When I was in twelfth grade, my favorite class in school was philosophy. Instead of writing a long, boring paper, our final test of the year was completing a group presentation in which we were tasked with exploring a deep-rooted issue in our society that we believed was grossly misrepresented. The most memorable presentation came from a group of students who explored social inequality by statistically comparing the living standards of the average person to professional athletes. They exposed the extreme wealth gap between baseball players and firefighters, and managed to shine a light on the fact that the average employed person performs a necessary function in society, but is underpaid compared to people who are aimed to entertain us by playing a game. After the presentation wrapped, the students got a big hand except for one person, the teacher. Our professor looked up from his desk and asked them a question that I will never forget for the rest of my life.
“You did a great job researching their salaries, but why didn’t you examine the people who are paying them?”
At that moment, the class fell completely silent and even the kids who did the presentation didn’t have an answer for that. See, when you focus on the low-hanging fruit that is millionaire celebrities, it’s difficult to look higher to see the blood stained leaves at the top of the tree. This is my perspective on the entertainment business in a nutshell and this is what will be informing my opinion in this particular article, so if you are someone without the ability to see that most musicians, like professional athletes, are mostly high-paid employees (well, independent contractors to be more accurate), then chances are you will not understand me when I say that this #TIDALforALL backlash is utter bullshit.
1. The People Who OWN Your Favorite Artists Make More Money Than They Do
I always find it hilarious whenever some entertainer receives a huge contract for doing something they’re talented at, and people get self-righteous about the money they’re making, as if the people who offered them the contract are taking less or barely scraping their coins together to make ends meet. The way record labels work, the artist gets paid LAST. The way movie studios work, the actors get paid LAST. The way many professional sports leagues work, the contracts are not even guaranteed so the announced amount is NOT the amount they actually earn. Compare the annual salary of Sony’s CEO Doug Morris to the average yearly earnings of a Sony artist. If you think it’s close, you’re sadly mistaken.
2. Artists Have Been Getting Royally Screwed For A While
When Jay Z famously said, “I’m overcharging for what they did to the Cold Crush,” he was referencing a common industry fact that is very rarely talked about (or even known) in many public circles: Recording artists have a long history with being screwed. Therefore, ownership is actually revolutionary in it’s own way. In no way, shape or form is it comparable to social activism, but helping artists make money off of their art without it being pillaged by middlemen and greedy executives is a start. Is that to say that Tidal will definitely not have any illicit business practices? Of course not. Only time will tell that. But, I have absolutely no problem with artists being disgusted at making $23 for every $1,000 they sell (if they’re lucky).
3. An Artist-Centered Music Platform Can Help Lesser Known Artists Too
It’s easy to look at the owners of Tidal and say, “I’M NOT HELPING YOU GET MORE RICH!” but what about artists like Aloe Blacc who aren’t multimillionaires? If he is getting screwed by Spotify, what in the hell is wrong with a songwriter such as himself having another option with more control for himself? Their music can get 168 million streams and they walk away with $4,000. Many songwriters and artists are not out here driving Maybachs and living in plush Manhattan condos. They work for a living like we do, and have to find money to pay the mortgage and their car note. It still remains to be seen how Tidal will specifically help artists like Aloe Blacc but the fact that the owners are artists themselves is something to be hopeful about.
4. Where’s This Outrage When Rich, Non-Artists Make Business Deals?
Remember all of that Twitter backlash that billionaire Ted Field received when he launched Trauma 2 records? Field, who once was #236 on Forbes Richest People list, decided to team up with other moguls to create a record company that could help musicians also simultaneously break into TV and film (read: find other revenue streams to bilk artists out of). Well, there was no damn outrage. Ted Fields has made billions of dollars and screwed a lot of people along the way, but no one cares because he’s not a big name. But truthfully, there shouldn’t be any backlash to business deals because this is what life is like in a capitalist society. These artist came together to have a work meeting, and whether it disappoints you that they don’t come together for greater causes outside of the office, that is no reason to demean them gaining a measure of ownership over their own art.
Look, if you don’t want to pay $20 a month for a streaming music service, fine. That is your choice as a consumer and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. But please spare us a lecture on morality because all artists, whether big or small, whether conscious or money hungry, are allowed to congregate and capitalize off their art because it is their livelihood. It’s up to you as the consumer to determine how much you’re willing to pay for their service, but to determine that they’re selfish for doing what they feel is in their best collective economic interests is beyond stupid. Let the market decide and leave it at that.
LAB
Lincoln Anthony Blades blogs daily on his site ThisIsYourConscience.com, he’s an author of the book “You’re Not A Victim, You’re A Volunteer” and a weekly contributor for UPTOWN Magazine. He can be reached via Twitter @lincolnablades and on Facebook at This Is Your Conscience.