. Furthermore, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department began an investigation into the abuse allegations surrounding Manson.

These accusations and their public nature have sparked broader conversations about accountability, the power dynamics in celebrity relationships, and the support structures needed for survivors of abuse. Manson, for his part, has denied the allegations, calling them “horrible distortions of reality.” His legal team has responded to various lawsuits, suggesting that these claims are part of a coordinated attack. As of now, the legal processes are ongoing, and the court of public opinion remains sharply divided on the issue.

Yet, there has been no shortage of interest in his recently announced tour. Even the name of the tour, ‘As Sick as the Secrets Within’, which shares the name of his recently released single, stings as a slight to all the women who have suffered at the pallid hand of the talc-dusted embodiment of the edgelord syndrome. The lyrics cloyingly and desperately attempt to elucidate his religious reformation while also portraying the extent of how guilty his conscience is over morose pedestrian melodies which forlornly paint Manson as the ultimate victim of his vices. He’s a different beast than he was in Antichrist Superstar, but has he really found the light, or is he attempting to use it to blind his fans from his previous sin?

Regardless of what he’s putting in his arsenal to stay relevant and put money in the bank, for as long as the industry enables abusers, women will suffer the success of artists who gain their power from popularity. Fame and fortune empower and embolden abusers, which brings to question, should musicians who have fallen from grace get a shot at redemption?

Is the Road for Redemption Open for Cancelled Artists?

The phenomenon of ‘cancelled’ artists raises intricate questions about justice, redemption, and societal values. As public figures fall from grace, the discourse often oscillates between calls for accountability and the potential for rehabilitation. This conversation becomes particularly charged in the context of musicians, where personal character and creative output are often deeply intertwined.

The music industry, with all its glamour and history of pushing boundaries is a sphere where misconduct can go unchecked, sometimes shielded by fame and financial influence. Women, in particular, have borne the brunt of this unchecked liberty, as evidenced by numerous accounts that have surfaced in recent years, detailing exploitative and abusive behaviours by prominent male musicians.

The #MeToo movement has been instrumental in bringing many of these stories to light, challenging the industry to confront its demons and reassess its moral and ethical standards.

The call for ‘cancellation’—a form of social ostracism where the public withdraws support for the offending artist—often follows revelations of particularly egregious behaviour. This mechanism, while serving as a tool for public accountability, does not necessarily equate to legal repercussions but aims to impact the cultural and commercial viability of the artist. However, the complexity arises when considering whether these artists should have a pathway to redemption and what that pathway should entail.

Redemption, in a cultural sense, requires genuine contrition, a commitment to change, and actions that demonstrate an understanding of past wrongs. It is not merely a public relations exercise but a profound personal transformation that must be evident over time. The public’s scepticism towards seemingly sudden transformations of troubled artists is not unfounded.

For instance, Marilyn Manson’s recent portrayal as “skinny, sober, and Christian” coincides with the release of his new album and a new record deal with Nuclear Blast Records. This raises critical questions about the sincerity of his transformation, especially given the timing aligns with a strategic attempt to revive a career marred by serious allegations of sexual abuse.

The severity of the allegations against such artists cannot be overshadowed by their attempts at image rehabilitation. Society’s eagerness to embrace a comeback story should not undermine the experiences of the victims or trivialise the gravity of the offences committed.

While forgiveness is a personal and sometimes necessary path for healing, it should not be confused with the public’s responsibility to hold individuals accountable for their actions. The entertainment industry, in its quest for profit, often blurs these lines, readily backing projects that promise financial returns, sometimes at the expense of ethical considerations.

Furthermore, the readiness with which some sections of the industry and the fan base accept such artists under the guise of a second chance can send a disheartening message to survivors of abuse. It perpetuates a cycle where financial gains overshadow moral accountability and where superficial changes are rewarded over substantive justice.

Conclusion

The question of whether fallen musicians deserve a shot at redemption is not a simple one. It necessitates a discerning approach from the public and the industry, emphasising that redemption should be rooted in real change, not just rebranding. The music industry must develop more robust mechanisms to address and prevent abusive behaviours. Ultimately, the journey back should be marked by a sincere commitment to change, underpinned by actions that speak louder than any comeback album ever could.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Can New Music Sustain in An Era Marked by Nostalgia and the Novelty Factor?

Posted on 26 July 2024

In the plight proliferated modern music industry, one of the biggest obstacles for contemporary artists to overcome is the disparity between how long it takes to create a new record and how long it remains relevant.

The definition of ‘new music’ tends to vary, with some sources claiming that ‘new music’ can be defined as music released in the last 12 months, but any independent artist attempting to market music more than a few months old will know all too well that it is an act of pure futility, as perfectly articulated by Kel from The Empty Page:

“It’s a funny thing when you release an album after several years of working to get it done and then it’s out in the world and you’ve done all the promo, run out of marketing budget and it’s now already seen as ‘old’ and everyone is wanting something even more ‘new’. It’s a relentless treadmill of ‘productivity’ this world and sometimes it really gets to me. The other day someone said to me: ‘Let me know when you have new music out and we’ll add it to our playlist’. Is a two-month-old album not new music? When does it stop being new? Why is new the most important thing anyway?”

Music journalists, playlisters and radio stations pride themselves on keeping their ears on the pulse of modern music, overlooking anything that was released beyond the lifespan of a moth. Yet, they aren’t solely to blame for the emphasis on the novelty factor; the attitudes of industry figureheads reflect broader attitudes of the music-consuming public, who are overcome with aural amnesia when it comes to music that is beyond a few months old.

At this point, I must profess that I’m scarcely a model music consumer. So far this year, I’ve hyper-fixated on albums from three of my favourite artists: Nadine Shah’s Filthy Underneath, Mother Mother’s Grief Factor, and Frank Carter’s Dark Rainbows were relentlessly spun. However, once I’d played the LPs on repeat and seen the album tours, the compulsion to revisit them seemed to fade, regardless of how visceral the initial obsession.

My engagement with new albums is often as fleeting as the trend cycles which propel them. Once the novelty wanes, the records gather dust, overshadowed by a relentless influx of fresh sounds and the comforting echo of my old favourites found in my formative years and the subsequent eras of self-discovery when I attempted to embroil my identity with melodic connectivity.

I don’t speak for everyone, but I can attest to how connection to music alters through maturity; how in the formative years of music discovery, every lyric seems to resonate and solidify a sense of self; yet, in time, we no longer seek affirmation or identity in new releases and how this absence of deep connection makes it difficult for new music to enmesh within our lives.

With this in mind, in an era dominated by nostalgia and a craving for novelty, can new music truly sustain and will there be any classics of tomorrow?

How New Music Lost Its Sustainability

The Novelty Factor and The Nostalgia Wave

The music industry today is marked by an overwhelming abundance. With new tracks and artists bursting onto the scene every minute, courtesy of streaming platforms, the sheer volume can feel stifling. This saturation dilutes the impact of new music and makes it increasingly difficult for any album to hold its ground in the public consciousness. This phenomenon of songs slipping from memory amid the chaos of continuous new releases compounds the challenge for contemporary artists, particularly in a digital age where distractions are a click or doomscroll away.

New artists aren’t just competing with their contemporaries, they’re contending with the power of nostalgia, which evokes a powerful connection to the past, offering listeners a comforting escape to a time perceived as simpler or more meaningful. Classic hits and old albums serve as auditory gateways through time, transporting people to the purity of youth or the endlessly reminisced upon pivotal moments in their lives. This longing for the past is amplified by social trends and media that glorify previous decades, from 80s synth-pop to 90s hip-hop, each resurgence bringing with it a wave of revival tours and remastered releases.

Industry Dynamics and Short-lived Fame

The trend towards prioritising brand-new music over music beyond its few-month-long-prime is immensely influenced by those curating our musical landscapes—label owners, journalists, playlisters, and radio hosts; if a new album doesn’t immediately catch on, all the time and money poured into a release was in vain, creating an industry where only the most accessible or marketable new tracks break through the noise, often at the expense of experimental or less instantly gratifying music.

We used to listen to music until we grasped an appreciation for it; today, it is highly unlikely that we will voluntarily give new music a second chance. Industry figures, with their desire to boost their own relevance, know this all too well. Their relentless focus on the ‘new’ neglects ‘older’ works, potentially diminishing their historical and emotional significance. As industry figureheads mirror and perpetuate these attitudes while prioritising metrics over championing and nurturing talent, artists find themselves in a vicious cycle of production, leading to creative burnout and a diluted quality of musical output. Artists now find themselves in an environment where the window to make an impact is smaller than ever. As soon as a new album drops, the focus shifts to the next release, leaving little room for albums to grow and mature in public consciousness.

Viral songs blaze brightly but briefly, quickly forgotten in the rush towards the next trending soundbite.

Searching for Redemption & Solutions for Sustainability

If artists are lucky, their albums will get a shot of redemption through the Album of the Year lists. However, a more viable way to ensure new albums endure is to create timeless records that transcend the immediate draw of novelty and retain their appeal across generations. Artists must focus on building deeper connections with listeners through storytelling, crafting albums that offer more than just singles.

Cultivating a base of ‘super fans’—listeners deeply dedicated to an artist’s work—can ensure consistent support and engagement, and if that fails, there is always the option of breathing new life into their music through remixes, or by repurposing and representing tracks in different contexts, extending their relevance.

Conclusion

The quest for sustainability in new music in an industry dominated by nostalgia and novelty is complex and fraught with challenges. However, by understanding the dynamics at play and adopting innovative strategies, there is hope for new sounds to find their lasting place in our musical lexicons. As we continue to navigate these shifts, our engagement with music—both new and old—must evolve, ensuring that the art form remains as dynamic and enduring as the human experiences it seeks to encapsulate.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Is The Boom in CD & Vinyl Sales in the UK A Sign of Prosperous Times to Come?

Posted on 18 July 2024

It can be tempting to clutch at optimistic straws when there are signs the music industry isn’t following a depressing trajectory of decline, such as the resurgence in the sales of physical media, with CD & vinyl records charting impressive gains in the UK.

This revival, as recently indicated by the Entertainment Retailers Association (ERA), is a testament to a shifting consumer preference towards tangible music formats. However, is this trend a harbinger of a more prosperous era for the music industry, or merely a nostalgic blip in the digital-dominated landscape?

This article will examine the nuances of the freshly reported statistics and explore what they truly signify for the industry’s future, bearing in mind that for the music industry to be sustainable, emerging independent artists need a slice of the sonic pie.

The Resurgence of CD & Vinyl

It is undeniable that the latest figures from ERA paint a promising picture for physical music formats, with CD & vinyl sales experiencing a notable uplift. The first half of 2024 saw vinyl sales amassing £86.3 million, a 13.5% increase, while CD sales brought in £57.9 million, marking a 3.2% rise.

However, if you take the figures, which suggest a revitalisation of interest in physical media with a pinch of salt, you will see that the influx in sales is driven by more than a consumer shift towards more tactile forms of music consumption.

One of the main drivers of the increase in CD & vinyl sales was Taylor Swift releasing 19 physical variants of her latest album, The Tortured Poets Department, which included six vinyl, nine CD and four cassette variants. Since the album went on sale in April, Swift has managed to shift 2.47 million physical copies of her album. Undoubtedly, many of Swift’s diehard fans purchased as many physical copies as they could afford/get their hands on. This album release strategy, which inflates album sales, has come under fire recently, with several industry figures, including Billie Eilish commenting on how insidious the trend is.

“I find it really frustrating as somebody who goes out of my way to be sustainable and do the best that I can and try to involve everybody in my team in being sustainable – and then it’s some of the biggest artists in the world making 40 different vinyl packages that have a different unique thing just to get you to keep buying more.”

Another key driver of physical sales was Record Store Day, which was primed to be the biggest RSD event to date and anticipated to inject £10 million into independent record shops. However, just because RSD favours independent record stores, independent artists rarely get a look in, and once again Swiftonomics played their part in the success of RSD 2024 with a limited edition copy of her album being the reason that many music fans hit record stores in their droves, simply to procure a copy of the album with the note “Happy Record Store Day!”

The Illusion of a Booming Industry

While the uptick in physical sales might suggest a thriving industry, it’s essential to tread cautiously with your optimism. The broader perspective reveals that this rise occurs against a backdrop of overall decline since the industry’s peak in 1999.

Moreover, despite the growth in physical sales, the industry is still heavily skewed towards streaming, which accounted for 84% of UK music retail revenues in 2023; as it is almost impossible to earn a living wage from streaming royalties, the music industry is still very much a hostile economic environment for independent and grassroots artists.

Therefore, the disparity between physical sales and streams which sees many music fans foregoing physical releases for the convenience and low cost of streaming services, suggests that the increase in physical sales may not signify a comprehensive industry recovery but rather a niche revival fuelled by specific market drivers, such as those outlined above.

The Nostalgic Overhang

It is also crucial to note how the nostalgia factor significantly contributes to the resurgence of vinyl and CDs. Older tracks and classic albums continue to dominate sales, potentially stifling new music’s market penetration and influence. This trend towards nostalgia can be a double-edged sword: it bolsters sales figures while possibly hindering the diversity and evolution of music offerings. Thus, while there’s an aural appetite for old favourites, it’s imperative to consider what this means for new artists and music innovation.

Independent Artists and the Trickle-Down Effect

Despite the rosy picture painted by raw sales figures, the reality for independent artists remains markedly different. The boon seen by flagship artists and big-ticket events like those associated with Taylor Swift does not necessarily trickle down to smaller, independent artists who often remain on the fringes of these economic uplifts. This scenario raises questions about the equity and distribution of wealth within the industry, suggesting a need for more inclusive growth strategies that support a broader array of artists. We have already written extensively about the dire state of the talent pipeline in the UK; however, there seems to be no clear course for recourse that will take indie music back to its 90s glory.

Conclusion

As nostalgia and globally revered artists hold the monopoly of the music industry and project an illusion of growth into the sonic economy, it is crucial to consider the industry’s underlying challenges, instead of taking the figures as a reflection of a universally prosperous landscape for all artists involved. As we look forward, it is crucial for stakeholders to foster a more sustainable and inclusive environment that supports both the old and new facets of music, ensuring that this resurgence is not just a fleeting echo of the past, but a stepping stone to a robust and equitable industry.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Music Industry Demands vs. National Priorities for New Labour

Posted on 14 July 2024

Ahead of the general election, we reviewed the manifestos of each of the three major political parties to discern which political party would bring a brighter future to the music industry. Labour and the Lib Dems were almost on par with their policies, so with Labour winning the election with an overwhelming majority, it should certainly be a source of (at least thinly veiled) optimism for creatives in the UK that Starmer is residing in 10 Downing Street.

Multiple organisations, including UK Music, have wasted no time and have already called upon Starmer to address the conflating issues putting the music industry under immense pressure. However, it is far too soon to expect Kier Starmer to turn his attention to the music industry when there are many other urgent issues to address.

Economic stability, robust healthcare, and comprehensive education reform are foundational to the well-being of the nation and, indirectly, to the success of the music and creative industries. By addressing these broader issues first, the government can create a more favourable environment for the music industry to thrive in the long run. Nothing will change overnight, so while it is undoubtedly tempting for some music journalists to declare that “it’s time for the new Labour government to honour its commitment to supporting the music industry”, a little bit of realism wouldn’t go a miss, as unsurprisingly, when YouGov conducted a poll asking voters what issues will affect how they vote in the general election, the music industry didn’t get a look in.

A Summary of the Influx of Demands on the Labour Government

The current demands from the music industry are multifaceted and pressing. UK Music, representing the collective interests of the sector, has called for immediate action to reverse the decline in music education, citing the loss of 1,000 music teachers since 2012. This decline not only affects the talent pipeline but also deprives young people of the opportunity to engage with music, which can provide essential life skills. Tom Kiehl, CEO of UK Music, has highlighted the need for strong government support to navigate these challenges and leverage the opportunities that the sector offers.

Moreover, the Association of Independent Music (AIM) has underscored the importance of including music in creative tax reliefs, akin to those in film and gaming, to stimulate investment in the UK’s music scenes. They also advocate for small business opportunities in apprenticeships and responsible AI development that nurtures UK music and musicians. These measures are designed to create a sustainable environment where music businesses can thrive and scale.

In addition, the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) has emphasised the necessity of a comprehensive plan for the creative sector as part of the Labour government’s industrial strategy. This includes not only reversing the decline in music education but also fostering a robust relationship between the music industry and the government to ensure growth and stability for the sector.

Why the Music Industry Has to Wait for Major Reform

The Labour government, led by Keir Starmer, has inherited a plethora of urgent issues. The housing crisis, with its severe impact on affordability and availability, requires immediate and sustained intervention. The NHS, beleaguered by long waiting lists and staffing shortages, needs comprehensive reforms to ensure it can meet the healthcare needs of the population. Additionally, the rising levels of poverty and economic instability necessitate robust economic policies to support those most affected and to foster long-term economic growth.

Addressing these foundational issues first is crucial. By stabilising the economy, improving healthcare, and reforming education, the government can create a supportive environment that benefits all sectors, including the music industry. For instance, a stronger economy can lead to increased disposable income, which in turn can boost spending on music and entertainment. Improved healthcare can ensure a healthier population that can actively participate in and contribute to the creative industries. Comprehensive education reform can produce well-rounded individuals with the skills and knowledge necessary to excel in the music industry.

Keir Starmer’s personal commitment to music and the arts is well-documented. His background as a musician and his passion for making the arts accessible to all young people are promising. However, translating this passion into effective policy requires a balanced and prioritised approach. The Labour government’s broader strategy for the creative sector should be integrated into its overall industrial strategy, ensuring that it supports growth and addresses the challenges facing the industry in a holistic manner.

Realistic Timelines of Music Industry Reformation

Realistically, the timeline for the new Labour government to reform the music industry will depend on several factors, including the complexity of the reforms, the legislative process, and the prioritisation of other urgent issues. Typically, substantial reforms can take several years to implement fully. Here’s a breakdown of the likely phases and their durations:

Initial Assessment and Planning (6-12 months):

Establishing a task force or committee to assess the current state of the music industry.
Consulting with industry stakeholders, including organisations like UK Music and AIM.
Developing a comprehensive plan that aligns with broader government priorities.

Legislative Process (12-24 months):

Drafting necessary legislation based on the plan.
Presenting the legislation to Parliament and navigating it through the legislative process.
This phase includes debates, committee reviews, and potential amendments to the proposed laws.

Implementation of Reforms (24-36 months):

Rolling out new policies and regulations.
Allocating budgets and resources for initiatives like music education reforms and creative tax reliefs.
Establishing support systems for small music businesses and freelance musicians.

Monitoring and Adjustment (36-48 months and beyond):

Monitoring the impact of the reforms and making necessary adjustments.
Continuous engagement with industry stakeholders to address emerging challenges and opportunities.
Long-term policies to ensure sustainability and growth within the music industry.

Given these phases, it could realistically take around 4 to 5 years to see significant and comprehensive reforms in the music industry. However, some changes, like increasing funding for music education or providing immediate support to struggling musicians, could be implemented more quickly.

The success of these reforms will also depend on the government’s ability to manage and address other pressing issues simultaneously, ensuring that the music industry receives the attention and resources it needs for long-term growth and stability.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Is Rock as Dead as Emily Eavis Thinks It Is?

Posted on 4 July 2024

The remarks made by Emily Eavis, organiser of the Glastonbury Festival, about the scarcity of new rock acts to headline the festival has sparked a heated broader conversation about the current state of rock music and its place in today’s music industry. Eavis’s candid and arguably ignorant comments reflect a notable shift in the music landscape, where rock music seems to have drifted from its mainstream prominence – unless the nostalgia factor comes into play.

Naturally, her comments rubbed plenty of people the wrong way, including the rock-adjacent acts who are pouring their blood, sweat and tears into their careers and those who follow and champion them. Yet, Glastonbury isn’t the only major UK festival which is struggling to find fresh rock headliners. Take Download for example; the biggest acts this year included Queens of the Stone Age, Fall Out Boy, Avenged Sevenfold, The Offspring, Machine Head and Pantera; the only relatively fresh blood among the acts was Royal Blood, who have still been around for more than a decade.

So why is it that new rock artists in the UK are relegated to smaller stages or shunned from festivals entirely? The answer lies within a conflating myriad of factors which will be outlined below, followed by an outline of ways to remedy the crumbling talent pipeline and revive the genre.

Why Emerging Rock Artists Have Been Pushed to the Festival Line-Up Sidelines

Even if the torch you carry for rock hasn’t diminished, the popular shift away from rock towards pop, hip-hop, and electronica can’t be dismissed. Dominant artists and genres will naturally draw larger crowds, hence festival bookers being more inclined to allocate prime space to them. With music festivals feeling the pinch more than ever, leading to more than 42 festival organisers in the UK and Ireland cancelling, postponing or totally laying to rest their events, playing it safe with the line-ups in this economy is vital for organisers if they want to see another year.

It is crucial to remember that festivals operate on a commercial basis and prioritise acts that guarantee large audiences and higher returns. As rock is perceived to have a smaller or more niche following compared to other genres, rock bands often end up on smaller stages. While it is a bitter pill for rock fans to swallow that their favoured genre is no longer the flavour of the era and they are no longer catered to by festival bills, acceptance of this fact and that festivals aren’t patrons of the arts, but commercial entities, removes some of the confusion and contempt from the equation.

Other factors which may contribute to new rock artists struggling to secure coveted spots on festival line-ups include the evolution of marketing trends, which modernistically focuses on viral marketing and social media presence, and the change in festival dynamics, which has seen many modern festivals are embracing a more eclectic approach to their line-ups to reflect cultural diversity and inclusivity, which can sometimes mean traditional rock bands find less prominence.

The Future of Rock: A Revival?

While the current scenario might seem grim for rock fans, the genre’s revival is not out of the question. Music trends are cyclical, and the essence of rock—its raw emotion and the energy of live performances—continues to have a dedicated following. The challenge lies in adapting to the new musical landscape without losing the genre’s authentic appeal.

There is no shortage of contemporary rock bands with the talent, the songwriting stripes, and the charisma to lead illustrious chart-topping careers. However, as any independent artist will tell you, without major financial backing, it is practically impossible to elevate their standing in the music industry. As current collective tastes are geared toward other genres, it isn’t likely that many labels will want to take the risk on emerging rock bands, leading to a Catch-22 situation where the rock scene has stagnated and only the bands which thrived while rock was the dominant genre are revered in popular culture.

Addressing the Talent Pipeline

Emily Eavis was unequivocally wrong in her statement that there are no new rock bands; what would have been a more accurate assessment is that the industry has ceased to gamble/capitalise on and nurture new talent.

She is also underplaying her own responsibility in the death of rock music; for rock to regain prominence, new talent needs platforms, and what could be a better platform than Glastonbury? After all, it is one of the only festivals that people fall over themselves to buy tickets for before actually seeing the line-up! So many Glastonbury-goers claim that it’s not about the music, it is about the experience, making it the perfect festival for little-known artists to gain a foothold in the music industry.

In Conclusion

While Emily Eavis’s remarks on the scarcity of new rock acts at Glastonbury might seem to signal a bleak future for the genre, it is essential not to view this as an absolute demise.

Rock music’s position within the contemporary music industry has shifted, facing significant competition from genres that resonate more with today’s digital and streaming cultures. However, this does not preclude a resurgence. Rock music, with its deep roots and passionate fan base, has the potential to adapt and reassert itself in the mainstream. It necessitates an environment where new talents are nurtured and given opportunities to shine, much like what Glastonbury and other festivals could offer.

Rather than seeing Eavis’s comments as a final verdict on rock music, they should be interpreted as a call to action—to the industry, to festival organisers, and to fans—to rekindle their commitment to a genre that thrives on live performance and raw emotional energy. By fostering new talent and embracing the evolving dynamics of the music scene, the genre has the potential to find its way back to prominence, proving that its spirit is far from extinguished.

Article by Amelia Vandergast

Older Posts

Newer Posts