Entry tags:
Boycotting the RIAA
Rialian's Interest List (Continued)
Boycotting the RIAA
The RIAA (which stands for Recording Industry Association of America) was founded in 1953. Its original purpose was to advocate for and represent recording companies in disputes. A lesser-known original function of the RIAA is that it was established as the official certification agency for gold, platinum, multi-platinum and diamond record awards.
In other words, this organization was never intended to represent recording artists, which is the explanation usually offered for its continued existence. It is intended to assist large corporations to become larger, and to control which music is allowed airtime on major radio stations and which ones are allowed to receive awards (earned or not).
This situation was not optimal, but until recently it was tolerated. Then the Bush administration and its major media tentacles came into power. They saw the RIAA as an opportunity to use legal means to stem the free flow of digital information, and rapidly installed their own people within its ranks. The free flow of information is the antithesis of the controlled society that they're attempting to establish in this country, so the RIAA's powers were increased and refined, making it into an instrument for controlling that flow in the music industry and in other areas as well. Apparently the Bush administration recognized information in general and music in particular as being one of the prime ways in which the population can either be stirred to revolt or numbed to complacency, so they were not willing to allow the flow to travel where it wished.
To establish the RIAA's extended powers, controlled media stations used rhetoric involving "protection of the rights of recording artists" in order to gain political appeal. Simultaneously, they began multi-pronged legal assaults on individuals who operated peer-to-peer sharing websites, and on people who downloaded from those sites.
Most people entirely missed the fact that the RIAA dictates who does and who does not receive recording awards (i.e., they control who becomes popular), and that its original function did not have anything to do with recording artists at all, but with the control of information and the support of the recording industry.
For this reason, I believe it is a good idea to 1) boycott the RIAA, and 2) support the indie recording community which does not deal with the RIAA. Supporting the indie community is similar to supporting local growers and local stores rather than large chains, or growing multiculture gardens rather than supporting monoculture agribusiness.
The end result of boycotting the RIAA will be to strengthen the independent artists themselves. Buying RIAA-sanctioned CDs does not support the creators of the music. It supports the recording industry, whose executives and boards of directors are members of the RIAA. Not buying these CDs does nothing to the artists (since the RIAA ensures that they make no profit from CDs) but it *does* weaken the stranglehold of the RIAA -- and this is a good thing.
The RIAA is too big for individuals to take on directly, but if people stop supporting recording companies who are members of the RIAA and who think information should be controlled as dictated by the RIAA, their stranglehold can be broken. We the listeners are the reason they have been allowed to exist at all.
From the Urban Dictionary:
So the truth comes out. As I said before, the RIAA represents the recording industry (and in more recent years, the entire information industry), and not the artists. The artists themselves will tell you this. The RIAA's function is to control the flow of information and not to assist anyone (except those industries who hold most of the power in the world). This is something that most people miss.
In fact, most lost sales are not even lost due to piracy but rather are lost because the RIAA destroys unsold CDs to create the illusion of loss due to piracy so it can lend credence to its practices of controlling information. If they were concerned about lost sales, they would send the CDs to the artists and allow them to sell them on the internet. They do not do this, however The contract (no doubt created by the RIAA) probably forbids such a thing.
Eliminating the middle man (the recording companies) and dealing with indie culture seems to be the best way to upend these structures...
Like an underground mycelial mat that fruits when and where it pleases, indie artists will arise in the most unlikely places, and certainly not where they are expected. A diffuse, moving target is generally not a good one...
Boycotting the RIAA
The RIAA (which stands for Recording Industry Association of America) was founded in 1953. Its original purpose was to advocate for and represent recording companies in disputes. A lesser-known original function of the RIAA is that it was established as the official certification agency for gold, platinum, multi-platinum and diamond record awards.
In other words, this organization was never intended to represent recording artists, which is the explanation usually offered for its continued existence. It is intended to assist large corporations to become larger, and to control which music is allowed airtime on major radio stations and which ones are allowed to receive awards (earned or not).
This situation was not optimal, but until recently it was tolerated. Then the Bush administration and its major media tentacles came into power. They saw the RIAA as an opportunity to use legal means to stem the free flow of digital information, and rapidly installed their own people within its ranks. The free flow of information is the antithesis of the controlled society that they're attempting to establish in this country, so the RIAA's powers were increased and refined, making it into an instrument for controlling that flow in the music industry and in other areas as well. Apparently the Bush administration recognized information in general and music in particular as being one of the prime ways in which the population can either be stirred to revolt or numbed to complacency, so they were not willing to allow the flow to travel where it wished.
To establish the RIAA's extended powers, controlled media stations used rhetoric involving "protection of the rights of recording artists" in order to gain political appeal. Simultaneously, they began multi-pronged legal assaults on individuals who operated peer-to-peer sharing websites, and on people who downloaded from those sites.
Most people entirely missed the fact that the RIAA dictates who does and who does not receive recording awards (i.e., they control who becomes popular), and that its original function did not have anything to do with recording artists at all, but with the control of information and the support of the recording industry.
For this reason, I believe it is a good idea to 1) boycott the RIAA, and 2) support the indie recording community which does not deal with the RIAA. Supporting the indie community is similar to supporting local growers and local stores rather than large chains, or growing multiculture gardens rather than supporting monoculture agribusiness.
The end result of boycotting the RIAA will be to strengthen the independent artists themselves. Buying RIAA-sanctioned CDs does not support the creators of the music. It supports the recording industry, whose executives and boards of directors are members of the RIAA. Not buying these CDs does nothing to the artists (since the RIAA ensures that they make no profit from CDs) but it *does* weaken the stranglehold of the RIAA -- and this is a good thing.
The RIAA is too big for individuals to take on directly, but if people stop supporting recording companies who are members of the RIAA and who think information should be controlled as dictated by the RIAA, their stranglehold can be broken. We the listeners are the reason they have been allowed to exist at all.
From the Urban Dictionary:
RIAA: This organization represents the artists, right? WRONG! We don't get a cent from our works thanks to the RIAA, and the only way we can get by is to stage concerts, which is a risk because that sometimes costs us more than what we can afford. Supposedly the RIAA is trying to protect other peoples' works from being "pirated", but in reality, the RIAA destroys 1/3 of the music CDs not sold, counts that as "Lost Sales", and rewrites it to "Lost Sales caused by Piracy". If anything, piracy actually HELPS us a lot because more people listen to our music and decide whether it's worth keeping or not. The RIAA just keeps on resisting changes in technology, and has even gone to the point of suing the poor, the children, and the college students, all who make up a large percentage of its customers. I encourage everyone to share and trade music because that's the best way folks like me can ever be known beyond our towns.
So the truth comes out. As I said before, the RIAA represents the recording industry (and in more recent years, the entire information industry), and not the artists. The artists themselves will tell you this. The RIAA's function is to control the flow of information and not to assist anyone (except those industries who hold most of the power in the world). This is something that most people miss.
In fact, most lost sales are not even lost due to piracy but rather are lost because the RIAA destroys unsold CDs to create the illusion of loss due to piracy so it can lend credence to its practices of controlling information. If they were concerned about lost sales, they would send the CDs to the artists and allow them to sell them on the internet. They do not do this, however The contract (no doubt created by the RIAA) probably forbids such a thing.
Eliminating the middle man (the recording companies) and dealing with indie culture seems to be the best way to upend these structures...
Like an underground mycelial mat that fruits when and where it pleases, indie artists will arise in the most unlikely places, and certainly not where they are expected. A diffuse, moving target is generally not a good one...