Saturday, March 20, 2010
Why Havent I Gotten Married As Of Yet?
Simply put, I havent found the right woman for me! I have found a few good women, but it can be hard when you work as much as I do!
Payola in the Music Business
The professional career of Malcolm Freeney has maintained two tracks from its inception: one of an IT professional and the other of a budding music entrepreneur of a company called Park Place Record Corporation. This is important to note because one financed the other. The proceeds from the IT employment became the seed capital for his company, Park Place Record Corporation. As Mr. Freeney worked his way up the ranks from desktop support professional to network administrator towards management, he used the proceeds to fund his entertainment company.
Park Place Record Corporation consists of several interrelated branches: an artist management wing, independent record label, and a music production company. The goal was to be a stop shop, where an artist would come in, get groomed, and subsequently introduced into the marketplace with great fanfare and success. It was an ambitious venture, but the vision was to become the next Motown, where the company would make history that would transcend generations. This is important to note because Mr. Freeney would soon come across a situation where there would be a conflict between his financial/economic responsibilities and social/ethical responsibilities. An ethical analysis of the situation facing Park Place reveals a major conflict facing the organization: whether to engage in payola with its debut R&B artist, Ricco.
II. Description of Ethical Situation
The situation in question involves Park Place’s debut artist, an R&B male singer named Ricco. He was signed to the organization’s management arm, but he required additional development to introduce him to the marketplace. So the production and record label arms went into full motion to develop a set of material that would be conducive to his image. The intent here was to develop a situation where Park Place would be presented in the best possible light in order to develop a brand that would last a lifetime. The record label went even further and began strategizing and developing a means for the product to be released to the public. This brings us to the situation in question:
Payola is a common practice in the music industry, where record labels pay the radio stations to have their music played. It has always been illegal, but each time the law has been updated or changed, the record labels found a way around the situation. The latest workaround was for the record labels and other entities to pay “independent promoters” and the independent promoters would pay the record labels. These payments would be legal and could be found as line items on the balance sheets for every radio station. In addition, artists for the record labels would perform for record labels for free
So, Park Place was faced with the debut product from Ricco, which was to be introduced to the local market in Washington, D.C. Should Park Place reinforce the servicing of the record to radio stations and local deejays with payola in order to have the material played on the air? The menu of possible actions was to: 1.) not engage in the act of payola under any particular situation or circumstance, 2.) engage in limited forms of payola where the nightclub deejays would be paid off to play the record, 3.) engage in another limited form of payola where radio is paid off (legally or otherwise) for radio play, or 4.) Engage in any and all forms of payola as a means to introduce the record to the marketplace.
This situation presented both financial/economic implications and ethical social implications. To develop the record from a creative perspective had already cost Park Place approximately $20,000 in studio time and deferred labor expenses. The production expenditures were mandatory because the product had to be on the level of the major labels to be able to compete. On a shoestring budget that was dependent of one IT salary, a marketing and promotion budget that included payola would double that amount, and perhaps triple it. However, the question remains as to how could revenue be generated without the exposure?
III. The Ethical Decision that was made
Park Place decided not to engage in any form of payola. Mr. Freeney was willing to forge partnerships with the radio stations in order to move the organization forward. However, Mr. Freeney felt that the records should be able to stand on their merits. He also felt that radio should have a vested interest in building the local music scene from the Washington, D.C. area.
The full scope of the “managerial agency” was not considered at the time these decisions were being made. Other than the fact that the Park Place Record Corporation had not heard of the term “managerial agency,” economic implications were the primary consideration in the decision. Park Place had already spent a considerable amount of capital on the production of the material in order to get it to broadcast quality. Broadcast quality was important for the recorded material to be able to compete with the major record labels. As a result, this left a limited amount of capital for marketing and promotions which was a concern for the organization. So Park Place was limited in its economic options because of its limited track record as an organization. In addition, Ricco was not developed to the point where he could enter into a relationship with a major record label.
The legal ramifications of the decision were not considered extensively even though Park Place was aware of their potential. Its historical significance hovered over the organization dating back to the 1950’s when Alan Freed was paying disc jockey’s to have his records played. However, it would not be a major factor due to the fact that the economic situation dominated the calculus of the decision at the time. The legal ramifications would become significant however, because in 2007, the FCC would conclude an investigation of four of the six major radio corporations. The investigation would result in a 12.5 million fine for Clear Channel Communications Inc., CBS Radio, Entercom Communications Corp. and Citadel Broadcasting Corp. In addition, some of the record labels (such as Sony/BMG) had to pay a separate settlement investigated and negotiated by the state of New York.
The ethical ramifications of the decision made by Park Place were not considered at the time. The principles of Park Place acknowledged that it had ethical responsibilities as well as economic and legal responsibilities. But those responsibilities were not the foremost priority of the organization as it was seeking to establish itself in the marketplace. There was some thought given as to Park Place’s ability to choose and change the values and practices of their environment in Washington, D.C. area. Dreams and visions of being a catalyst for change in the music industry were developed in meetings within the staff of Park Place. In this case, “voice” was considered as a viable option to voice ethical concerns and to potentially organize concerted action. But it was crushed by the realities of the business and thus not fully acknowledged by the principles of Park Place and thus was not carried out.
The result of the ethical decision was that Ricco did not gain any airplay from within the Washington, D.C. area for the first CD release. Some of the radio jocks gave favorable impressions of the material, but could not go out on the limb to start playing the music. Light radio play came from the release of a second CD, but this was based on the relationships that were cultivated from the first CD. In addition, the musical direction of the music on the second CD release changed so that there was some material that was more conducive for radio to support.
IV. Ethical Analysis of the Situation
The ethical decision that was made in this particular situation did not ascribe to a sole ethical theory. The thought process behind this decision combined several ethical theories to form the decision that was made. Portions of the Libertarianism and the Rawls theories apply directly to the ethical decision made by the principals of Park Place Record Corporation.
Mr. Freeney stressed independence as a principle component of the vision behind Park Place. He valued alliances and partnerships but did not wish to become overly dependent anyone or any external entities. This way the organization could control its own destiny and fulfill its enormous growth potential. The ethical components of the libertarianism theory that stresses individual freedom, independence, and ownership are components that directly apply to this situation. More specifically any law that would be considered to be moral or expressed any form of moral conviction by the majority . The act of payola may be morally wrong to some, but it does not implicitly harm anyone, so it is up to the individual or the corporation to make a decision on whether they choose to engage in such a practice.
Mr. Freeney thought as a viable local music organization, that the market would be fair in providing his material a viable introduction to the marketplace. Especially since he possessed quality material that was worthy of radio play, he felt that it was only fair and in everyone’s best interest to play the material. Representing the views of Park Place as the organization, they felt that the radio stations should make an exception in how they normally do business and operate on some form of a social contract. This contract would stipulate what they advertise on the air that they support local artists and thus provide them with a shot at regular rotation. It would be similar to Rawls’ ethical theory which calls for a “hypothetical agreement in an original position of equality.” Radio stations in the Washington, D.C. area spoke of nurturing local artists as part of their marketing slogans. Park Place simply felt that an agreement was implied that would promote equality amongst all of the local artists getting a chance at radio play.
However, If Park Place did not feel that an agreement was implied and thus, engaged in the practice of payola; it would have been the perfect example of utilitarianism. The reason being is that the monies would have caused the greater good for all of the parties involved. The radio stations would receive additional revenues, Ricco would have experienced his records in regular rotation at radio, and Park Place would have experienced increased sales and exposure as a result of the radio play.
Payola and radio would not qualify as a human right worthy of respect. So Kant’s theory does not have a direct application in this instance. However, there are some indirect applications when examining some of Kant’s categorical imperatives. Radio deejays making false promises of radio knowing full well that they cannot deliver on these promises would qualify as a violation of Kant’s Categorical imperative I: Universalize your maxim.
Aristotle’s theory of ethics applies in this situation, when you ask a basic question, “Does Park Place have a right to have their records played?” Would it be an injustice if their records were not played? In this given situation, Park Place does not have a right to have their records played if the people do not wish to hear it upon an initial listen. However, it would be an injustice if Park Place was competing against another independent record label and Park Place was disqualified based on the fact that the other record was backed with payola. Park Place did not deserve radio play just because it was a Washington, DC organization, but it did deserve a level playing field to operate on.
V. Conclusion
An ethical analysis of the situation facing Park Place reveals a major conflict facing the organization: whether to engage in payola with its debut R&B artist, Ricco. The conflict was ultimately between Park Place’s financial/economic responsibilities and its social responsibilities. Originally, the decision was to not engage in payola of any kind and given the same set of circumstances, the same decision would have been made again. However, with hindsight being 20/20, a different business decision should have been made to reduce expenditures within the production process.
Park Place Record Corporation consists of several interrelated branches: an artist management wing, independent record label, and a music production company. The goal was to be a stop shop, where an artist would come in, get groomed, and subsequently introduced into the marketplace with great fanfare and success. It was an ambitious venture, but the vision was to become the next Motown, where the company would make history that would transcend generations. This is important to note because Mr. Freeney would soon come across a situation where there would be a conflict between his financial/economic responsibilities and social/ethical responsibilities. An ethical analysis of the situation facing Park Place reveals a major conflict facing the organization: whether to engage in payola with its debut R&B artist, Ricco.
II. Description of Ethical Situation
The situation in question involves Park Place’s debut artist, an R&B male singer named Ricco. He was signed to the organization’s management arm, but he required additional development to introduce him to the marketplace. So the production and record label arms went into full motion to develop a set of material that would be conducive to his image. The intent here was to develop a situation where Park Place would be presented in the best possible light in order to develop a brand that would last a lifetime. The record label went even further and began strategizing and developing a means for the product to be released to the public. This brings us to the situation in question:
Payola is a common practice in the music industry, where record labels pay the radio stations to have their music played. It has always been illegal, but each time the law has been updated or changed, the record labels found a way around the situation. The latest workaround was for the record labels and other entities to pay “independent promoters” and the independent promoters would pay the record labels. These payments would be legal and could be found as line items on the balance sheets for every radio station. In addition, artists for the record labels would perform for record labels for free
So, Park Place was faced with the debut product from Ricco, which was to be introduced to the local market in Washington, D.C. Should Park Place reinforce the servicing of the record to radio stations and local deejays with payola in order to have the material played on the air? The menu of possible actions was to: 1.) not engage in the act of payola under any particular situation or circumstance, 2.) engage in limited forms of payola where the nightclub deejays would be paid off to play the record, 3.) engage in another limited form of payola where radio is paid off (legally or otherwise) for radio play, or 4.) Engage in any and all forms of payola as a means to introduce the record to the marketplace.
This situation presented both financial/economic implications and ethical social implications. To develop the record from a creative perspective had already cost Park Place approximately $20,000 in studio time and deferred labor expenses. The production expenditures were mandatory because the product had to be on the level of the major labels to be able to compete. On a shoestring budget that was dependent of one IT salary, a marketing and promotion budget that included payola would double that amount, and perhaps triple it. However, the question remains as to how could revenue be generated without the exposure?
III. The Ethical Decision that was made
Park Place decided not to engage in any form of payola. Mr. Freeney was willing to forge partnerships with the radio stations in order to move the organization forward. However, Mr. Freeney felt that the records should be able to stand on their merits. He also felt that radio should have a vested interest in building the local music scene from the Washington, D.C. area.
The full scope of the “managerial agency” was not considered at the time these decisions were being made. Other than the fact that the Park Place Record Corporation had not heard of the term “managerial agency,” economic implications were the primary consideration in the decision. Park Place had already spent a considerable amount of capital on the production of the material in order to get it to broadcast quality. Broadcast quality was important for the recorded material to be able to compete with the major record labels. As a result, this left a limited amount of capital for marketing and promotions which was a concern for the organization. So Park Place was limited in its economic options because of its limited track record as an organization. In addition, Ricco was not developed to the point where he could enter into a relationship with a major record label.
The legal ramifications of the decision were not considered extensively even though Park Place was aware of their potential. Its historical significance hovered over the organization dating back to the 1950’s when Alan Freed was paying disc jockey’s to have his records played. However, it would not be a major factor due to the fact that the economic situation dominated the calculus of the decision at the time. The legal ramifications would become significant however, because in 2007, the FCC would conclude an investigation of four of the six major radio corporations. The investigation would result in a 12.5 million fine for Clear Channel Communications Inc., CBS Radio, Entercom Communications Corp. and Citadel Broadcasting Corp. In addition, some of the record labels (such as Sony/BMG) had to pay a separate settlement investigated and negotiated by the state of New York.
The ethical ramifications of the decision made by Park Place were not considered at the time. The principles of Park Place acknowledged that it had ethical responsibilities as well as economic and legal responsibilities. But those responsibilities were not the foremost priority of the organization as it was seeking to establish itself in the marketplace. There was some thought given as to Park Place’s ability to choose and change the values and practices of their environment in Washington, D.C. area. Dreams and visions of being a catalyst for change in the music industry were developed in meetings within the staff of Park Place. In this case, “voice” was considered as a viable option to voice ethical concerns and to potentially organize concerted action. But it was crushed by the realities of the business and thus not fully acknowledged by the principles of Park Place and thus was not carried out.
The result of the ethical decision was that Ricco did not gain any airplay from within the Washington, D.C. area for the first CD release. Some of the radio jocks gave favorable impressions of the material, but could not go out on the limb to start playing the music. Light radio play came from the release of a second CD, but this was based on the relationships that were cultivated from the first CD. In addition, the musical direction of the music on the second CD release changed so that there was some material that was more conducive for radio to support.
IV. Ethical Analysis of the Situation
The ethical decision that was made in this particular situation did not ascribe to a sole ethical theory. The thought process behind this decision combined several ethical theories to form the decision that was made. Portions of the Libertarianism and the Rawls theories apply directly to the ethical decision made by the principals of Park Place Record Corporation.
Mr. Freeney stressed independence as a principle component of the vision behind Park Place. He valued alliances and partnerships but did not wish to become overly dependent anyone or any external entities. This way the organization could control its own destiny and fulfill its enormous growth potential. The ethical components of the libertarianism theory that stresses individual freedom, independence, and ownership are components that directly apply to this situation. More specifically any law that would be considered to be moral or expressed any form of moral conviction by the majority . The act of payola may be morally wrong to some, but it does not implicitly harm anyone, so it is up to the individual or the corporation to make a decision on whether they choose to engage in such a practice.
Mr. Freeney thought as a viable local music organization, that the market would be fair in providing his material a viable introduction to the marketplace. Especially since he possessed quality material that was worthy of radio play, he felt that it was only fair and in everyone’s best interest to play the material. Representing the views of Park Place as the organization, they felt that the radio stations should make an exception in how they normally do business and operate on some form of a social contract. This contract would stipulate what they advertise on the air that they support local artists and thus provide them with a shot at regular rotation. It would be similar to Rawls’ ethical theory which calls for a “hypothetical agreement in an original position of equality.” Radio stations in the Washington, D.C. area spoke of nurturing local artists as part of their marketing slogans. Park Place simply felt that an agreement was implied that would promote equality amongst all of the local artists getting a chance at radio play.
However, If Park Place did not feel that an agreement was implied and thus, engaged in the practice of payola; it would have been the perfect example of utilitarianism. The reason being is that the monies would have caused the greater good for all of the parties involved. The radio stations would receive additional revenues, Ricco would have experienced his records in regular rotation at radio, and Park Place would have experienced increased sales and exposure as a result of the radio play.
Payola and radio would not qualify as a human right worthy of respect. So Kant’s theory does not have a direct application in this instance. However, there are some indirect applications when examining some of Kant’s categorical imperatives. Radio deejays making false promises of radio knowing full well that they cannot deliver on these promises would qualify as a violation of Kant’s Categorical imperative I: Universalize your maxim.
Aristotle’s theory of ethics applies in this situation, when you ask a basic question, “Does Park Place have a right to have their records played?” Would it be an injustice if their records were not played? In this given situation, Park Place does not have a right to have their records played if the people do not wish to hear it upon an initial listen. However, it would be an injustice if Park Place was competing against another independent record label and Park Place was disqualified based on the fact that the other record was backed with payola. Park Place did not deserve radio play just because it was a Washington, DC organization, but it did deserve a level playing field to operate on.
V. Conclusion
An ethical analysis of the situation facing Park Place reveals a major conflict facing the organization: whether to engage in payola with its debut R&B artist, Ricco. The conflict was ultimately between Park Place’s financial/economic responsibilities and its social responsibilities. Originally, the decision was to not engage in payola of any kind and given the same set of circumstances, the same decision would have been made again. However, with hindsight being 20/20, a different business decision should have been made to reduce expenditures within the production process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)