Is the audience for popular music created by the music industry?

When looking at this question we need to take into account what the music industry consists of. The music industry includes recording companies such as Universal, EMI, Sony/BMG and Warner, music retail such as HMV, music press, merchandising and music technology such as musical instruments and recording and reproducing technology. Now knowing what the music industry consists of we can see that the audience for popular music is most definitely created by the music industry. To support this Bruce Horner and Thomas Swiss state, “audiences depend on the music industry for access to music – access which is available predominantly through such economic transactions as purchasing records and tickets and selling and advertising.” (1999: p228) Without music retail such as HMV, audiences would not be able to access or buy their music. However, this idea is thought to be too simplistic. Some might say that it is not realistic to suggest that popular music can exist entirely unmediated by the forces of the music industry, yet I believe that the music industry does in fact create the audience for popular music.

Review on Hip Hop Magazine

Whilst reviewing Hip Hop magazine, it was clear to me that the potential target audience is that of a young, black male. Due to the continuous use of ‘black’ rap artists such as Nas, 50 Cent and Jay-Z, I felt that there was a clear bias towards a black audience. Additionally, considering that hip-hop and rap genre music is seen to be ‘black’ music, the magazine relates to this genre and appeals to this idea of a young, black male. The magazine uses very derogatory terms when talking about white people, for example the extract in the hip-hop gallery ‘Black people don’t cry’ states, “I know white people have stolen a lot from us, so let those devils keep jazz, rock and swing dancing as well as their contemptible white Jesus.” Finally, the use of a topless female with an article on who she is is a clear attraction to a male audience. Whilst this has been a negative review, the magazine obviously has appeal to its intended audience.

Are blackness and whiteness useful concepts in the study of popular music?

I think that blackness and whiteness are useful concepts when studying popular music. However, these concepts are hard to use in relation to music, as there are clear stereotypes of what ‘black’ music is and what ‘white’ music is. Yet, when looking back at some songs, John Lennon and Paul McCartney sung the song ‘yesterday’, but it was originally sung by Marvin Gaye. Therefore, the stereotypes of ‘black’ music being genres such as rap, R’n’B, rhythm and blues and jazz, and ‘white’ music being pop, folk and rock and roll is surely wrong? As David Hatch and Stephen Milward state, “pop music has always depended upon the interaction between white and black traditions.” (1987: p120) I think in this case class and location are more relevant. Race is not so much a major factor nowadays, but class and location can be a useful concept to the influence of types of music made and why. Obviously many years ago, race was a major influencing factor. Therefore blackness and whiteness are useful concepts in the study of popular music, however other factors such as class and location do need to be taken into account.

Can popular music achieve genuine political change?

According to Roy Shuker popular music can be “a means of raising both consciousness about, and funds for, political causes.” (1994: p235) In this case I would have to agree. Artists such as Bob Marley performed songs, which supported and advocated the counter capitalist politics of the Rastafari movement. In doing so his album sales were over 10 million. However, this is an example of hegemony of the recording industry, as it is apparent that it is only acceptable for Bob Marley to give voice to counter capitalist movement, as it’s making a profit. Additionally, events such as Band Aid have helped to raise money for third world countries. Therefore popular music can help to achieve political change, yet it is not solely the reason. Can popular music be taken seriously enough to make a genuine political change? In my opinion, I think that popular music merely plays a part in political change, as there are many other factors that can cause political change.

Are youth subcultures genuine signs of revolt or simply the manifestation of style?

Phil Cohen suggested youth subcultures as a “compromise solution between two contradictory needs: the need to create and express autonomy and difference from parents… and the need to maintain the parental identifications (Phil Cohen, 1972). In relation to this idea of expressing autonomy, we can see the signs of revolt. Many youths will rebel against what is seen as the norm purely because they don’t want to conform to society. However, in doing so they are in fact conforming to another social norm, just one that is not as predominant as the others, for example the Goth subculture. Eventually though this subculture does become a manifestation of style. For example, what I might have thought to be a ‘chav’ when I was at school may be perceived completely differently now and could now be the complete opposite. I believe that a lot of the time youth subcultures start out as a genuine sign of revolt, but do end up as simply the manifestation of style.

Does the emergence of the digital download signal the end of the music industry?

Due to the inventions of new technology many people say that the digital download signals the end of the music industry. I have to disagree with this. Personally, I would say that the emergence of the digital download gives artists the opportunity to share their music, and in doing so increase their audience. Dating back to the 1970s, compact cassettes became the first recordable audio medium. This and the release of the compact disc in 1970 raised many problems and lead to the British Phonographic Industry launching an anti-piracy campaign in the 1980s. Therefore, piracy has always been a threat to the music industry. With internet connections being faster than ever and programmes such as limewire enabling people to share music for free, many people are choosing to do this over buying music. After all, who would pay for something when they could get it for free? However, some prefer to pay to ensure they get good quality music. Furthermore, people are still paying to go and see live concerts because of the experience, therefore leading me to the conclusion that the emergence of the digital download does not signal the end of the music industry.

Can popular music ever really be unplugged?

Due to the technological advances that we have witnessed, with the invention of the microphone in 1827, the electric guitar in 1932 and the amplifier in 1904, how can music ever really be unplugged? If defining unplugged as without the use of these inventions then surely it is very difficult for music to be unplugged nowadays. Without this technology, artists would not be able to perform live concerts to thousands of people, as their voice would simply not travel far enough to reach every person. Unplugged music is therefore acoustic music, thus meaning without the use of these technological devices. Effectively, recording is not unplugged meaning that any attempt at making music that is unplugged would have to be done purely with a live, acoustic performance with only the strength of the artist’s voice to reach its mass audience. As we can see, this is very unlikely to happen therefore leaving me to the conclusion that popular music can be unplugged, but with great difficulty. With the technology that we have now, it is more than likely that music will not be unplugged as it is much easier with the use of microphones, instruments and amplification.