Pearl Jam Does Business++
I admit to not being a fan of Pearl Jam, but they did something to at least make me reconsider my position on them. Yesterday they released their newest music video “Life Wasted” on Google Video for free and under a Creative Commons “some rights reserved” license. Unfortunately, free streaming and download is only available until next Wednesday (5/24) so they only really got it half right.
Why not keep it free forever? It’s not like it probably won’t show up on YouTube eventually once someone catches it on their DVR and when did selling music videos really become a big moneymaker? If anything I would keep the low resolution version free and simply sell a higher resolution one for the people who really want to see it. Music videos are meant for promotion and using Google Video is a great vehicle to make this happen, especially when people start to share the video on their own sites as I have done here.
It’s cool that Pearl Jam is doing this. It’s not revolutionary and I have to wonder why you don’t see this from every band. Songs are being released on MySpace daily and you don’t read about the negative effect that is having on a band’s sales so why would releasing music videos be any different?
I don’t worry about content thieves that much anymore.* Most of the time when someone takes an article from here they at least provide a link back to the site and I have to wonder how many people are reading my content on my site versus the number that reads it elsewhere? I’m guessing not that many even bother to read it elsewhere and if they do and like it, there is a good chance they will come here to the original source and stick around. In a twisted form of logic when we complain about content thieves (the ones that provide proper attribution) we are acting like Sony who doesn’t want their content being seen in as many places as possible.
* That doesn’t mean I am happy when someone steals my content and makes whatever amount of money from it without proper attribution. I just hate legal issues and having to worry about something that many times I have control over. Best to stick with producing content and having fun. Let your mom worry who is stealing what.
*/
The Money program in the Uk had this week a feature on the online music versus record companies and in specific myspace. It raises the usual record company agrument and came down on the point of view you are stating rather than theirs. In the Uk this program is a bit of a good indicator of what is going on with main stream thoughts so was interesting to focus on these areas.
By karmatosed on May 20, 2006 7:39 pm
So are you saying they disagreed with my opinion on how the matter of music video distribution should be handled?
By Scrivs on May 20, 2006 8:24 pm
No they agreed. It was very against what was portrayed as dinosaurs of record companies that are having to change their perspective.
By karmatosed on May 20, 2006 8:32 pm
Good to hear. This almost begs the question (and another entry) if an independent band released a music video and released it for free, but it suffered in low production value, would you be more enticed to view than a high production video by a mainstream band you are familiar with that you had to pay a small fee for?
By Scrivs on May 20, 2006 8:40 pm
You ask an interesting question, Scrivs. I think more would opt for the small fee for better product, in all honesty.
Also, Pearl Jam can do this sort of thing because they claimed huge fame from their first album (Ten) and the first few singles/videos from that album (Alive, Evenflow, Jeremy), and a huge hit single/video from Temple of the Dog (Hunger Strike). Pearl Jam, after this huge initial success, simply quit making videos and swore off MTV completely. This move was a huge promotional/marketing risk. I don’t mean to give a history of Pearl Jam, but only to say they only had the privilege of skipping MTV and traditional video after becoming huge by using MTV and traditional video. Their sales have faltered ever since. So, I’m a bit curious as to how this works out for them.
By Shawn on May 20, 2006 10:56 pm
Well I will explore the question in a future entry maybe, but let’s look at the history of Pearl Jam and MTV. You say that Pearl Jam can do these kinds of things and I think any group can do this because it doesn’t sidestep MTV at all. Sure they could skip MTV in the past, but who says that releasing your video for free means you should also skip MTV?
How is releasing your video for free a promotional risk? Besides we know MTV doesn’t play videos now anyways. You have to hit up MTV2 for that and soon you will probably have to hit up MTV35 to even catch a hour of music videos.
By Scrivs on May 20, 2006 11:35 pm
I’m just betting the past success PJ has under their belt is a huge advantage over bands who are just starting and trying to “make it big” through free vids on Google, You Tube, or even MySpace. I think those venues would be huge – HUGE – if taken advantage of by an already very successful band. I just think it would be a tough haul for lesser known acts. I could be wrong.
Also, I didn’t say “releasing your video for free a promotional risk.” I said Pearl Jam boycotting MTV back in the day was a HUGE risk for them, as a band. Arguably, it never paid off because their sales went steadily downhill ever since … They still sell big, but not as big as they once did.
By Shawn on May 21, 2006 12:11 am
PS – I agree with you about MTV programming … I’m not even sure why they call it Music TV anymore.
By Shawn on May 21, 2006 12:12 am
Well free videos doesn’t mean instant success of course and just because everyone can do it that still doesn’t put you on a level playing field. Not everyone is able to get on MTV which still goes a long way in helping out any band.
By Scrivs on May 21, 2006 12:17 am
Absolutley, Scrivs. One word: iTunes! The Holy Grail … of any future music industry, IMHO. Plus, Axl Rose “leaks” on the Internet (the new promotional gimmick!). :)
By Shawn on May 21, 2006 12:30 am
Well the Holy Grail will always be something that every industry will look for, but fighting the natural forces of the crowds will only bring about trouble. Does that make any sense? Who the hell knows because I’m exhausted.
However, if iTunes does become the Holy Grail then you are looking at a Apple/iPod monopoly. Don’t know if I want that.
By Scrivs on May 21, 2006 1:35 am
[...] In yesterday’s entry on Pearl Jam I wrote: [...]
By Steal My Content…Please » Wisdump on May 21, 2006 3:27 pm
[...] Not sure how I missed this but ABC launched their online video player at the beginning of this month which allows you to watch selected ABC shows online with short 30 second interactive ads sprinkled in. However, they are making the same mistake along the lines of Sony and Pearl Jam by only keeping the episodes free for a limited time. If advertisers are willing to pay for those eyeballs and be the sole advertiser for a single episode then why not keep them free forever? [...]
By ABC Almost Gets It » Wisdump on May 30, 2006 8:42 am
This would be a bit of a big deal if I knew anyone who had ever gone and bought a single music promo video but I dont. My experience is that people dont want to really own music videos but just watch them a couple of times instead. Im going to record a video with my band and let the world have it for free. The world won’t want it though, because the world doesn’t want anything with a perceived value of nil. Ill let you know how I get on though. Great blog by the way. Ive stumbled it.
By calum on January 20, 2009 5:51 am