Comments on: Webcasting: ‘reverse payola’ http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12791 p2pnet.net - reader powered Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:56:15 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12791/comment-page-1#comment-144621 Reader's Write Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:14:16 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12791#comment-144621 to KB: music was licensed to radio broadcasters at no charge, for the same reasons you said, it was thought that it would increase sales. radio advertisement paid for employees of the stations, and cost to operate, and profit hopefully. Now they will just have to charge advertisers more, which in turn will raise product costs somewhere down the line. Inevitably, the radio stations will turn into more ads than airtime. it means that the RIAA has yet more control and the artist gets screwed because he WONT get paid from those sales. Not to mention, the consumer. I forgot FM still existed personally. to KB: music was licensed to radio broadcasters at no charge, for the same reasons you said, it was thought that it would increase sales. radio advertisement paid for employees of the stations, and cost to operate, and profit hopefully.

Now they will just have to charge advertisers more, which in turn will raise product costs somewhere down the line. Inevitably, the radio stations will turn into more ads than airtime.

it means that the RIAA has yet more control and the artist gets screwed because he WONT get paid from those sales. Not to mention, the consumer. I forgot FM still existed personally.

]]> By: KB http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12791/comment-page-1#comment-144258 KB Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:25:36 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12791#comment-144258 I never have understood why any kind of radio station has to pay for playing music. What they are doing is promoting the band/artist and getting the artist money. Why would a company pay for something just to give someone else a chance to make money? In fact when you listen to a commercial that means a company paid the radio station to put that commercial on the air so that company can get the word out about themselves and sell whatever they have to sell. So, does that mean bands should start paying for their songs to be heard, because they want to sell their music? I never have understood why any kind of radio station has to pay for playing music. What they are doing is promoting the band/artist and getting the artist money. Why would a company pay for something just to give someone else a chance to make money?

In fact when you listen to a commercial that means a company paid the radio station to put that commercial on the air so that company can get the word out about themselves and sell whatever they have to sell. So, does that mean bands should start paying for their songs to be heard, because they want to sell their music?

]]>