/discuss
iCame, iSaw, iConquered: The problems with Apple’s growing control of the music industry. (3 comments)
January 19, 2008
Question: What powerful pair of the last decade seems poised to continue on its ruling path well into the future? Sorry Dem's, but it's not the Clintons − it's the iPod and iTunes! Of course, these products need no introduction - the iPod is the world's most popular portable music player, and iTunes is the software that manages it. The two, which together form the Apple Music System, are obligatorily complementary. That is, iTunes is the only music application that will work with the iPod. The popularity of this dynamic duo would be doubly good if its successes also helped revive a faltering music industry, devoid of inspirational new talent and struggling to be profitable. But such is not the case.
Instead, the Apple Music System hurts the music industry because it stops fans from discovering new musical talents, ruins the greatness of albums by pushing singles, provides no means for users to download lost music originally purchased on iTunes, and emphasizes solitary rather than group listening. All these problems hurt music fans and labels, but create bigger profits for Apple. If no one steps in to confront Apple's music strategy, the music industry will have trouble exposing great new artists and sink deeper into its financial problems.
The main location where Apple has the ability to expose fans to new music is on the iTunes Music Store homepage. For an up-and-coming band, just a day on this homepage could help them get discovered by new fans, resulting in a popularity surge. Sadly, what could be used as new discovery outlet is often filled with singles from top-20 artists that most fans have already heard. This all makes sense from a business standpoint because Apple's goal is to sell as many singles as possible to generate the greatest amount of revenue. But in the interest of the music industry, this is hardly optimal. Since traditional discovery outlets, like the radio, music stores, and even basement jam sessions are losing popularity, labels cannot rely on them to connect music and fans. Instead, iTunes must be used to help fill this void. Embracing the iTunes as a place to discover new music is crucial to ensuring that new artists find their niche in a music industry that is becoming increasingly impenetrable.
Another way that iTunes keeps fans from discovering new music is by promoting singles rather than albums. In the process of music production, an artist creates a group of songs and arranges them in such a way to give the listener a great musical experience. The goal is that when the tracks are played in succession, the listener feels something. The music clicks. Playing just a single track can never evoke this feeling, and this is why artists want you to buy their albums, not their singles. Likewise, iTunes-created albums, those that Apple itself compiles, are revolting. If Apple cared about how artists wanted to sell their music, they would only allow fans to buy the artists' albums. Promoting only singles and iTunes-compiled albums proves that Apple has little regard for the thought and art that goes into creating an album.
From an economical standpoint, not offering a way for people to recover music that was purchased on iTunes creates an unfair and avoidable financial burden for users. People frequently buy new computers, upgrade iPods, crash their computers, and break their iPods. Consequently, migrating music that was purchased on iTunes to a new iPod or computer is notoriously difficult. Apple could easily solve this problem by letting users re-download tracks that they have already bought. Since each track that an iTunes user purchases in the iTunes Music Store is tied to that specific user, it would be easy for Apple to keep a record of all music a specific user ever purchased. If something goes wrong with the user's computer or iPod, it would be free and easy to get the music back. Apple's infrastructure could easily support this update, yet it does not exist, once again showcasing the little regard Apple has for treating its customers fairly.
Another, more subtle way that Apple keeps music sharing to a minimum is by manufacturing all iPods without built-in speakers. To share music with a friend, one must perform an awkward bud-share (the practice of giving your friend one of your earbuds, which is gross if friends don't wax), or carry unwieldy external speakers. Traditionally, “jamming out” is a way for friends to collectively enjoy and share music by playing it via a thumping speaker, but this turns impossible when solely clutching an iPod.
The goals of the Apple Music System are contrary to those most dear to the music industry. Namely, Apple provides no means for fans to discover new music, listen to albums instead of singles, recover lost music originally purchased purchased on iTunes, or enjoy music in a group setting. All this proves that Apple cares very little about the rescuing the music industry. Instead, Apple cares about, well, Apple. It is the responsibility of fans, artists, and labels to put pressure on Apple to implement changes in the Apple Music System that will help get the music industry back on track. If Apple resists, labels will have to cut their ties with Apple and look for a new means of music distribution that harmonizes with the changes needed to save the industry.
Joe,
While I agree that there are many flaws to the iGiant’s near-monopolized control of the music industry, I think there is an important perspective that should be considered before attacking the Apple empire: the perspective of the consumer.
In regards to hardware, anyone with a music player other than an iPod (and God forbid something other than an mp3 player) comes along about as frequently as the bubonic plague, and with the same societal exclusion. Aside from wielding an instrument almost instinctively frowned upon by our i-clad society, these users typically rip files to mp3 format, rather than iTunes proprietary mp4 format, which makes music sharing with iTunes users notoriously difficult. Again, it seems rational to attack Apple for causing a once-diversified market of digital music players to homogenize. But what drives Apple to act this way in the first place?
As much as I would like to agree with the utopian notion that music fans want to discover new music, this is simply not the case. Most music listeners, save the indie trailblazers, seem not to care about what else is out there; they hear a song on the radio, it gets stuck in their heads, and they download it so they can listen to it again. Mainstream artists have recognized the demand for these hit singles. Consequently, the thought that was traditionally put into producing an entire album simply does not exist anymore. By promoting singles, the iTunes Music Store is only conforming to this consumer behavior. In other words, it is the consumers’ desire to just download singles that sparked the downfall of the album, not the iTunes Music Store. Blaming Apple for providing music fans with what they demand seems is hardly objectionable. In fact, such behavior is a sound business practice.
And while I’m just as much of a “the-man”-hating, music loving idealist as you are, Joe, I think that attacking the Apple Music System is only scratching the surface of the problem that needs to be addressed. The problems evident in the Apple music empire are not the causes of the downfall of the music industry -- they are the symptoms. Apple is only conforming to what consumer behavior dictates; something Apple should be lauded for, not criticized. While I admit that the Apple Music System does not help the problems of music discovery, album appreciation, or legal file sharing (with those pesky mp4’s), perhaps a closer look should be taken at how the music industry can cope with recent changes in consumer behavior, rather than helplessly wish that consumers magically acquire a new found love for albums and digital music players other than the iPod.
-David F. on January 23, 2008
The problems discussed above are only a small part of the problem of information (in the broadest sense) increasingly being delivered on-demand. If you never want to be exposed to images, opinions, music or news you think you might not like, the Internet is the perfect tool; you can just go on experiencing the same safe stuff for ever and ever. If consumer choice in information ever becomes complete, a lot of people are going to end up in informational bubbles with little knowledge of unfamiliar tastes or points of view.
-Mr. Henderson on February 28, 2008
First, I do agree with you, Joe, that the iTunes Music Store could create a new section for up-and-coming artists. There are already sections for rap/hip-hop, country, etc., so this would just be a simple update and a very novel idea. An e-mail to an Apple Inc. representative might even spark some conversation about getting this to happen.
But even though Apple has taken off with this music giant, you have to see what good they have done for the music business. Millions of songs have been sold on the Music store, all of which are paid, but could have been downloaded illegally. And in case you are unaware, Apple makes relatively little money for each song purchased on iTunes.
Steve Jobs realized 10 years ago that the CD should be obsolete and that people were starting share, steal, and manage songs digitally. So by creating iTunes, he did what he does best and created a very easy to use, very powerful piece of software. Now ten years later, the Macbook Air has come out and it doesn't even have a CD drive. The CD is endangered. Because of this, a new way of getting music was needed, and thus we have the all-digital iTunes Store. This easy to use program makes it easier and more likely for a consumer to buy a song or album. Songs are just a few clicks away rather than driving down to the music store. For a hardcore music lover, driving to a store shouldn't be a problem. But, people in the music business aren't really concerned about getting their music to the avid fan, they are trying to get it to people who might not usually stop and listen.
And as for putting speakers onto an iPod, that’s just dumb. It would increase the size of the iPod, the quality of the speakers would be very low, and what is the point of having very shitty speakers on an iPod? This goes against everything Apple stands for. Yes, their products can be overpriced, but the fact of the matter is that they make very powerful, high quality products. If you and a friend both want to hear a song, then plug the iPod into speakers that are worth listening out of.
Sorry to rant, but I see that Apple could do more to help promote the up-and-coming artist and that they do make very smart business decisions that can suppress these artists, but I want people to realize that we are entering even further into the digital age and that iTunes and the iPod have actually done a lot of positive things for the music business as well.
-Jamie H. on March 31, 2008
Have an opinion on this piece? E-mail your thoughts to steve@sadsteve.com and we'll post them on this page.