Furry Writers' Guild Forum

Music and Writing-- Marketing Parallels?

Publishing and Marketing
#1

Hello!

I just listened to this BBC article in podcast form.

It was written/recorded by a young English musician who’s currently struggling to survive in as a professional in a world where practically everyone downloads their music for free (sound familiar, writers?) and how a certain French author predicted the music-marketing situation we live in today in 1976. His basic reasoning, by the way, was not based on computers or the Internet. My personal interpretation is that to him these were merely the means, not the ultimate cause of the destruction of the recording industry as the world then knew it.)

While I don’t agree with everything in the article/podcast, it’s an interesting look at what’s become a major problem for many sorts of artists. Interesting enough, I hope, for it to become an instigator of meaningful discussion here. Perhaps the most significant-- and scary!-- thing I got from it is that the French author in question (like me) believes that the only real economic future for musicians lies in personal appearances. Since we authors don’t really have those available to us as a meaningful or lucrative option, well…

(The audio version-- which I enjoyed!-- will be available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p032qlsz until about October 21, 2015.)

#2

Things are cheap, especially in a digital era with greater access to a wider market and the tools freely available. This goes to games, movies, books, and music. A few years back there was an article in the London Times about the future of cinema (as in going to the cinema) and transitioning into more selective and higher priced tickets. For example, paying $50 to see a movie in theater and getting a digital copy and disc upon release, all to combat the rising number of 200 million dollar feature films.

In many ways personal appearances will come into factor, but not earn cash. Personally connecting with fans is what makes things like Kickstarter and Patreon for musicians successful. The generosity of fans can outweigh traditional market logic.

By giving away a product for free (because personal preference or giving into piracy) requires a renegotiation of value. This necessitates providing something that is tangible and unobtainable via purely digital means. Easy for musicians who exist in an economy of memorabilia that costs money and cultural capital. Writers have books. Fans have to devote ten times the time to consuming a book. By moving from an economy based on the product the artist produce to the artist them self, piracy ceases to be an economic factor in success. Artists get paid to create art rather than paid for the art they make.

#3

After watching piracy reduce my sales to almost nothing, and then having many younger people-- all of them notably financially unsuccessful-- explain to me most earnestly that I ought to be grateful and honored to have work that took me years of hard work to create reproduced and read without compensation, well…

I’ve come to believe it’s inevitable. Technology isn’t just going to redefine the ethics and morality of the creative arts business-- it already has. Sure, the Big Powerful Government types and terrified Big Media corporations are scrambling to beef up copyright protections via draconian enforcement and international treaty, but in the real world that’ll only work for movie megastudios and others who have either enough funding to hire high-dollar lawyers or buy important-enough connections in the government to induce them to enforce the new laws for them. (Even for them, I predict ultimate failure. The technology in question is in my opinion just too damned cheap and useful to be suppressed, and the temptation of “it’s just a dollar and he’s a rich rock star anyway” too great. Combined, these forces will ultimately defy the best efforts of lawyer and financially-induced official alike.) Small-time authors like me… We have to simply eat our losses and accept being ripped off. Worse, there’s no relief in sight. As the cited article states, this is a sea-change for the entire human race in terms of compensation for creativity, and therefore a Big Deal. As 3-D printers improve, patent- and trademark-holders for physical products may well soon find themselves swimming in precisely the same toxic stew.

In essence, the old system of artistic/creative compensation is dead, dead, dead. I can’t make significant money writing under current techno-ethical conditions. Furthermore, I’m beginning to believe, very soon (as file-sharing grows more and more ethically-acceptable) neither will virtually anyone else. While I could go to a place like Patreon and beg for crumbs from the rich-- which is, frankly, how I currently view that particular system, though I’m still “thinking it all the way through” and my opinion is therefore still only a tentative one-- I can’t see a system like that effectively replacing good old-fashioned royalties, which represent relatively secure, long-term economic repayment in return for long, sustained effort. Years of repayment, in other words, in exchange for years of work.

At this point, I’m deeply questioning whether I ought to ever bother publishing anything anymore. I’ll certainly continue to write for my friends on the mailing lists I’ve been part of for over fifteen years, because it’s fun and I’ve grown very close personally to many of the people there. But all I post on said lists are easily-produced rough drafts. The real work-- and the real magic– of writing lies in the editing and rewriting process, and that’s hard, unpleasant work in exchange for which I see ever-less prospect of return. I mean… I was already making less than minimum wage before I was pirated, and I don’t enjoy editing at all. So…

Why should I continue to provide people I don’t know and who obviously aren’t in the least interested in compensating me for my labor with free reading material? I’m 55 and have heart disease. Why should I spend what time I have left huddled over a keyboard editing and rewriting with little prospect of a meaningful return?

I’m still working as hard as ever at writing as I type this, but I must say it’s only out of a sense of inertia. I honestly don’t have any further expectations of significant financial reward. I’m also actively investigating second careers in the “mundane” workforce; all of which seem to pay a lot better than writing free stories for file-sharers to enjoy. The day I take one of these jobs will, I suspect, also mark my last day of editing and rewriting and polishing. And, therefore, publishing.

My young file-sharing friends have already informed me that this a terribly selfish attitude, by the way…

#4

Couple things.

While I don’t necessarily think that the words of these “friends” of yours should necessarily be discarded due to the money they do or don’t make, I happen to believe that this idea is absolutely bunk.

What I can see is that there is SOME value to being pirated, in that people see it as exposure. And while you cannot eat exposure, it does have some value. SOME. VERY LITTLE. You are right, Rabbit, in that the old ways are dying. However, Patreon and other alternative payment schemes do have value in this world. Both are essentially crowd funding, in that you have lots of people giving you a certain amount of money to make a larger pool. If anything, this is more for little guys to pay for stuff that they like, since the financial investment for any individual person can be small, but their collective investment can be huge. And you should be paid for your work.

There is a segment of the population that is never going to pay for stuff. They’re jerks, and they essentially need to be worked around. Creative types especially need to put some of that creativity into essentially marketing skills to get people to know about your places of legitimate purchase and to buy. It’s not impossible but it is harder.

#5

The point I meant to make with that statement, though in retrospect clearly I did not, is that these guys have a poor grasp of financial matters and how the business world operates. Sorry-- I can see very clearly that another interpretation is possible and regret not being clearer.

#6

Millions use crowd-sourcing sites. Most are not rich (I am not rich and I’ve donated) most are there to support someone or something they care enough about to help the creator realize it. A dollar today is a dollar you didn’t have yesterday. Musicians and performers do this every day on street corners and in parks. They are not begging. You can stand and watch, jeer, ignore, pass by, either way they would still be there. You could throw them a quarter, a penny, a dollar, too. The opening act of a touring band may pass around a hat so they can wash their clothes, eat a meal, or have a beer. The only thing this system requires is the elimination of the barriers between creator and consumer. Art is insecure. Art comes with no guarantees. If art was secure and came with guarantees a great many more would be doing it.

Amanda Palmer gave a TED Talk on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMj_P_6H69g And then wrote a book.

Generally a meaningful, even passionate, discussion does not jump immediately into a personal rant and I say this as a financially unsuccessful, small time author, academic young person.

#7

I’m sorry that you feel that way.