As an avid fan of music and occasional radio listener I was delighted to read about the payola system which I had long ago heard about but was never fully satisfied. Payola as described by Rodman in chapter 8 states "record promoters began to pay Djs to play certain records, the practice became known as payola." I was actually surprised that the practice of payola was such a major scandal. “When the practice became public knowledge, a major scandal ensued. Many Djs were fired . . . congressional hearings were held, and the communications act of 1934 was amended to make the practice illegal.” 
The act of a Dj getting played to promote and play a song is no different than a Dj being paid to promote any other product or service on air. I also do not see a difference between payola and every second on MTV the so called viewer’s choice is really Viacom’s choice. Also what is the difference between a song in an advertisement and payola? In my opinion all of these practices are equally detrimental to the music industry. Any real music aficionado does not rely on television or radio to listen to music. What the act of 1934 did was simply keep the promotion money higher up in the conglomeration. After the act Djs were no longer getting money to promote the songs but their program directors were. The real travesty in the radio industry is not payola but the monopoly of the radio industry. The FCC needed to put restrictions on the size of radio conglomerates. In any age what is played on the radio, printed, or televised should be looked at with suspicion. The only things thought to be worth playing or printing are those things that further ones economic cause.
4 comments:
I totally tagree with you when you said that the difference between the act of DJs and advertising are the same. Even if I hear the same song so many times on radio or TV, I would not download or buy it unless I like the song. I think playing the same songs by Djs doesn't guarantee a song hit. Thank you for your summary of Payola!
I also agree with you on this topic. Back then Payola was a big scandal, but it's still basically happening today, just not so publicly. Like you said in your blog, the DJ isn't getting paid to play a song it's the program directors. SAME DIFFERENCE!. Let's be real here, somebody is always getting paid to do a favor in the music industry and in many other industries i'm sure of as well. I feel the high powered consumer industries, like the music industry has a level of corruption within its ranks. I feel that because of this who ever can pay the highest price is going to see the greatest amount of success.
I agree with you as well! Being a DJ is a job, and if they decide they want to get paid to promote a certain song then its up to them! The DJ is accountable for what his listeners think about their music choice & style, if that makes any sense. If Im at a club, and Im enjoying everything this DJ is playing, I am going to agree that he is an awesome DJ and every song hes playing was his decision to put it on. I dont think a DJ would play a song if he absolutely despised it. So getting paid to play and promote certain songs if they want to should be completely legal. Its just another way to advertise an artist's music!
I also believe that there are many scandals that are harming the entertainment and music industry, especially payola and the popular MTV network that has played a significant role in molding and shaping music the way it is today. There is no longer the idea of the People's Choice, but what has come to be important is the consumer and what music will drive people to consume more and drive up profits. The diversity and creativity of songs and music has rapidly declined on the radio and in mainstream media channels as a result.
Post a Comment