[Harp-L] Re: {Harp-L] Opps I did it again. Pop is for the week.

[Richard Hunter <turtlehill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Chris Michalek" wrote:
<Pop music is only popular because that what people are told to like.
<It's all about marketing.  Do you think a song is popular because you
<hear it on a pop station twice per hour?  Companies pay for that kind
<of exposure.  You know this Richard.  Weak minds are subjected to the
<same things over and over thus they believe it is what they are
<supposed to like.  They believe it is popular. Marketing in the Pop
<sector involves a technique called Forced Evangelism. 

Oh, come on.

I heard the same argument from Al DiMeola, the guitarist in Chick
Corea's Return to Forever band, years ago.  According to DiMeola, jazz
lacked a popular audience because it wasn't on the radio.  Just put it
on the radio, and everybody would rush out and buy it.

This is exactly backwards to reality.  Reality is this: radio stations
live by selling advertising, not by taking payola. Payola revenues are a
fraction of advertising revenues.  Advertisers pay for time on stations
that attract listeners -- the more listeners, the more the advertisers
pay per minute of air time.  Stations that attract listeners -- and
therefore charge higher rates to advertisers -- play music that a lot of
people want to hear.  

Jazz isn't hard to find on the radio because of payola.  Jazz is hard to
find because stations that play a lot of jazz attract fewer listeners
than stations that play a lot of pop.  Period.

It's not surprising to me that music that's more complex intellectually
and emotionally has a smaller audience.  It's surprising that so many
musicians who should know better think that putting their brilliant,
emotionally and/or intellectually complex music in front of a larger
audience will make it more popular than the Bay City Rollers.     
Again, this isn't about what sucks and what sings.

Thanks, Richard Hunter
hunterharp.com