This article was downloaded by: [DePaul University] On: 07 January 2012, At: 15:11 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Popular Music and Society Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpms20 A View from the Trenches of Music 2.0 Sherman Young & Steve Collins Available online: 03 Jun 2010 To cite this article: Sherman Young & Steve Collins (2010): A View from the Trenches of Music 2.0, Popular Music and Society, 33:3, 339-355 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03007760903495634 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Popular Music and Society Vol. 33, No. 3, July 2010, pp. 339–355 A View from the Trenches of Music 2.0 Sherman Young and Steve Collins In recent history, the music industry has been built on a small number of relationships, largely driven from the top down. While the actual music forges a direct link between musicians and their fans, the reality of the industry is that a number of intermediaries interrupt that relationship, forcing musicians to communicate through their management companies and record labels. The promise of the new technologies is to reconfigure the possibilities, allowing the emergence of new relationships. The communication and distribution potential of the Internet (which can be encapsulated as Music 2.0) suggests that disintermediation and reconfigured relationships are possible. But what is the reality of this promise? In the context of a broader global experience, this paper draws on primary research consisting of interviews with a range of Australian musicians to explore how they may be forging new networks of opportunity, and how realistic the promise of Music 2.0 might be. Introduction This paper draws on the emerging body of research which re-situates media production and distribution as a de-institutionalized activity. The work of Jenkins, Bruns, and others addresses what might be categorized as a democratization of traditional processes. While this is occurring in a number of realms, as described by Gillmor and Reynolds, music is a key example. Alderman, Gordon, and Kusek and Leonhard explore the history and possibilities for music delivery in the new media Downloaded by [DePaul University] at 15:11 07 January 2012 context, while authors such as Jennings examine how information moves between online fan forums. Using that literature as a foundation point, this paper contextualizes some findings from primary research into musicians’ attitudes towards the new media environment. It summarizes a number of in-depth interviews conducted with Australian musicians during the course of 2007, and contextualizes those conversations in a wider global discourse that gestures towards a general direction that the recording industry is taking. Our research provides both confirmation of those trends and a counterpoint to utopian sensibilities that may be emerging. While it would be inappropriate to draw singular conclusions from such a diverse group of musicians, some key themes emerged from this research. The first ISSN 0300-7766 (print)/ISSN 1740-1712 (online) q 2010 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/03007760903495634 340 S. Young and S. Collins observation is a common understanding among musicians that times are changing. The new technologies allow artists to engage with their audiences directly—via social networking sites in particular and the Internet more generally; as a result, there is a widespread feeling that the major record labels are becoming redundant. To that end, the existing top-down relationship model is evolving. Traditionally musicians are connected to fans via intermediaries including recording companies and commercial radio, but the new technologies are driving a mesh-like networking model with flattened hierarchies, more (and evolving) actors, and nodes joined by various activities and communications, of which recorded music represents only one form. Of course, individual artists have different responsesto change. It isclear that, while the new technologies make possible more direct relationships with fans, resources are still required to build those relationships. However, those with the resources have been able to utilize the Internet to establish a new kind of economic relationship with their fans. Overall, the promises of empowerment enabled by Music 2.0 are enticing, but the view from the trenches is one of uncertainty. Our interviewees provided a range of responses, but all alluded to a period of transition. The major labels still wield significant market power, and alternative publicity, marketing, and distribution models are still in flux. While the idea of Music 2.0 may be apparent from the outside, a magic bullet has yet to appear defining an easy alternative pathway for musicians to obtain (independent) market success. What is Music 2.0? The changes in the music industry can be overlaid against the meme of so-called eb 2.0 technologies. The idea of Web 2.0 sprung from a brainstorming session involving publisher Tim O’Reilly at the end of the dot com boom. The term has since been used to describe everything from programming tools such as AJAX or Google page rank systems to popular websites that rely on tagging and recommendation, such as Flickr, Reddit and Digg. If the Web 2.0 meme can be simply summarized, it might be seen in the title of Kevin Kelly’s 2005 article in Wired magazine, “We are the Web.” In that piece, Kelly identifies a key theme in the Web 2.0 discourse—the idea that “the Downloaded by [DePaul University] at 15:11 07 January 2012 producers are the audience, the act of making is the act of watching, and every link is both a point of departure and destination” (1). Or, in Tim O’Reilly’s progression, “publishing participation” (online). ! Without engaging in a critique of the Web 1.0/2.0 dichotomy (or indeed a critique of Web 2.0 itself, which can be found in Keen, Zimmer among others), it is fair to suggest that the idea of Web 2.0 is a contemporary expression of what Tim Berners- Lee has called intercreativity—“building together, being creative together” (Khare and Denison). In media studies discourses surrounding participatory cultures, this has led to the rise of the so-called citizen-journalist and the increasing number of blogs which contribute to something that (arguably) bears more than a passing resemblance to Habermas’s public sphere. Of course, this reconfiguration of professions, an intrusion Popular Music and Society 341 of Keen’s so-called “cult of the amateur,” has led to aggressive debates. While these arguments are often voiced by those intent on protecting their turf, there are legitimate questions that need to be asked—most of which focus on the economics of Web 2.0 and the ability to provide, not just a sustainable living for creators, but a range of services and information that is actually comparable to what already exists. It is easy to situate music in the center of the Web 2.0 maelstrom. The new technologies have enabled a number of seismic shifts. The first is increased accessibility and a consumer expectation of on-demand digital delivery of the entire catalog of musical offerings, legitimately or otherwise. As well as legal distribution mechanisms such as iTunes, the more contentious sharing networks such as Soulseek and BitTorrent provide 24/7 access to an unprecedented collection of music far exceeding the digital offerings of the major labels. The second shift is a flattening of what was once a distinct divide between creator and audience. In the case of music, this flattening has two components. As well as musicians discovering new ways of engaging with their audiences, the audiences themselves are fast becoming collaborators in the act of musical production, as ideas of audience shift towards what Henry Jenkins (290) calls participatory culture. This process encourages disintermediation—the direct connection between musician and audience, not only via the traditional means of the music itself, but by creating different communications channels that largely bypass traditional middlemen (record labels, distributors, radio networks, and independent record promoters). A consequence of this is the growing realization that the traditional manner of making money from music is no longer the only viable option. The promise of Music 2.0 then, is nothing less than a total reinvention of how musicians create, distribute, and generate money from music (Draper 6–9). The 20th-century recording industry was built on a model in which record labels identified, nurtured, and marketed musicians, providing them with the resources to create and record their music and finding ways for them to distribute that music via radio and record stores. It was a model that proved extremely successful—not just for the many artists who achieved widespread attention, but for the industry itself— which managed to create a self-sustaining and lucrative business model. Today, that industry is apparently in crisis. As CD sales fall, the view from the top Downloaded by [DePaul University] at 15:11 07 January 2012 appears bleak.