By Noe Pacheco
Independent music has been a driving force during the development of MySpace, and now the social network has ignored its core when it launched the new MySpace Music. The new deal with Amazon.com makes them a new competitor against iTunes and Napster.
After signing a deal with the 4 major labels (Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group, EMI Music, and Warner Music Group, Inc.) MySpace and its business partners could benefit from the indie artists, but will they return the benefits?
You can always say that yes, an indie artist being featured next to a signed artist could help their exposure. But does the artist gain the same amount of benefits as the major label?
1. The independent artist doesn't see a fixed amount of money coming in from the on-site advertising deals that MySpace creates, because of MySpace Music.
2. The indie artist has to count on, whoever checks out their page, actually listens to their music, instead of it being forced into their ears by consistent radio airplay.
3. Ever since the News Corp. buy-out, the social network has been geared toward mainstream music. As of today, I only see 1 independent artist featured next to a whole page of mainstream artists.
Is that really helping independent music out?
MySpace is not an artist's, or band's website. News Corp. can one day say, "Let's get rid of these pages." The page is owned by them, not the artist who put so much work into maintaining the page.
This type of deal should really send a message to an indie band, or artist, which is, "I should have my own website." The artist is free to post/sell their music, merchandise, and what ever they have to market themselves, and it can not be taken away.
Yes, MySpace is a free outlet, but there is a price to pay if you do not go by their standards. It is a great marketing tool, but that is it. All the friends, music, and layouts that an indie artist has worked to get can all be gone one day.
Noe Pacheco Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Noe_Pacheco |
