Everything old is new again

Radio has come full circle, and we're back to the good old days.

During a single week in May, Canadian pop rocker Avril Lavigne's new song Don't Tell Me aired no fewer than 109 times on Nashville radio station WQZQ-FM.

The heaviest rotation came between midnight and 6 a.m., an on-air no man's land visited largely by insomniacs, truckers and graveyard shift workers. On one Sunday morning, the three-minute, 24-second song aired 18 times, sometimes as little as 11 minutes apart.

Those plays, or "spins," helped Don't Tell Me vault into the elite top 10 on Billboard magazine's national pop radio chart, which radio program directors across the country use to spot hot new tunes.

But what many chart watchers may not know is that the predawn saturation in Nashville — and elsewhere — occurred largely because Arista Records paid the station to play the song as an advertisement. In all, sources said, WQZQ aired Don't Tell Me as an ad at least 40 times the week ending May 23, accounting for more than one-third of the song's airplay on the station.

The Don't Tell Me campaign is part of the latest craze in record promotion, a high-pressure part of the music business in which the labels try to influence which songs reach the air. . . .

In the latest twist, it's the radio stations themselves that have been reaching out to the labels, offering to play songs in the form of ads, often in the early morning hours when there tends to be an excess inventory of airtime. The practice is legal as long as the station makes an on-air disclosure of the label's sponsorship — typically with an introduction such as "And now, Avril Lavigne's Don't Tell Me, presented by Arista Records."

To be sure, Don't Tell Me is a bona fide hit, even without spins being bought and paid for. Radio stations must play a song many thousands of times for it to crack the Billboard top 10. Nonetheless, a few hundred spins here and there can move a song up a place or two in the rankings — and ensure that it is climbing rather than falling on the charts.

Now, don't blame the labels, at least not totally. The second a record loses spins, BAM! it's history. At least now they're being up-front about everything.

Man. What's next-- poodle skirts?

Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 4

§ 4 Comments

1

Miss Lavigne pays for these ads along with other promotion so this is just another pile of money another artist won't get from her record label.

I wonder who will be the first label that shuts down all A&R/promo and sticks to distribution only. The former are labor- and cost-intensive with rare chances of return on the investment. The latter is something the Big Five are really good at and has a steady revenue stream.

2

GP,
The problem is that such a label won't be a label any more. Companies like Koch and Ryko who have both functions are careful to keep the two-- label and distro-- separate, because the risk of the label business really screws with the steadiness of the distro income.

What's more likely to happen will be that, say, Koch shuts down their label in favor of just being a distributor with a small rump team of A&R guys who work out of the office taking and vetting applications for distribution from artists who come to them. That would actually be a good idea! Anyone got some capital?

3

That's exactly what I'm talking about, Johno. Let the label do what it is really good at (distro) and get a wider variety of artists released. If the artists do their own production and as you say a rump team of A&R guys vet for quality it could get artists' music out the door make the label vast quantities of cash. After all, if you're selling millions of CDs per annum, does it truly matter whether the catalog is 50% Britney-type stars and 50% smaller acts or 100% smaller acts?

I have no capital. Damn.

4

GP, it actually does truly matter how the sales of the catalog break down. Economies of scale mean that Britney acts, once they reach a certain scale, make a giant amount of money fast. Smaller acts, thanks to certain fixed costs and other incremental costs, can't rake it in on the same scale.

Put differently, the math would go for example,

1 Britney selling a gazillion= 100%

100 YourBandHeres each selling a centigazillion= 65%

[ You're too late, comments are closed ]