In an article on your website, you quoted industry sources and record execs as saying that radio stations should pay for music they play. We in the broadcast market are
paying for their music in the form of royalties. It would seem that this isn't enough. They want more. This is another for of greed in which artists want to receive more and work less. Most fairly well known artists are already worth millions of dollars and with concerts and royalties, it can only get better. If the record companies want a bigger piece of the pie, then maybe they should help the artist sell the product more efficiently. One artist in particular that I will not purchase a product from or play music is Garth Brooks. He and his record company Capitol Records, started this whole thing and now with a little help from a discount chain, you can only purchase his product from them. This is absurd. Yes,
we do pay for the music we play and most if not all is based on our income. If our income goes up, their royalty payments go up or conversely, if it goes down..........
well, you get the picture. What they want is the same amount of money all
the time, when they are just as much of a driving force in the market place as anyone else. They complain about the U.S. as compared to other countries not paying enough, but the U.S. used a more equitable system where Broadcasters pay their fair share.
If it weren't for us, they couldn't sell their product.....and that is the very reason that
some radio stations opt to do all talk, all news, all sports or anything else except music. Because if we don't play it, they don't get paid.