Youtube -The Radical Environment for Self-promotion That Is Facing Censorship - Research Paper Example

 Youtube: The radical environment for self-promotion that is now facing censorship Introduction The 21st century has seen the rise of websites that are geared toward self-promotion. Sites like MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter have created a way for the average person to publish anything they want the world to know about themselves online. The web has generated blogs that create an ongoing diary for the world to witness the events that shape ordinary lives. The internet has opened doors, some of which are not desirable, others in which people who might not have had an opportunity to shine can absolutely glow. One of these sites is called Youtube, where individuals can create their own videos and upload them for the world to see. However, in recently a censorship has evolved that has diminished the free environment of Youtube. While the home to many homemade videos, the site also carries a great deal of content that show music videos, television programs, and just about anything that can be copied and shown on the site. This poses problems with the publishing rights of those who own the work that is published on Youtube. According to Geoghegan and Klass (2007, 205), in this age of self publishing, a home video maker must be on Youtube if they want to send their message out to those who are attracted to the video shorts made by the amateur creator. Youtube has a great number of choices in the type of material that is available on the site. According to Schepp and Schepp (2009, 46), the most popular videos on Youtube are those that teach the viewer how to do something. Many activities are available for viewing and with the site being free, the viewer has the ability to create work that can be utilized by a large audience. The topics of discussion are endless as the many minds of the world have contributed to creating the entire body of work. Because of copyright laws, Youtube faces problems where their content is concerned. PRS, or the Performing Rights Society of Music has proposed an untenable deal for Youtube after the expiration of their original deal with the organization. The deal would require Youtube to pay out more for the rights to show the videos that are affected than the ads that are placed next to the videos pay to the site. The would create a loss in revenue for the popular site. Youtube is subject to licensing laws in accordance to individual nations laws and must pay for the privilege of showing some of the content. Therefore, this new wrinkle sets up a conflict between the intent of the site and the availability of content (PDA The Digital Content Blog 2010). History of Youtube In February of 2005, Chad Hurley, Steve Chen, and Jawid Karim, former employees of Paypal, began development of an idea of a video hosting site. The site was funded through venture capital from a company called Sequoia Capital of Menola Park, California and was launched by December of that year. Google purchased the company for 1.65 billion in stock by November of 2006, operating the company as an independent subsidiary of Google. The monetary success of the company is notoriously bad, although he popularity of the site soars each year. The content rich site is reported to cost 1million dollars a day to operate while it reports no where near that type of revenue. The company is seeking out new ways in which to support its expenses and to revitalize its income to match the success of its daily access (Schepp and Schepp 2009, 21). According to Steve Chen the success of the site can be attributed to the timing in which it entered the market. Inexpensive video cameras, the growth of fiber lines from 1999 to 2004, and the expansion of the broadband technologies created a perfect environment in which to launch the site. Since that time, celebrity has come to those who have created content and posted it to the site where the content caught a broad audience (Schepp and Schepp 2009, 21). Singers, video bloggers, and outrageous scenes of every day life have gained popularity for those who have hit upon the right idea at the right time on the site. However, the site also caters to professional videos that are released onto the site for publicity and to promote the objects of the content. One of those types of content that benefit from the worldwide availability of the site is music video. The Digital Age and the Music Industry The way in which the music industry has handled the new digital age has created many problems for both sides of the equation. Instead of embracing the new ways in which music can be experienced, there has been a continual battle between music makers and the freedom of digital recreation and publishing. One of the first battles that was fought between the digital revolution and the music industry was over a site created by 18 year old Shawn Fanning when he designed software that could create a music exchange online (Kot 2009, 26). Napster was a website that could search uploaded music and video from other subscribers and then share that content with others on the site. Generally, the music industry’s attitude toward the new advent of file exchange was ignored. Both the dangers of pirated music and the advantages of easy publicity seemed to elude the industry as a whole. In 1998, however, the alarming decrease in revenue from retail purchases forced the industry to address the issue. While artists were asked to address and come out in support of the end of the piracy, others like the Beastie Boys used the venue to promote themselves. The Beastie Boys gave away digital files from their August tour, a promotion that was swiftly ended by their label, but which allowed for the collection of a hundred thousand e- mail addresses. In 1999, Tom Petty uploaded a free version of his new song that was coming out soon called “Free Girl Now” to a website called MP3.com. The song was downloaded more than 150,000 times in the 56 hours it was there until the record label stopped the dissemination of the recording (Kot 2009, 27). The digital age created problems for the record industry. The content of the files that contained the music of professional artists are hard to contain and control. Therefore, creating profit from the release of digital content onto the web becomes problematic. As in the case of Tom Petty, the free release could have been used to promote the upcoming album, but the idea of creating support for free file sharing caused such an issue within the industry that the publicity opportunity seemed to be wasted. However, one can look at it from the standpoint of the idea that Tom Petty might wanted to have appealed to the rebel, thus taking the single down from the free site put Petty on the side of the downloading public, rather than on the side of the hard-nosed industry executives. Either way, the industry appears to be a step behind in the digital products that can both help and harm their profits on their product. Napster was sued in 1999 by The Recording Industry Association of America for copyright infringement. Following this suit, the rock band Metallica filed an additional lawsuit and Lars Ulrich, a musician in the band, showed up at the offices of Napster with file boxes full of the names of people who had uploaded Metallica songs into the software. This resulted in the banning of 335,000 people from the website as it struggled to comply with the law and to navigate the lawsuits that were launched against the site (Kot 2009, 33). The following passage reveals the general attitude and cost to Metallica for having taken this position. The band had its fan base in turmoil by the decision to so vocally support the record industry position. One of the 335,000 named by Metallica was Mark, of St. Charles, Illinois. “This is how I’ve used Napster in the past: I would download a song or two of the band,” he said. “If I liked something, then I would fork over the money for the CD. The funny thing is that if it wasn’t for Napster, I would not have bought [the 1999 Metallica CD] S&M. According to Cavalier (2005, 31), Napster lost their case and lost on appeal when they attempted to compare themselves to the VCR in that replicating copyrighted materials to a new format, which was then compared to the 1984 suite Sony v Universal City Studios where the private use of the materials was considered non-infringing. However, Napster did not win its appeal and Napster has now become a pay per download site. Ironically, shortly after the lawsuit the record industry was charged with anti-trust issues stemming from illegal contracts with retail outlets that did not honor the royalty agreements with artists for CD distribution (Cavelier 2005, 33). The results for Metallica was that the fan base for whom they had established a reputation for being one of them, rather than distant celebrities now saw them as tools of the corporation. When asked about the episode in 2003 Ulrich described it as a “bad dream” as he admitted the shortsightedness of his actions (Kot 2009, 38). The arguments that came from the recording artists who supported the new technologies and supported Napster were that the record industry had always been stealing money from the artists, creating difficult contracts and giving the artists the least of the advantages of the sale of their work. For these artists, Napster supported the art, where the corporation that was refusing to work with the new technologies was supporting an avenue that was not going to be in the overall best interest of itself. The new technologies were not going anywhere (Kot 2009). The New Promotion of Music According to Straubhaar, LaRose, and Davenport (2009, 146), the expenses in the normal course of creating and promoting a music act for a record company are quite prohibitive. The label must put up the money to create the music for the record, pay for independent promoters to get the music onto the radio, create publicity campaigns, and produce music videos. The costs are such that many times contracts must be canceled before the public has a real chance to fully experience a new artist. A rise in the popularity of independent labels has proven that the large scale promotion and promotional costs that larger labels utilize are not necessary in order to promote an artist. However, it is the ease that technology has created within the industry that has given it the greatest advantages. Straubhaar, LaRose, and Davenport (2009, 146) claim that the radio is far less central to the success of a musician than it used to be before the popularity of MTV created a need for visual media to accompany music. Without visual media, most music is never experienced by the public. In order to well promote a music act a video is essential in carrying the work further to the audience. The use of such websites like Youtube allows for acts that do not have a great deal of capital from which to create expensive campaigns to promote themselves through the needed visual medium that can promote their music. One then has to wonder if creating a separation from the popular sites that carry independent work will diminish the popularity of music acts that are no longer promoted through popular websites such as Youtube. Music is sold through the advantages of the retail system, through record clubs, and through television commercials. In addition to these venues, music is now downloadable through sites such as I-Tunes, Napster, and Zune. The new technology allows for a broader experience with exploring bands. One of the ways in which to explore new bands is to go to Youtube and listen to what they have to offer. If the music appeals, a buyer can go to a download site of choice and choose to buy a copy of the music they have heard and apply it to a device of their choosing. The promotion of bands has changed in that new bands no longer have to depend on a major record label to create their popularity. Through the use of MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter, artists of all types can create personal spaces that promote their work. Examples of their music can be uploaded onto some sites as well as references made to their personal websites where even more promotion can occur with more information being available. By uploading music videos on to Youtube, further exposure can be created. This gives many opportunities for the unsigned music act to promote themselves and create celebrity where none was available before the creation of this type of do it yourself publicity. Furthermore, the big act must also compete in this new form of the dissemination of information or risk being forgotten as other acts take their place. These aspects of promotion must be assessed before the music industry once again goes to war against the new technologies. The fact is that while Napster lost its battle to the music industry, ultimately the music industry lost its battle against the technology and had to find a way to use it instead of fight against its growing usefulness. If the U. K. organization PRS remains stubborn against Youtube and pulls its videos rather than take less of a payment for the licensing rights, it will be the artists who will lose the access to their work that the fan base has developed. If the music disappears off of the site while it is still in its peak of popularity, the music acts will suffer for it. Searches that come up empty will more often lead to other avenues of entertainment rather than create a need for leaving the Youtube site to search out the music from another source. The power of free websites is that it creates a base of information, just like Napster did, from which to make informed decisions as a consumer. If the information is not there, then the decision will most likely follow what content is available. Youtube According to Schepp and Schepp (2009, 27), Youtube is an entire community that extends beyond just the sharing of videos. The demographics are broad and the users claim not to mind the advertisements as the site then remains free. This is good news for the advertisers and allows for the encouragement of a continuation of participation as they know that the site has value to them. The site has more than 200 million visitors per month that proves that the site has a powerful viewship that can make or break promoted individuals. The creation of celebrity through the use of self promoting publicity has attracted a wide variety of individuals and changed lives. One individual, Lucas Cruikshank, created character named “Fred”, a six year old boy which he plays on a variety of videos. Fred is entrenched in some very deep social issues such as an absent and imprisoned father, an alcoholic mother, and some serious anger management issues that are all dealt with through some irreverence and a great deal of humor (Weinberg 2009, 285). According to Schepp and Schepp (2009, 30), his channel created such a large fan base that he has been hired by an advertising firm and has a manager. Curikshank produced his work on his family farm in Nebraska with two of his cousins and is now the spokesperson for a new technology involved with text messaging devices targeted toward the pre-teen demographic. Lucas is just 14 years old and has created a lucrative career through his home made short films. This is part of the magic of Youtube. If someone creates a home made video that captures the attention of the viewing public, instant fame can be the result. This is without great expense or even a particular plan for the publicity or the fame. Therefore, the power of the technology and the informative nature of the site can create an even larger fan base for a musical act that has the capital and backing of a major label. The music as it is available through the internet creates the desire to be able to listen to it beyond this venue. However, the record labels still seem to be lacking a basic understanding of the new sources of promotion. The idea that this type of exposure should be a large source of direct revenue is contrary to the purposes of the website in creating free content for its users. In creating free content for users, the site promotes to a wide audience what would normally require a great outlay of money for the record label. Conclusion The actions of the PRS in creating a financial scenario that is beyond the means of Youtube does not seem to make sense. According to Patrick Walker, director of video partnerships for Youtube, “The record industry needs new business models so its kind of a shame that this has happened” (PDA The Digital Blog, 2010). With the technology being lead by the younger demographics, the industry needs to pay attention to where the viewers go rather than combat the sites in attempts to create new revenue streams. Otherwise, the lessons of Napster will not show to have been learned and the industry will suffer for its arrogance once again. In the aftermath of the Napster revolution, the sales of music CD’s dropped dramatically, especially for the band Metallica (Kot 2009, 38). The band had to work to recover from their association with an old and disconnected point of view on the distribution of music. The release of the blog on the decision of Youtube to pull the videos that were in question through the unreasonable demands of PRS for financial compensation for their content on the site was in March of 2009. In September of that year an agreement was made between PRS and Youtube, unblocking the content for the viewers in the U.K. The rate that the PRS was expecting was .22 pence, but was slashed in June by an amount of 61% to .084 pence in order to create a more tenable licensing agreement. However, Billboard reports that it is probable that Youtube has agreed to a one time payoff rather than a continuing cycle of payments in relationship to the number of times each video is viewed (Paine 2009). The fact that the issue has been settled in no way diminishes the egregious actions of the PRS. For about six months the careers of the affected artists were impacted by a lack of a presence on the now centrally considered venue for exploring music. The idea of fan based promotion is not a new idea. According to Krasilovsky, Shemel, Gross, and Feinstein (2007, 446), the Grateful dead encouraged their fans to record their concerts and spread the recordings throughout their community of listeners. This form of distribution helped to promote the importance of the music over profit, creating a connection to the audience. Not all musicians can use their recordings merely as promotional tools for their concerts, ignoring the revenue from the potential sales of their work in favor of allowing free distribution. However, the promotion through free sites has a great value in creating publicity for musical acts and in repeating this battle, the recording industry pushes its fans away from wanting to support their clients and use their financial power to support their interests. This battle has been a continuing saga in the history of music for the last decade since the internet became central to the distribution of information. Because the format is free, the use of it can be either embraced or negotiated against. The internet does not seem to be diminishing as a source of new musical content. The recording industry seems hard pressed to finally and definitively embrace these new technologies, working with them to ensure the continued admiration of the fan base while developing new business models in order to more fully take advantage of the medium. References Cavalier, Robert J. 2005. The impact of the internet on our moral lives. Albany, N.Y.: State university of new york press. Geoghegan, Michael W., and Dan Klass. 2007. Podcast solutions: the complete guide to audio and video podcasting. Berkeley, CA: Friends of Ed. Kot, Greg. 2009. Ripped: How the wired generation revolutionized music. New York: Simon and Schuster. Krasilovsky, M. William, Sidney Shemel, John M. Gross, and Jonathan Feinstein. 2007. The business of music: the definitive guide to the music industry. Los Angeles: Billboard Books. Paine, Andre. 02 September 2009. Youtube, PRS agree licensing deal. Billboard Biz.com. Retrieved 24 May 2010 from http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/ind ustry/e3i82908c6716f89cd126fb26e42dc438ad PDA The Digital Content Blog. 9 March 2009. Google and PRS in deadlock as music videos pulled from Youtube. The Guardian. Retrieved 24 May 2010 from http://www.guardian.co .uk/media/pda/2009/mar/09/digital-music-and-audio-youtube Schepp, Brad, and Debra Schepp. 2009. How to make money with YouTube: earn cash, market yourself, reach your customers, and grow your business on the world's most popular video-sharing site. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. Straubhaar, Joseph D., Robert LaRose, and Lucinda Davenport. 2009. Media now: understanding media, culture, and technology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Weinberg, Tamar. 2009. The new community rules: marketing on the social web. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly. Read More