The way the music died

I tend to think overconcentration of power is bad whether in the hands of an individual, an organization or the government. This is different from libertarians who tend to think it's only bad when in the hands of the government.

Monopolies are generally bad for consumers. It doesn't really matter whether it's a state-run monopoly or a private monopoly, the effects are the same. I was thinking about this today on my bike to work. Mainly in how it relates to the decline of the music industry in recent years. I was inspired in this by a recent PBS documentary on the decline and fall of the music industry.

I don't listen to music in the morning when I'm getting ready for work. Mainly because radio stations don't really play music in the morning. They are filled with babble and gabbing that, in a crime against humanity, is marketed as humor. 3rd graders joking about bodily functions is more amusing than most of this stuff.

You'd think one of the radio stations would play just music because they would automatically become the destination of choice of radio listeners who like to listen to... music. Market forces suggest that someone should step up to fill this niche, but it doesn't happen. At least not around here.

Clear Channel dominates the commercial radio industry. It's not a technical monopoly, since there are other players. But much like DeBeers in the diamond industry, Clear Channel has such overwhelming influence that it's a de facto monopoly. If you want to be a player, you have to conform to Clear Channel's fiats.

This essay is not to bash Clear Channel. Just about any corporation would become a de facto monopoly if they could. It's the instincts of most business to get as much market share as possible. And it's not to bash the Republicans either. The GOP Congress passed the liberalization bill that made this domination possible, but it was Democrat Bill Clinton who signed it into law. Indeed, it was bipartsian complicity. Rather, this essay is just to note the consequences of Clear Channel's domination.

Monopolies, actual or de facto, are generally bad for consumers. They become flabby and complacent, because there's no punishment if they do, in contrast to competitive industries. The natural instinct of a big corporation is conservatism, to not take risks. Taking risks means upsetting the status quo. If you have a de facto monopoly, the status quo is good. They also tend to be more concerned about price, so quality suffers. This is because American consumers are generally more concerned about price than quality so they're giving the consumers what most of them want. Not what they say they want, but what they prove they want via their actions.

By all accounts, Microsoft Windows is far from the best operating system out there. Yet, through genius marketing, MS Windows has near monopoly on operating systems. This is to Microsoft's credit. If you have an inferior product, you need to compensate somewhere else and MS did a great job.

The telecommunications industry exploded in innovation and prices came way down after Ma Bell was broken up in the early 80s. First, Sprint and MCI evolved as rivals to AT&T and now we have a million cell phone companies. Long-distance calls are much cheaper than they were before.

Clear Chanel's effective monopoly over radio stations is bad for consumers. I remember one Sunday evening flipping through my pre-sets. I have 8 pre-sets and 3 of the stations were playing the exact same song and were at the exact same point in that song. The de facto monopoly means there is little opportunity for new music to get on the airwaves. Not no opportunity, but little opportunity.

Because Clear Channel has been so aggressive in buying up the airwaves, the price of frequencies has gone through the roof, thus making competition that much harder. That's exactly the same strategy DeBeer's uses to control the diamond industry. When I was in Guinea, I got to know a few DeBeers' employees. One of them was telling me that they buy just about any diamond that's brought to them, even if it's not of good quality, merely to preserve the illusion of the rarity of diamonds, which is the main part of the gem's appeal. They were quite open about the strategy.

Clear Channel is as aggressive as DeBeers in preserving its market share. It's good for them and I don't blame them. But I'm not under the illusion that I, as a consumer, benefit in any way.

Clear Channel's domination of the airwaves has led to mass mediocrity in radio. I'm not upset about this, just a bit sad. I really don't listen much to radio anymore because of this. I rarely buy new release CDs. New acts get so little exposure and most of those few that do aren't so much aritsts as pretty boys or skanks or one-hit wonders. The miniscule number of real artists that get through as so drowned out that I, like most people, don't waste my time any more sifting through the garbage just for the increasingly rare gem.

If I do buy a CD, it's usually of an older artist. I think about 15% of my CDs are of current acts and Dave Matthews, U2 and Counting Crows are the only ones of those I have more than one of. Most of my stuff is older stuff. Beatles, Zeppelin, Genesis...

This mass mediocrity is the biggest reason why file sharing has exploded in popularity. Who wants to throw away $15 bucks on a CD with one or two decent songs? The RIAA can lecture on morality and legality all they want and they might be technically right, but it's a pyhrric argumentative victory. I personally prefer the CD format. I don't know how many great songs I've discovered because I was listening to a CD I bought for another song(s).

CDs give you a broader portrait of the artist. But if that broader portrait is revealed to be empty and worthless, people are going to realize the shell game. And they have. The increasing emphasis on the hit song means the rest of the album suffers. As the rest of the album suffers, consumers stop getting value for the money and eventually get pissed off and stop shelling out their money on the crap.

I, the consumer, am ill-served by this de facto monopoly. I'm not proposing any solutions, since there really isn't any practical solution. The horse is out of the barn. I'm just a consumer bemoaning my paucity of choice. This monopoly status has bred so complacency and conformity that it's not going to change. And I'll continue to not buy CDs or listen to the radio.