Song of the Moment: Fifty in Five

UPDATED: I sit here and listen to the last song on the new Hilltop Hoods CD – Fifty in Five off the album State of the Art – and I am literally speechless.

Listen to this song. Read the lyrics.

This is a narrative about humanity. My interpretation of the title is that it reflects on the last fifty years of world events in five minutes and it does so with absolute style and precision.

I was listening to it repeatedly last night knowing that I wanted to write about it and yet hours later still feel that I cannot find the words to do it justice. I had thought to write up something about all of the individual events that the lyrics cover but what I really want to write about is the emotion that this song brings out in me. This song makes me feel sad, angry, disappointed and worried. The lack of repetition and the lack of chorus are indicative of the fact that this song is not an anthem. It is not there to make us want to do something. It does not try to bring people together to make a positive change. It is the epitome of sadness and the confronting, bitter truth.

The sheer volume of lyrics is overwhelming. I have written shorter essays than this. They cover an enormous range of topics and events with an international perspective that shows the wide spread damage and devastation of the corruption and decay of modern society. I hesitate to give examples because the nature of the lyrics are to mention so much in such a short space that not one thing is given priority over another; it is a list. I wonder if the composers had to restrict themselves and had to leave things out. Ironically we might applaud the level of detail and quantity of information they have included and yet the song itself is written to speak of the sheer dissatisfaction of how so much wrong has occurred in just fifty years.

It mentions the future but only in context and connection with the past. It is not at all hope for what may change or what may come next. It tells us how we have set ourselves up to fail. How stupidity, ignorance, lack of leadership and ourselves are to blame for what comes next: ‘the generation next will degenerate and die’.

In sections the song talks about the distractions that prevent us from seeing the destruction that is before us. Things like the Macerena, superman, chicken dance and botox. The song reflects on the youth – women getting fake tits and young kids in detox. My interpretation is that references to technology including the internet and 3g cellular phones are also negative statements about distractions and how we have the technology to communicate and yet we just don’t in the way that matters. The reference to how ‘mp3s saw the death of an industry’ reflects on how the loss of the music industry renders poets/musicians incapable of helping us to make sense of the world and to be the agents of social change that we so desperately need.

Towards the end, the lyrics move from merely being a list to using cultural references to characterise the distraction of society. It warps into text that includes numerous references to horror movie titles and the names of drugs – aspects of our culture that reflect the sentiments of the song: the terror and dependence that we suffer. At the height of the passion, questions are asked - a rhetorical question: 'what happened to the love?' and another that asks 'what happened to the cubs?' [they were fed to the wolves]. Questioning the loss of the positive motivations of the 1960's and the focus on the needs of children, brings an element of uncertainty to the lyrics when concepts rather than events are considered.

The musicality of the song is well worth mentioning too.

As with most hip hop, the lyrics flow without a break but here the lack of pauses and the perpetual motion illustrate how these events have taken place one after the other without room for reflection, without the chance to stop and take account of what’s happening. The flood of events and the flood of lyrics parallel a world that does not have a chance to take its breath.

At one stage the lead singer sounds like he is gritting or clenching his teeth in frustration or disgust. He is easily heard above the music but as the song builds he becomes louder, more predominant and has more and more angst. The incomprehensible sweet whispering layered above the tale reminds me of the sugar coating of the media but perhaps is really meant to be the spoonful of sugar to be taken with the medicine.

The music has moments that seem regular – when it is not overwhelming and provides a solid background to the text. At others times there are distinct samples and the integration of instruments and styles – a sample of Martin Luther King (the loss of hope), John F Kennedy (a small, barely audible sample that depicts that we can no longer hear or remember what he said), groaning/moaning (pain), helicopters, rifles, a bomb (war), a brass line from an 'olden days' song at the same time as the discussion of right wing overlords and refugees, the building of tension and urgency by the use of piano chords and the interposing of another voice which yells out key words (adding emphasis and trying to get our attention).

Indeed the dynamics of the song depend heavily on the change of colours in the underlying score with little change in the pitch and speed of the vocalist and drums that have a consistent tempo. The song does not noticeably speed up but rather the consistency illustrates the persistence and unrelenting nature of the chaos that we face.

When discussing the ozone layer and the how the earth is cooking itself the music becomes harsh and percussive which reflects the pain, discomfort and discord of the global suicide that is taking place.

Finally, at key points the music goes quiet with a small number of instruments playing a thin or light melody in the background. This gives the lyrics the space to make some points stand out from others: ‘A blowjob brought about the fall of a dynasty, and Mp3s saw the fall of an industry... Rich bleeding the kind, the blind leading the blind and history competes, no competing with time... The government and church on which we try to rely, both rob us til it hurts chasing lie after lie.’

The song finishes with resignation: ‘Can you believe what we have become? As we walk into the sun.’ The phrasing here speaks of how things are going to get worse; disgust and disbelief; and makes the statement that the end is here. This part is sung by a different vocalist which completely removes it from the body of the song.

The music at the end of the song is a solo piano - this contrasts dramatically with the thick and heavy instruments that come before it. The sound is much more melodic and has a sense of simplicity about it. The music in this section is far less challenging - more mainstream and verging on romantic in nature - perhaps highlighting the idea that this is the part of the message that everyone should hear or that we over romanticise the idea that humanity is good or that it will survive despite it all.

The contrast between the vocals and music in the last section of the song compared with what has occurred earlier depict how removed we are from our own history - how we look on these events as though they are someone elses responsibility and someone elses past. The very last vocal sound is a breath - the last gasp of air or a sigh - perhaps this the death of humanity or at least an expression of disappointment.

This is, at the same time, the most brilliant and yet most awful political song I have heard. I became very emotional after I listened to it tonight. I HATE THIS.

FUCK.

________

I was having trouble working out the origin of the brass line that I refer to above as the 'olden days' song as well as the whispering voice that is layered over the top.

Given the frequency of the whispering voice it is likely that this is the sample from a 1960s song called 2010 referred to in the following articles - see: GroopieBlog, Hilltop Hoods Preview State of the Art Tracks (6 April 2009) <http://www.pagesonline.it/groupieblog/archives/1880> at 19 June 2009 & all aussie hip hop blog, State of the Art Preview (10 June 2009) <http://allaussiehiphop.wordpress.com/2009/06/10/state-of-the-art-album-preview/> at 19 June 2009. There are 27 songs listed with this title on iTunes - none of these appear to be the original all having release dates after 1990.

The brass line is also an important sample. While I realise the parameters of the song suggest that only samples from the past 50 years are likely to be included this seems to be a type of sound much older than the 1960s - it has a serenade feel to it. It verges on a type of 'national anthem' and to me feels more like something from the 1920s or 1950s.

These are important samples to this song and I would like to trace their origins - much like the need for this song to trace society's past to reach a conclusion. The architecture of the internet and the lack of copyright registrations prevent me from knowing with certainty where they have come from. While I do not, at this point, wish to delve into a detailed discussion of sampling and copyright law (even though I could!) it is worth noting these as examples of how this form of culture can take elements of the past and say something new with them, provided the regulatory forces at work enable that to happen.

I was also thinking about the place of this song on the CD. It is the last track and my first thought was that this was because it is the most serious of the songs - it is different from the content of the other tracks at least in its overt nature. On a more artistic level perhaps it is located at the end of the CD because this is the last thing, we as a society, want to hear or pay attention to - or because time is running out and our responses will undoubtedly be at the last minute.

I also took time to reflect on the fact that it is at the end of the CD from a tangible format perspective. Consider for a moment the nature of pay per song download stores and how unlikely it is that those that consume music on a song by song basis will ever hear this. Even the disconnection from the printed lyrics in the digital age presents a major hurdle to the consumption of the message of this song - lyric sites are on the web but their accuracy can sometimes be questionable.

A major label would definately hesitate to release this as a single but hopefully Golden Era Records don't. The loss of the tangible format presents may complications including the fact that things we need to hear cannot be packaged with the things we choose to hear - so many young kids will never hear this song - the world and the industry have indeed changed: we need to make it for the better.

[Imagine how long it took to compose this - the hard work and the dedication.... It is so rare to have a contemporary song so rich in detail; artistic and powerful... Will this make it to the mainstream media?...Imagine the beauty of the mashup that could be done with the video to this song... I could go on forever about this track but I have to stop here... for now...]

What’s the Deal with Record Labels?

Many of us sit back and wonder why it is that record labels act the way they do. I have written earlier about how the corporations law prevents them from making decisions based on morals and forces them to consider profits above all else. But what are the impacts for musicians and the music?

The Standard Deal
Typically record labels offer ‘standard’ deals to artists (especially the unknown ones) that have unfair and onerous conditions. Many artists, with the exception of those with a very savy manager or significant popularity, walk into a record label’s office prepared to accept any terms they offer. The artist believes that without their support they simply cannot create but the short term gains most often outweigh the long term benefits. Indeed it is not until sometime later, once the contract is in full swing, that they can really assess their needs compared to what they are being offered and by then it is generally too late.

All but the most successful artists are forced to work under terms which are financially unsustainable and grossly unfair, sometimes without access to resources that would help them to produce better music and without the ability to renegotiate.

With the exception of those that have an agreement that would be considered in law to be ‘unconscionable’, there is little that can be done but to find ways around the conditions that have been imposed.

Some artists seek the advice of organisations such as the Musicians Union but the contracts which already underfoot, are strict in their terms and there is little that can be done to negotiate a better deal.

Artists under standard contracts are left with little option but to rely on alternative forms of revenue – this has typically been in the form of concert ticket sales and merchandising which until recently were not part of recording contracts.

Those lucky enough to have a short term contract may have the opportunity to reconsider their options and look around for another label but this process itself is stressful with the old label looking over their shoulder.

For those artists that do have some success and are able to prove their worth, the length of the deal which often has clauses that enable the label to keep extending the current arrangements (option clauses) means they are trapped and must continue to work under the same conditions regardless of whether their needs or abilities have changed.

For others, those that are not as successful, the contracts may still be extended despite the fact that the label has no intention of supporting them in the future and yet they are not able to sign with another label or go out on their own as an independent.

Furthermore, even the most successful artists are forced to make ‘artistic compromises’ – in short this has meant that the labels can refuse to release music that they consider unworthy of financial investment or unlikely to be popular with the masses. For political music this is very problematic with songs deemed too controversial unlikely to be released unless they have an associated marketing angle.

One artist famous for a dispute with his record label is Prince/The Artist Formerly Known As Prince. Prince was in dispute with his record label, Warner Brothers, who had trademarked his name and owned all associated rights to the music marketed under that name. I remember well the jokes that many in the industry made at the time asking why he would pick the Love Symbol and such a silly name. The reason was that his record label could hold him to the contract if he used the name 'Prince'. By changing his name in this way he gained the benefit of both avoiding the terms of the contract he was in while negotiations were taking place and continuing to work based on the reputation he had already built.

However for most artists the results of ‘corporate patronage and indentured servitude’ are catastrophic. They are unable to plan their lives as they do not know from one day to the next what will be happening. They have terms that are financially unsustainable and demanding commitments that they cannot meet. Some struggle to work with the little that they have and others elect non performance. Pure and complete non performance of a contract is a breach of the agreement but by sabotaging themselves - writing poor songs, being unreliable, difficult to work with and generally uncooperative - some artists may be released from their deals. Others are retained, perhaps out of spite, and all lose whatever reputation they have developed to that point. They suffer career paralysis and eventually their popularity dies.

In all circumstances record labels control the recording copyrights and what was done in the past continues to be the property of the record label so the labels continue to reap the profits despite the ongoing frustration of the artist.

Enter the Internet
Up until the last decade this was the fate of the majority of musicians. However the internet has transformed the options for artists. They are much more likely to be able succeed without the support of major labels, for the most part superstar status still depends on it, but many more are able to connect with their fans and give them a reason to buy their music without having to enter into deals that are uncompromising and unfair. Those that were signed to a major label in the past, Nine Inch Nails and Trent Reznor being one such example, are refusing to get back into bed with the record labels knowing that they have the reputation, intelligence and experience which enables them to go forward without the help of others.

Indeed those that are signed to major labels can take advantage of this new form of communication. One recent example of this is DJ Danger Mouse who was prevented from releasing his new album because of a dispute with his record label. Instead he released a CD case with an extensive booklet of photographs and a blank disk, telling consumers to ‘Use It As You Will’ – implying that as the music was available on file sharing networks that they should feel free to download and burn a copy.

Some have stated that the digital environment creates a ‘competition issue’. Those that are familiar with trade practices law will know that many countries attempt to regulate markets to ensure that they do not become too concentrated – in Australia it is the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) while in the USA it is the Sherman Act (1890). (Kazaa unsuccessfully argued anti trust grounds in an early MGM v Grokster decision [1]).

The internet means that record labels are in competition with the entire world. It has the potential to create a much more open marketplace where there is far less control and concentration. While on the one hand this alters the power of record labels to dictate the terms, it also dissipates the potential for artists to penetrate the global market place and for some forms of music, particularly the political, this may have associated consequences.

The New Deal
Record labels have not responded well to the digital environment and the competition that they are now faced with. The tendency has been to do as much as possible to constrict the competition – lawsuits against emerging technology are just one part of this equation – the move to 360 degree contracts where they control every aspect of a musicians career and can make money from all parts of their business has been another.

But not all labels are taking that approach. There are number of record labels, such as Magnatune (‘We’re Not Evil’), that are attempting to work with artists rather than exploit them. This has typically meant less financial investment but greater understanding for the uniqueness of some artists and the need to ensure that they are comfortable with their contractual arrangements. However many artists are scared and do not know enough about these labels to make the change, perhaps more time will help them to see that they do not operate in the same way as the record labels of the past.

What Does it Mean for the Music?
Music is and has always been intangible. It is non rivalrous meaning that it can be duplicated without loss of quality and in infinite quantity. The artificial scarcity that was created by the reduction to material form (the CD) has now largely been replaced with unfettered and cheap supply. It is only natural that music should want to be free, to explore and communicate with as many people as it wants, and yet it remains in an environment where it can be difficult to assess who will permit this and who won’t.

Some, those of the old school, get angry with those that seek to enable the music to live out its intangibility. Some seek to enable the intangibility but fail to consider the implications of the lack of financial support that is needed to sustain a professional sector of creators. Others seek the mid point. They know that there needs to be more freedom and are willing to give it but also seek to create an environment in which the music is able to have some support without being dominated and controlled to the point where it can no longer reach its true potential. Those in this mid ground advocate a collective licensing regime. Whilst requiring detailed planning and foresight it is nonetheless achievable and would make an enourmous difference to the choices that are currently in place.

A collective licensing regime has been advocated by the likes of Netanel [2], Fisher [3], Lessig [4], the Electronic Frontiers Foundation and The Songwriters Association of Canada. Experiments have taken place in countries such as Canada and China (Fisher) and in the USA recent steps have been taken to trial different versions in colleges as a means to reduce illegal file sharing by students (Choruss).

While there is a way to go yet, these developments are both positive and essential. While some forms of music, the emotive and purely entertaining forms, will be produced in most conditions due to their social function, they can be produced to a higher standard under better conditions. Other forms of music, such as political music, require greater attention. This form of music in particular has an important social function but under negative community conditions – capitalism, closed or structurally deterministic architecture, neoclassicist copyright law and prohibitive social norms – it cannot achieve its potential as an agent for social change.

If the major record labels are going to have a place in musicians' lives in the future, they need to act now because they are running out of time. It is impossible to unscramble an egg - things will never return to the way they were before. It is time the labels realised this and got on with helping musicians to achieve their goals.

Further Reading

[1] Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., et al v Grokster Ltd et al 269 F.Supp. 2d 1213; 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11329; Copy. L. Rep (CCH) P28,634; 2003-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P74,081

[2] N W Netanel, ‘Impose a Noncommerical Use Levy to Allow Free P2P File-Swapping and Remixing’ (2003-2004) Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 1-84

[3] William W. Fisher III, Promises to Keep (2004)

[4] Lawrence Lessig, Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity (2004) 301

ArsTechnica, Canadian artists' new/old plan: $5 to share music legally (24 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/canadian-songwriters-plan-5-to-share-music-legally.ars> at 29 March 2009

Electronic Frontiers Foundation, File Sharing: It’s Music to our Ears, Making p2p Pay Artists (2004) <http://www.eff.org/share/compensation.php> at 12 April 2006

EFF Deeplinks, More on Choruss, Pro and Con (20 March 2009) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/more-choruss-pro-and-con> at 11 April 2009

EFF Deeplinks, Danger Mouse Releases a Blank CD-R (18 May 2009) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/05/danger-mouse-inducem> at 29 May 2009

Future of Music Coalition, Major Label Contract Clause Critique (2001) <http://www.futureofmusic.org/contractcrit.cfm> at 16 June 2009

OpenContentAustraliaResearchReview, Capitalism and the Alcoholism of the Music Industry (18 May 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/05/capitalism-and-alcoholism-of-music.html> at 16 June 2009

Open Content Australia, Year in Review: Recording Contracts (18 December 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/12/year-in-review-recording-contracts.html > at 16 June 2009

TechDirt, My Keynote At The (RIAA Sponsored) Leadership Music Digital Summit (30 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090422/0407024607.shtml> at 3 May 2009

TechDirt, U2 Manager: Free Is The Enemy Of Good; And It's Moral To Protect Old Business Models (29 May 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090528/1919455049.shtml> at 31 May 2009

Testimony of William W. Fisher III before theSubcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness Committee on Education and the WorkforceHearing on: The Internet and the College Campus: How the Entertainment Industry and Higher Education are Working to Combat Illegal Piracy (26 September 2006) <http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/109th/21st/piracy092606/fisher.htm> at 17 October 2006

The Dues, “Record Earning” Deemed Oxymoronic (Issue 9 Vol 1) March 2006 <http://www.musicians.asn.au/ezine/archives/issue9/page2.html> at 16 June 2009

The Dues, How to Make it To The Top and Still End Up in Debt (Issue 2 Vol 1) <http://www.musicians.asn.au/ezine/archives/issue2/> at 16 June 2009

Wikipedia, Prince (musician) (14 June 2009) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_(musician)> at 16 June 2009

Good Copy Bad Copy<http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/> at 22 April 2008

Magnatune <http://www.magnatune.com/> at 16 June 2009

Musicians Union of Australia <http://www.musicians.asn.au/union/index.html> at 16 June 2009

Overseeing the Three Strikes Policies

There were some interesting developments in France recently with the Constitutional Council refusing parts of the proposed three strikes legislation. I have written earlier about the growing trend to disconnect users from the internet and some of the implications this is likely to have.

The policy itself is flawed for a number of reasons. One concern is the fact that it prevents people from communicating on a whole range of levels – as we all know internet access is a fundamental component of modern life and has a much greater social function than simply the sharing of music. It is the most open and immediate form of communication available enabling each and every person to communicate with friends, family, their local communities, their interest groups, the government and the world at large. Being disconnected from the internet because of the sharing of culture, from a basic free speech perspective, is an unjustifiable and disproportionate loss of human rights.

Furthermore with respect to the sharing of culture itself, the policy is both counter intuitive and counter productive.

The purpose of culture is to communicate. The underlying aim of entertainment or education is secondary to the broader aim of enabling connections and the exchange of ideas. Disconnecting users undermines the very intent of producing culture in the first place. Simply put, the sharing of culture is a natural and inherent component of its creation – most (but not all) artists recognise the importance of this but corporations typically do not.

In addition, these policies are counterproductive. Reactionary punishment for something that has occurred in the past is only of benefit when it outweighs the costs. While cutting a user off the internet may act as a deterrent to that person and perhaps others in the future, the more likely result is one in which alternative means of sharing are developed.

Disconnecting one user from the internet may simply result in another household member needing to have the internet connection in their name. It remains impossible to police who in that household is using the internet at a particular moment in time and as such it is unlikely to prevent the offender from sharing culture again in the future. The ever increasing development of digital devices with vast storage capacity means that the sharing of culture can take place on or off the internet and disconnections are more likely to make this harder to track and monetise than stop it from happening altogether.

The bigger problem and one that the music industry appears to either be ignoring or ignorant of, is that this policy actually stops users from consuming culture in ‘legitimate ways’. Not having internet access at all prevents users from accessing iTunes just as much as it stops them from using BitTorrent or Limewire. The collateral damage of these policies is therefore greater than what their implementation can achieve.

Countries that consider disconnection as the most appropriate sanction include France, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea. While France and New Zealand are both in the process of reworking their legislation, Taiwan has passed laws which appear to introduce a non mandatory disconnection regime. South Korea is the only country with a mandatory policy in place at present. In Ireland one ISP has agreed to implement a three strikes policy that includes disconnections, as part of a settlement agreement for a secondary copyright liability claim. Steps to introduce the policy nationwide have not been successful to date. It has also been reported that Italy is considering the introduction of a three strikes policy which has the ultimate penalty of disconnection.

In other countries, alternative penalties are being considered. The recording industry in the United States is in the process of trying to get ISPs to voluntarily embrace the policy but without disconnections. Some six month after the initial announcement not one ISP has agreed to implement the process. Similar moves are underfoot in the UK with increasing pressure on the government to introduce the policy, with the slow down of internet connections rather than disconnection being the ultimate sanction. Early next week the final Digital Britain Report is expected to recommend the introduction of this policy.

In all of these circumstances there is a common concern regarding the lack of judicial oversight. It is imperative that we ask the questions: why do we have judges and why is it okay that they be removed from this process?

Speaking broadly about legal systems in general, regardless of whether they are adversarial or inquisitorial, judges take a particular place in the system of democracy. Their independence from government and institutions (including corporations) is fundamental to their role. They are adjudicators that decide disputes based on evidence according to the laws which (in theory?) reflect the standards of the community. Largely only accountable through the media or on appeals, those that are placed in this position of authority must have extensive training in their field(s). In some areas of law strict liability is imposed by the legislature which removes their discretion however in many other areas they must have the capacity to make a qualitative determination of often complex and detailed events. The reasoning for their decisions forms a basis of knowledge on which others can act in the future to exercise their rights.

The desire of the content industry to remove the judiciary from the determination of copyright disputes is primarily born from concerns about efficiency and cost. In effect the three strikes policies seek to create a strict liability offence for the sharing of culture – where the presumption is of guilt and the offence proved by default rather than the more typical approach of innocence as a presumption. Much like a speeding ticket, the desire is to place the liability on the holder of the internet account without the opportunity for it to be rebutted. But here there is often more than one driver, there could be many potential users of an account and without the opportunity to defend an accusation, there remains implicit potential for injustice. Indeed, the name 'Graduated Response' appears to be a misnomer - there is no real graduation - there are 2 warnings and then the ultimate price is paid.

The costs of justice are well known. As has been well evidenced and a matter of much contention in the mass lawsuit campaign against individual users, the average person simply does not have the financial resources to defend themselves against civil litigation by major record labels - instead being forced to settle disputes regardless of whether they were personally liable. While this system was excruciatingly imperfect it nonetheless allowed some opportunity for redress.

The recording industry incurred costs too. While those that were forced to settle most likely covered some of the costs involved in their investigation, the initiation of John/Jane Doe lawsuits, the sending out of letters of demand and the running costs of the settlement payment centre, these expenses nonetheless existed and detracted from the viability of the initiative. It seems there was also momentum and assistance building for those seeking to defend these actions and this would have added significantly to the costs of the program, only being offset by the potential for massive damages payouts in the event that the lawsuit was successful.

The other aspect to the judicial system is time. There is often a significant delay between the commencement of litigation and the time when a matter is heard. Furthermore, there are often delays in the hearing of cases with some taking a number of months and there is an extensive delay in the hearing of appeals which are more likely in emerging areas of law or contention.

The aim of the three strikes policies are therefore to allow for the quick and inexpensive determination of disputes. Having said that; the French proposal was expected to cost $40 million to implement annually – money that should be in the pockets of artists. But as a society, what price do we place on free speech? Is this the type of human right that should be calculated quickly and cheaply?

Of course the content industry would respond with arguments about ‘theft’ and ‘property’. But as a community are we blind to the inherent implications of these policies? In my view the court system, imperfections and all, is a fundamental aspect of democracy and the oversight of the judiciary is of paramount importance to a legislative system corrupted by capitalism. Every bureaucracy makes mistakes and no matter what procedures are in place there remains opportunity for human and technological error and there must be a forum to redress complaints. The vulnerable and the weak need these avenues to remain open and we are all in that position when major corporations collude to achieve their profit lines. While the majority of internet connections are in the name of the parents, it is the children that will suffer.

France has seen the need for continued involvement of dispute resolution mechanisms, but so far, is the only country to have done so.

Further Reading

FRANCE
The New York Times, French Council Defangs Plan to Crack Down on Internet Piracy (10 June 2009) <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/technology/internet/11net.html?_r=1> at 12 June 2009

TechDirt, French Constitutional Council Guts 'Three Strikes' As Unconstitutional (10 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090610/1103345185.shtml> at 12 June 2009

The Register, France suspends Three Strikes (10 June 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/10/france_three_strikes_hadopi_suspended/> at 12 June 2009

ZeroPaid, France’s Top Court Rules “Three-Strikes” Unconstitutional (10 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86401/frances-top-court-rules-three-strikes-unconstitutional/> at 12 June 2009

WashingtonPost/The Associated Press, New French law on Internet piracy meets skepticism (21 May 2009) <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/21/AR2009052101770.html> at 29 May 2009

ZeroPaid, French Minister - Three Strikes Law Would See 1000 Disconnections Daily (24 May 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86288/french-minister-three-strikes-law-would-see-1000-disconnections-daily/> at 28 May 2009

ZeroPaid, French Arts Community Revolts Against French Three Strikes Legislation (30 April 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86130/french-arts-community-revolts-against-french-three-strikes-legislation/> at 3 May 2009

ZeroPaid, French ISPs: 'Three-Strikes' will cost us $40 mill Annually (10 March 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/10047/French+ISPs%3A+%27Three-Strikes%27+will+Cost+Us+%2440mill+Annually> at 12 March 2009

ITALY
TechDirt, Italian Politicians Look To Push Through French-Style 3 Strikes Law (21 January 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090121/0834043477.shtml> at 24 January 2009

UK
TechDirt, Study Says File Sharers Would Ignore Warning Letters; Recording Industry Gets The Wrong Message (10 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090610/0234295184.shtml> at 12 June 2009

ZeroPaid, UK ISP: Idea of Stopping File-Sharing is “Very Naive” (9 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86388/uk-isp-idea-of-stopping-file-sharing-is-very-naive/> at 12 June 2009

TechDirt, British Government Says No To Three Strikes (5 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/1019495131.shtml> at 8 June 2009

BBC News, Web pirates placed in 'slow lane' (4 June 2009) <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8083866.stm> at 8 June 2009

ZeroPaid, UK Minister Says “Three-Strikes” too Draconian (5 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86371/uk-minister-says-three-strikes-too-draconian/> at 8 June 2009

ArsTechnica, UK ISPs refuse to play Internet copyright cops (12 May 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/uk-isps-refuse-to-play-internet-copyright-cops.ars> at 15 May 2009

IRELAND
TechDirt, Irish ISPs Point Out They're Under No Obligation To Follow Three Strikes Policy (17 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090315/2011434125.shtml> at 18 March 2009

The Register, Irish ISPs rally against record label anti-piracy threat (17 March 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/17/irish_isps_rally_against_irma_threats/> at 18 March 2009

Digital Music News, Irish ISPs Battle Back Against Three-Strikes... (19 March 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/031809irish> at 20 March 2009

Billboard.biz, Irish ISPs Reject Labels' 'Three Strikes' Demand (19 March 2009) <http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3icd8ec261b0f1e7f730729c488530e3ba> at 20 March 2009

ArsTechnica, Blackout Ireland rallies support against P2P disconnections (5 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/blackout-ireland-rallies-support-against-p2p-disconnections.ars> at 6 March 2009

Slyck, Ireland says Yes, Germany No to 3 Strikes (3 February 2009) <http://www.slyck.com/story1829_Ireland_says_Yes_Germany_No_to_3_Strikes> at 4 February 2009

The Register, Irish ISP Eircom in 'three strikes' file sharer crackdown (3 February 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/03/eircom_agrees_to_three_strikes_enforcement/> at 4 February 2009

Digital Music News, Big Precedent: Irish ISP Adopting Three Strikes... (30 January 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/012909eircom> at 31 January 2009

TechDirt, Irish ISP Accused Of Copyright Violations Agrees To Implement Three Strikes (29 January 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090128/1855013560.shtml> at 31 January 2009

ZeroPaid, Irish ISP Agrees to Three-Strikes Policy For File-Sharers (29 January 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9984/Irish+ISP+Agrees+to+Three-Strikes+Policy+for+File-Sharers> at 31 January 2009

EFF Deeplinks, Irish ISP Agrees to Three Strikes Against Its Customers (28 January 2009) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/irish-isp-agrees-three-strikes-against-its-users> at 30 January 2009

USA
Digital Music News, France Says No, But What About the US? (11 June 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/061009us> at 12 June 2009

Digital Music News, 6 Months, 0 Disconnecting ISPs: RIAA Still Coming Up Short... (4 June 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/06020riaa> at 8 June 2009

TechDirt, Six Months And Still No ISPs Officially Signed Up On The RIAA's Program (4 June 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090604/0137485124.shtml> at 8 June 2009

NEW ZEALAND
Computerworld, Work continues on Copyright Act (4 May 2009) <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/593AE7BB01CE30EBCC2575AB0077BDC2> at 6 May 2009

TechDirt, New Zealand Denies It's Scrapping Copyright Laws (4 May 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090504/0440064740.shtml> at 5 May 2009

National Business Review, Entire Copyright Act to be scrapped (1 May 2009) <http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/entire-copyright-act-be-scrapped-101820> at 3 May 2009

TechDirt, New Zealand Officials To Scrap Copyright Law; Start From Scratch (30 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090430/1400034708.shtml> at 3 May 2009

ArsTechnica, "3 strikes" strikes out in NZ as government yanks law (23 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/3-strikes-strikes-out-in-nz-as-government-yanks-law.ars> at 29 March 2009

TechDirt, Musicians In New Zealand Protesting 'Guilt Upon Accusation' Plan (6 January 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090105/1232323289.shtml> at 7 January 2009

SOUTH KOREA
ZeroPaid, South Korea to Become 1st Country with "Three Strikes" for File Sharers? (29 March 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/85895/south-korea-to-become-1st-country-with-three-strikes-for-file-sharers/> at 30 March 2009

TechDirt, South Korea The Latest To Introduce Three Strikes Plan (11 March 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090311/0213404068.shtml> at 12 March 2009

TAIWAN
ZeroPaid, Taiwan Passes “Three-Strikes” Anti-P2P law (28 April 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86072/taiwan-passes-three-strikes-anti-p2p-law/> at 29 April 2009

TechDirt, Taiwan Sorta, But Not Really, Approves Three Strikes Law (28 April 2009) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090427/1843094669.shtml> at 29 April 2009

OTHER
The Register, Billy Bragg: Three-strikes lobbying is 'shameful' (20 May 2009) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/20/bragg_three_strikes/> at 22 May 2009

ZeroPaid, U2’s Band Manager Praises France’s “Three-Strikes” Law (8 April 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/85953/u2s-band-manager-praises-frances-three-strikes-law/> at 11 April 2009

ArsTechnica, Google: Internet disconnection a "disproportionate" penalty (17 March 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/google-cutting-internet-access-for-p2p-abuse-disproportionate.ars> at 23 March 2009

ArsTechnica, 37% of P2P users say they'll ignore disconnection threats (18 January 2009) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20090118-37-of-p2p-users-say-theyll-ignore-disconnection-threats.html> at 21 January 2009

OpenContentAustraliaResearchReview, Graduated Response Update (29 March 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/03/graduated-response-update.html>at 14 June 2009

OpenContentAustralia, NZ Delays Guilt Upon Accusation (25 February 2009) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2009/02/nz-delays-guilt-upon-accusation.html> at 29 March 2009

Digital Music News, Pirate Bay Martyrdom Continues... The Decision Stands (12 June 2009) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/061109pirate> at 12 June 2009

The Local, 'Pirate Bay judge not biased': court (8 June 2009) <http://www.thelocal.se/19946/20090608/> at 12 June 2009

ZeroPaid, Court Review Says Pirate Bay Trial Judge Not Biased (8 June 2009) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86385/court-review-says-pirate-bay-trial-judge-not-biased/> at 9 June 2009

EFF, RIAA v. The People: Five Years Later - White Paper (September 2008)
<http://www.eff.org/wp/riaa-v-people-years-later> at 14 June 2009

Free Music Archive.

I am a few days from really being back on this space but thought to let you know about the Free Music Archive. This site was started by WFMU, a freeform radio station in the United States.

The latest Creative Commons newsletter advises that the site was launched in April 2009. It hosts tracks available as free downloads using a number of licenses including Creative Commons. Users can download from a catalogue of 8,659 tracks (it was launched with 5,000 songs).

The site looks good but has some way to go in terms of growth and development. Nine thousand tracks is a good start but small compared to other sites such as Jamendo which, at present, hosts some 20,478 albums.

Like Jamendo, the Free Music Archive seeks to embrace new business models. It is intended that links will be provided enabling users to buy the full album and/or giving users the option of tipping an artist by making a deposit to the artists’ PayPal account (from what I can see these are not yet in place). Artist profiles also include tourdates allowing fans to both enjoy their art and support creators/performers by attending concerts.

Another good thing about the site is the album/track descriptions - these are much more detailed than what is found on many other sites including iTunes, eMusic and file sharing networks. The search function allows for key word searching of both the descriptions and the tracks which is a big improvement in terms of the architecture needed to help listeners find political music. One could well imagine the power of combing this design attribute with a much larger catalogue.

This site is in its infancy but is one to watch in the future.Take a look around and be exposed to some new independent artists. But be careful first to check that the license conditions permit uses that suit your needs.

More Information
Free Music Archive <http://freemusicarchive.org/>

Jamendo <http://www.jamendo.com/en/>

Off The Grid

You may notice that this weekend I have posted a number of new articles that some might say take a fresh approach to thinking about political music and the digital environment. I hope you enjoy them.

I am, however, preparing for a conference and for the next two weeks will be off the grid unless something major happens on the internet. I apologise for leaving this space for the moment. Please take a look at my other site OpenContentAustralia http://www.ocaustralia.blogspot.com/ at the end of the month to catch up on other developments in this area.

Capitalism and the Alcoholism of the Music Industry.

UPDATED: Imagine, if you will, the digital music environment as a person. The body, by analogy, is the music industry. The brain is controlled by the directors of the four major record labels with a small space for independents. The speech and actions of this person are therefore predominantly made and influenced by those in the majority who themselves are ‘under the influence’ of capitalism. Indeed this greed is an illness which well equates to alcoholism.

Reflect a little on what this person says and does. The expression is predominantly of one type – it talks about love, it talks about pain, personal struggle, and it entertains. It is often repetitive, reminiscing about times past and sometimes abusive. Much like a real person heavily intoxicated by alcohol it cannot rationalise the world’s events, it focuses on things that are subjective and is incapable of holding a sustained conversation about critical issues that face society.

It is unstable, it is obsessed with getting more of the substance which keeps it feeling this way. It is constantly reaching for the bottle – drinking every last drop of musician’s talent and then discarding them for another over and over again. Its behaviour fractures communities and it offers itself as a poor example to the young people around it who, through ongoing exposure, see this as the normal, as the acceptable and as the example by which others should live.

But it cannot see itself in the mirror. It is blind drunk and beyond being able to help itself. It has a poor memory of the events that have taken place in the past and has not learnt from its mistakes.

Capitalism is the music industry’s alcohol. Its dependency drives the need for it to get more all the time – so why does it act in such a destructive way? The answer lies within the structure of the brain.

The directors of the four major record labels owe a fiduciary duty to their corporations. This duty compels them to act in a way that ensures the greatest profits are produced. In the process of securing more and more money they seek to influence others to create freer (liquor licensing) conditions. Public choice theory describes the cycle by which major corporations threaten and pressure governments to enact new laws which work in their favour and this person, this drunk, exerts its irrationality on those that should be more concerned with helping society.

Indeed it stands on the precipice of self destruction. Despite its addiction, despite its nonsensical speech, despite its influence over governments, it is failing at an ever increasing rate to get enough money into its system. Each year the revenue of the major labels drops. Some of this money is channelled into independent artists who are now able to take more control over the body to create new expression. But on the whole, the industry is getting sicker and sicker.

Furthermore, while the industry explores the new veins and arteries of its recently evolved limb - the digital environment - network neutrality and the contamination of this new part of the body by capitalist priorities threatens its adaptation forever.

So what can we do to help stop this illness?

One approach would be to take this person aside and speak to them about their problems. Explain to them that what they are doing and why it is so destructive. This has already been tried. Academics such as Professor Lawrence Lessig, Professor Terry Fisher and Professor Neil Netanel and many others in the mainstream media and on the internet have tried to ‘intervene’ by writing about these issues. There have been open arguments with representatives of the record labels. They are aware of our concerns and yet they still do nothing.

Another approach is to cut of its supply altogether. File sharing networks are, in essence, the means by which others try to ‘steal’ the alcohol away from this person. But the illegality of these actions only enrage it more and help to perpetuate the discord between the industry and the world leading it to demand more protection and support for its habit. Indeed, the music industry needs some money to function otherwise it will suffer from withdrawal symptoms and be incapable of functioning at all.

Another approach is to wait for capitalism to take its course. The Corporations law and the fiduciary responsibilities of the directors should, at some point, create a tipping point – an acquired brain injury. They should arrive at an equilibrium whereby these companies have lost so much money and are so desperate that they eventually help themselves by introducing a collective licensing regime. But I do not trust them to do this in a way that will be inclusive.

What we actually need is for the government to step in.

This body needs a new brain – there needs to be a shift in control of the industry itself to ensure a democratic governance structure is in place with the capacity to think and act rationally. This will enable the industry to be healthy with enough money to support a professional sector of creators that are free to express themselves to the best of their ability. We need the internal controls to be in place to ensure that in the future, adaptation to new technologies is quick and effective.

More Information
Wikipedia, Alcoholism (17 May 2009)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism> at 17 May 2009

MashUps and the Reuse of Music

Mashups are a form of culture which take small pieces of pre-existing songs and blend them together to make something new. Perhaps the most well known artists in this field are Girl Talk and DJ Danger Mouse.

This form of culture has developed from rap and hip hop music which has traditionally used repetitive samples as additional parts in new songs. Samples themselves have long been part of our oral tradition. Indeed in everyday language we sample speech from each other through the use of catch phrases. The more recent composition method of mashups, have a tendency to include no new parts to the composition rather bleeding together material from a range of other sources.

The first time I ever experienced a mashup was in an interview with Professor Lawrence Lessig (formerly of Stanford University and now with Harvard University) in the film Good Copy Bad Copy that featured Bush and Blair footage cut to sit with the song Endless Love. This was a film clip about the close relationship between the USA and the UK on foreign policy. But to Lessig the clip also demonstrated the malleability of digital culture and the ability of old material to be used in a way that comments on new situations or events.

But what of music?

There has always been some resuse of music – most typically bands have played songs that others have already composed and released – those that do only this are commonly referred to as cover bands. These bands often offer a new interpretation of the song and sometimes play it in a new style. In other examples of the resuse of music, slightly more adaption takes place – one recent example are the artists Santagold and Diblo who adapted the Clash’s Guns of Brixton and released a version titled ‘The Guns of Brooklyn’. The original song reflected on the socio economic and social conditions of African immigrants in the UK and the intention of the derivative released by Santagold and Diblo was to further comment on the socio economic and social conditions of African Americans.

The cultural benefits of reusing music are profound. Culture allows us to see the world, to express the demands and events that take place in it and allows us to imagine and create a better future. Music that has a pre-existing association with social events and conditions that is then relocated from the past into new circumstances, allows audiences to make an immediate connection between the two spaces in time. The public are able to relive old sentiments, memories are triggered, feelings and emotions of an era past return and the perspective they had at that time can be used to view the contemporary world. The music is re-contextualised.

One example of this is DJ Danger Mouse’s The Grey Album, a remix of Jay-Z’s Black album and The Beatle’s White album which was distributed over file sharing networks. Whilst not sued, the artist, DJ Dangermouse, was threatened and sites hosting the file were subjected to take down notices under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Despite the efforts of the copyright holders, the tracks were quickly spread by internet users and a civil disobedience campaign launched to protest the inability of artists to remix music. The mashup itself was a form of political expression reflecting the need for racial harmony.

The institutional mechanisms of society, particularly law which is supported by capitalism, have not readily adapted to new forms of culture. While most forms of copyright legislation provide compulsory licensing mechanisms for cover songs, there are varying degrees and certainty to which samples can be used without a license under the protection of fair use/fair dealing. Typically licensing agreements are required which are expensive and take long periods of time to secure. In protest of the current state of the law a German Avant Guarde musician, Johannes Kriedler mashed 70,200 songs in 33 seconds, completed the necessary paper work and delivered it to the German Music Rights Organisation, GEMA.

In his text Remix Lessig notes that digital technologies have seen a move away from a Read Only culture to a Read Write culture where anyone is able to use cultural expression and mash it into new forms. Lessig suggests that there is a generational difference in the way in which culture is viewed with the older ‘couch potato’ generation unable to appreciate the need or desire of the younger generations to access and recreate existing works. We must be active in ensuring that the law catches up to technology, embraces new, transformative, cultural forms and does not inhibit their growth.

More Information

MySpace, Girl Talk (2009) <http://www.myspace.com/girltalk>at 17 May 2009

YouTube, Bush Blair Endless Love (12 April 2006) <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nupdcGwIG-g> at 17 May 2009

Imeem, The Grey Video by DJ Danger Mouse vs. Jay-Z vs. The Beatles (2009) <http://www.imeem.com/systim/video/Z0ejz5RQ/dj-danger-mouse-vs-jay-z-vs-the-beatles-the-grey-video-mus/> at 17 May 2009

You Tube, Santogold - Guns Of Brooklyn <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duhGjGuzpSA> at 17 May 2009

Wikipedia, The Grey Album (20 February 2008)<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grey_Album> at 22 April 2008

P2p Blog, Musician mashes up 70,200 songs, delivers lists to rights holders by the truck load (21 August 2008) <http://www.p2p-blog.com/item-826.html> at 17 May 2009

Good Copy Bad Copy <http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/> at 22 April 2008

Wikipedia, Good Copy Bad Copy (30 March 2008) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Copy_Bad_Copy> at 22 April 2008

OCA Research Review, Remix (27 October 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/10/remix-lessig.html> at 17 May 2009

OCA Research Review, In the Matter of Mashups (2 September 2008) <http://ocarr.blogspot.com/2008/09/in-matter-of-mashups.html> at 17 May 2009

Spaces and Places.

Last night I had a very enjoyable dinner with friends at the 20,000 Cows Restaurant in Lismore, NSW and thought to write a little about the analogy between this place and the current space for political music.

20,000 Cows is a quaint little restaurant outside of the CBD. It is housed in an old petrol station with an odd, triangular shaped, small building and a small court yard. Inside the walls are decorated with a range of unique and hand made art works, the curtains are all different colours, there are lanterns, candles on the table and a collection of odd pieces of furniture. There is a potbelly stove made out of an old beer keg, panels of melted glass and a book on Ghandi on the wall.

The food which is absolutely beautiful is Middle Eastern and Indian vegan/vegetarian and the philosophy of the proprietor, Murray Vilkelis, is based on animal rights and respect for other living beings. Some people eat around coffee tables while sitting on lounges, others at tables with mismatching chairs.

The atmosphere is fantastic – there are people from all backgrounds including those from non mainstream and mainstream cultures. It serves as a meeting place for many that appreciate the ideological basis of the ‘business’ and it serves as a place where people from outside that culture can be comfortable and become accustom to alternative approaches.

I say ideological basis of the ‘business’ because while there are recommended prices, these are optional –the menu states that these are suggested prices.

It was a great evening and I will be certain to return many more times however it was not without its hiccups. It was very busy with a Gem Festival nearby attracting a large number of people, this led to some cramping with people squashed together in small spaces and the high demand on the staff led to some delays in service and some confusion about meals.

This was really of a secondary concern to my friends and I, and I only raise it because I was thinking at the time what a great analogy this place was for the current space of political music in the digital environment.

Political music is unique and at present it suffers from a small area in which to thrive. The artists congregate in what little architecture is available to them which is beneficial because of its intimacy and concentration, however the spaces have not grown to accommodate new creators, they have not expanded enough to house everyone comfortably and in a way that provides the greatest level of service. The distribution system (serving staff) are limited in effectiveness because of the lack of expansion and money to do more.

The business appears to be worthwhile from an economic perspective however I was not the one to pay the bill so I cannot say from personal experience whether social norms are enough to ensure that the costs are covered. At a guess I would say that most people that go there are ethically motivated enough to pay the recommended price but am sure that on occasion those that can’t don’t, and sometimes those that can, do not either. The generosity of the proprietor is both what attracts people to try new experiences but at the same time does not of itself ensure or guarantee that the business will continue without financial concerns. As I have noted recently, Trent Reznor estimates that only around 18% of consumers paid to access his bands music when a similar business model was used.

The ideological basis of the restaurant is both an attraction to those that appreciate alternative perspectives, catering (pun intended) to their desire for integtrity and respect. For others, perhaps it is something that does the opposite. It is the same for political music - not everyone who is exposed to it goes on to appreciate its true value.

I didn’t get to eat all that I ordered and some friends ate another person’s meal because of the lack of resources (serving staff per customer) – this is a direct parallel to those of us that want more political music but cannot find it.

There were delays in getting our meals (lack of cooks = lack of artists) but the uniqueness of the food was worth waiting for – it takes time to prepare something that is not generic and mass produced.

And there were things that were not welcome, such as the consumption of meat from other sources on the premises and smoking – this relates to the notion that non dedicated spaces for political expression dilute its potency and ability to get its message across.

As I said, it was a wonderful and very enjoyable evening – we all had a great time and please don’t take this as a criticism of the restaurant. This is merely me being observational and using a real space example as an illustration of what is taking place on the internet.

I had been to this restaurant some 10 or more years ago and never saw it in this way. If you ever have the chance, go, and see for yourself how special cultures express themselves and think a little of how much better the world would be if there were more chances for it to do so.

More Information

Wolf & Lamb, Wolf and Lamb: Animal Free Cooking (7th ed, 2002) <http://lis.net.au/marijonas/WOLF01.html#F200> at 17 May 2009

Your Restaurant, 20,000 Cows (2009)
<http://www.yourrestaurants.com.au/guide/20000_cows/> at 17 May 2009

The Icing

I haven't been able to verify it from another source yet but I was just reading an article on Digital Music News which I found hysterical. Apparently DJ Dangermouse (of The Grey Album fame) and Sparklehorse have released a new album titled 'Dark Night of the Soul'. The trick is that the CD (R) is blank - they are having a dispute with their record label (EMI) and cannot release the music. The music however is available on the net, so all consumers are getting are the liner notes with a 100 page booklet of photos and the instructions to 'Use It As You Will'.

Too funny - when will these labels learn?

More Information
Digital Music News, Danger Mouse + Sparklehorse: The Art of Releasing a Blank CD... (15 May 2009) <http://digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051409danger> at 15 May 2009

Wikipedia, The Grey Album (6 May 2009) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grey_Album> at 15 May 2009

The Importance of Political Music.

As I start to condense some 8,500 words into four pages for my IASPM presentation I have been thinking a lot about the relative importance of political music. As you should know by now, my doctorate concerns the conditions that will ensure it’s production and reception in the digital environment and maximising the opportunities for it to act as an agent of social change. However in recent times it has become apparent that while this is a noble and valuable pursuit, it takes place in a world that in fact needs many forms of culture including those that I have tended to refer to as ‘superficial’ or ‘distracting’.

Someone asked me recently what music has had the most impact on my life and in answering, I, without hesitating, said that the most obvious music has been that with a strong message about personal strength and courage. Even last week, in the process of confronting some personal challenges, I walked around with a Britney Spears song in my head with the lyrics ‘I’m stronger than yesterday’. Yet in my intellectual pursuits I have typically distanced myself from this form of culture. Indeed there are many moments in my life when I have turned to non political music for comfort, support and fun. Just today I tried to purchase the new Hilltop Hoods CD. It has not been released yet, but the intention was to use it as a new form of escapism – to listen to something that I could enjoy but not on a purely intellectual level. [I will not download it but am cursing the fact that I can hear it on the radio but not purchase it for another month! Damn those release dates.]

As a politically aware person it can be hard for me to actually indentify the impact this form of culture has had on me – since becoming heavily immersed in the study of these types of songs I have made some changes to my personal behaviour including taking greater responsibility for the environment (buying carbon credits when I could, being more diligent about recycling, walking rather than driving when I can), being more aware of and more compassionate for the disadvantaged and marginalised and more in tune with the political events that are taking place in the world. But when the impact is micro not macro, it can be more subtle and difficult to see. Aside from the internet censorship campaign in Australia I cannot claim to have become more overtly involved in politics. Nonetheless the changes are there and the music has certainly been part of making that happen.

But political music is just one form of culture that has produced changes in my personal behaviour and approach to life. When I want to dance (much to the world’s regret) I listen to dance music, techno and hip hop. When I am feeling down I listen to music that has an uplifting message – one of my favourites is Bob Marley’s ‘Three Little Birds’. When I want to relax I listen to classical music or instrumental works (I would not be here today without Deep Forest). And so it becomes clear to me that in my enthusiasm for advocating the conditions for protest music that perhaps I am guilty of being dogmatic. There is a time and a place for all forms of culture – just so long as I am not the only one that remembers that.

Some are aware of my lack of appreciation for organised sports, indeed I commonly refer to football as a form of distraction. Having grown up in a city that stops for sport I became very frustrated by what I considered to be the distraction of the masses. Why, I would ask, do people devote so much time and energy to watching a group of men run around, often in the rain, after a piece of stuffed leather when so much of the world is in a state of crisis? And as a parallel I become frustrated with people that listen only to superficial and distracting music (not that those terms are appropriate). Indeed it is not the football game or the culture of football that I disagree with; it is not the love songs and the dance songs themselves that I don’t appreciate; it is a world which does not allow space for more that bothers me.

One perspective is that people devote themselves to football or listen to music that ‘entertains’ rather than ‘educates’ because they need to. The world is in a state of crisis, but so are many people in their day to day lives. Even if they are not in crisis as such, then they are under pressure from other places whether that be in the workplace, economic, from society itself, from their friends or family or a number of other sources, and they need an outlet. They need to express their feelings and be part of something that does not place demands on them and provides them with a sense of community and security. Political music can do this to a certain extent but it has another motive as well. Popular music which speaks of emotions and which creates a sense of fun and enjoyment does not place people under these demands; it simply allows people to feel.

I was asked recently what I would do to address some of the issues with disadvantaged youth and my answer was immerse them in music and I was clear that it did not matter what type of music or what involvement they had – whether that be to learn an instrument, play in a band, be a radio presenter, go to concerts or just download and share with their friends as much music as they could. The reason for this is two fold. Firstly much of the problems associated with kids stems from their use of time. If they are busy they are far less likely to get into trouble. The second part to this is that music is an outlet – it is a form of expression that is universal (second perhaps only to the smile) it is something that they can share with others and have fun with in the process. It can help them to overcome their personal difficulties, help them to rationalise the world and help them to stay on track.

And so I need to change my approach – political music is important but it is not more important, it is just as important. Without the emotional, without the physical, we are not capable of the intellectual.

One of the sentences in my IASPM paper that I may need to reword to be more diplomatic suggests that emotive and dance music will be produced under almost any conditions because the social function is so well engrained and so well established. Perhaps this is true but only to a certain degree. Just like political music, there remains conditions under which better emotive and dance music will be created. A professional sector of creators needs to be sustained not just to challenge the status quo on a macro level but to ensure that individuals on a micro level have the peace of mind and strength to get over their personal challenges, to enjoy life and can be in a position to contribute to the wider social issues of our time.

I accept that we cannot have one unless we have the other. They are interconnected and not separate. What happens to one effects/affects the other.

Forgive me for just focussing on the political. From now on I will do so in a less dismissive way.

In the digital environment, just as in real space, we suffer from noise. Life is a constant process of clustering and filtering. Trying to group things together and sort them from others. Unlike popular music which already has many architectures and spaces in which this can occur, much more needs to be done to ensure that political music too has a space. It has not gone unnoticed to me that my local club has started to play a lot more political music. As someone who has already been exposed to this, consumes it and uses it, the reception is welcome. But it is partly ineffective for others. While they might hear it and sometimes even recognise it, they cannot connect with it on a level that converts that exposure all the way through to use. There needs to be a forum. There needs to be space and it needs to be appropriate to be effective.

In the digital environment we have the space for the popular, now it is time to create the space for the political.


__________________

I have three phrases I use to describe my learning process. There are the ‘book ends’ where I find the start and the end that hold the middle together. There is the perfect circle, where I can trace something to find its holistic presence. This is what I would call a ‘corner’ because it changes my direction. I have turned it. Thank you.