I guess to elaborate on the need of people caring. I guess I’m discussing how a story becomes big in media. Blogs care that Radiohead is doing something cool and different and it becomes something that’s passed along and the media picks up on it. The viral marketing aspect of artists trying to succeed is important.

I see a lot of bands trying hard and giving away their work for free but it doesn’t matter to a lot of people and it didn’t matter to people who didn’t care about Radiohead. Just pointing out that Radiohead was huge.

I don’t really look at myself at the providers. But hey fast food places do well . As for music consumers wanting value, I mean from artists (didn’t mean myself). It’s a big deal that In Rainbows was good, or else who would care? You could have a free piece of crap, doesn’t mean people will want it.

As for your point on the mp3 and internet, you make a good point there.

Metric is a bit of different case. They didn’t fully release it directly. Different labels depending on the country (here it is Last Gang Records) so it gets a little complicated at least for me…wouldn’t surprise me if they went fully independent here though as they have a large following in Canada.

I read that Metric made more from Fantasies – which they released directly – than from any of their other albums combined. Admittedly, some of that could be attributed to their increasing popularity, but as I understand it they made more from selling less, on the whole.

I definitely agree with you though. I don’t see Radiohead as being “selfish” for looking out for themselves. I would’ve done the very same thing, provided I could get it to work.

When I see someone comparing to blogging, what if I called Pretty Much Amazing selfish? It makes no difference. They don’t care in the first place and sometimes you need to be selfish to be successful (in all areas really). So yeah, we aren’t fully legal ourselves but it’s not like I’m on their naughty list either.

I do find it interesting that some people thought that Radiohead didn’t make any money out of it and could “take the hit”.

This whole conversation does bring in the fallacy of the major label industry. Really the major label industry is useful for struggling artists and less important for established artists like Radiohead. Radiohead could’ve flipped the industry upside down.

A friend’s dad once said something along the lines of ‘If you no longer piss anyone off, you no longer matter’. I take that with a grain of salt, but I do think there’s a kernel of truth to it. Radiohead did what they did because it created excitement. They were between labels, sick of EMI and eager to do something new. They chose to act on that impulse, whether it was perfectly executed or full of flaws. That it sparked such a wide range of reactions tells me they did something worth talking about, and I think that’s what matters most.

Honestly, it’s a bit silly for Kim Gordon to expect Radiohead to think about anyone but Radiohead. They worked hard to get where they are, and they had the power to do what they did. Why begrudge them for it? It’s not as though file-sharing suddenly increased just because Radiohead gave an album away. It was massive before, and it was massive after. To behave as though Radiohead somehow ruined it for everyone else is pretty daft. And deliberately giving away your music for free certainly hasn’t hurt smaller artists like Girl Talk. I think the key for most of these folks following The Radiohead Model™ is to add back the value lost by years of record company mismanagement.

After all, isn’t a big part of the free music issue – besides being a simple matter of the ‘free is better than not free’ mentality – about years and years of record companies bleeding their customers dry? Once CD burning technology became widespread, it became apparent just how out of wack the whole pricing scheme was. Plus, the loss of consumer confidence over pay-for-play scandals, reissue after crappy reissue (remember those first few years of digital remasters and just how awful they were?), iTunes, a complete lack of adaptation to the marketplace…there are so many different variables that have fallen into place to create the current mess the music industry is in. And there’s no easy way out for anyone.

In terms of where I fall as a blog in all this: I stay as close to legal as I can, particularly with new music, but if it’s something that’s been out for some time I don’t really think twice about sharing an mp3. We are mp3 blogs, after all, so it’s not totally unreasonable for people to come to us looking for mp3s. And with older, more obscure artists, one would hope by sharing a track we’re turning someone onto something they’d have otherwise been unfamiliar with. Might be a pipe dream, but fingers crossed.

I think Coko is making a statement though, where critics would easily detest the record immediately, she does give the album a chance and gives her opinion on it. So in some way, the content will end up being different. At least, I wouldn’t care about a BEP record.

I guess it’s always nice to appeal to a niche audience, but who are the Passion Pit fans anyway?

But, I’m not sure that getting more traffic for bands that have nothing to do with the bands you like – ie, is putting up Three Black Eyed Peas songs – is going to be good for the people that normally visit this blog (ie, the people looking at those Passion Pit tickets?)

I agree we’d all love to have 5000 hits a day, but I think I’d rather have hits be real and not just the people looking for free songs. If you take the time to write something more than a copied press release, you’d like to think people are reading it.

Who knows? But I guess it doesn’t really matter. At the end of the day, it’s their art and only our words… so they get the final say.

I think blogs have to balance between wanting traffic and helping out your independent artists. Who doesn’t want to have a successful blog?

I’ve made it clear, I’d like to have all the traffic in the world . I just put myself on standards that some blogs don’t follow such as: albums leaking.

One of my main questions: Getting permission can take a lot more work. Why should we depend on the labels to get the greenlight? I just find this process slow and you’re more then likely not going to get a response anyway. The Stereogum model just doesn’t work for most blogs…and most become annoying press releasey fodder. I’d much rather work on improving my content then asking for permission a few hours a day.

I’d much rather post them and let them tell me to remove (which we 100% oblige) mp3s. I don’t mind the Web Sheriff in this case. I’m still given the traffic and the artist still gets to do what they like with the content. Sure a few people get it but it’s halted from there.

Just found this in my spam filter. – No idea why.

You say so yourself – “It’s a great model, they don’t really piss anyone off and they can’t be held for liberally giving away tracks without the artist’s consent (which we do).”

Why not just help them by writing thoughtful pieces and giving away the content they have made available for free? If your opinion/taste/writing is strong enough you don’t have to give away illegal content to get visitors and if they are coming for the free songs, it doesn’t help anyone.