Is there a double standard in the Record Industry?

[Foxus]

The point to this thread is looking at the double standard of the record industry, and perspectives thereof. Before I start, know I'm writing this out of passion and concern, not just as a musician, but as punk rock musician. I encourage debate in this thread, and raising awareness of the double standard in the record industry.. Despite not caring for children myself, if anyone has ever seen "The Other F Word" documentary, you'll see how hard punk rock bands have it, from TSOL to Rise Against.

When you look at the industry and the artists today, a pop singer who makes millions each year and lip syncs 99% of the time on tour, has a nice mansion in Malibu, then in comparison to say a punk rock band, who lives check to check, in a single family home at best, it makes you think, why is there such a double standard in the industry? Punk rock has a message, that's the whole idea of punk music. Whether its rebellious against the government or romance dealing with a ex-girlfriend, it delivers a message and record labels, like em or hate em, need to hear that message.

You always hear a pop singer, rapper, or country singer singing about the same old song and dance. Living in a broken home, their dad is a workaholic, how their girl/boyfriend totally screwed them over, you listen to say a Rise Against record. You hear about the same family values and personal feelings, but you don't see them on the cover of Billboard or see a net worth in the double or triple digits of millions.

As I watched this documentary, I felt a wave of sadness and anger, a sense of empathy for these musicians and a sense of anger toward the industry, for being so arrogant and one-sided. There's a reason why the word, "Equality" exists. Because regardless of the genre, everyone deserves the same treatment. It really makes you think twice when you listen to a record, look at an artists bio, the content of the songs, when you think this in-depth of the, discrimination for the lack of a better word, on behalf of the industry.

With this said, I'm curious to see your perspective toward this issue. Maybe you haven't thought about the possibility of a double standard in the music world until you read this, maybe you have. I feel, on a musical standpoint, this double standard needs to be seriously addressed.

Thanks.

 

[Whia]

People liking pop more than punk isn't a double standard. Record executives, whose job it is to make money, have no practical incentive to support artists/singers/bands who they feel won't be popular.

No double standard. Just capitalism.

 

[Sucumbio]

Bad Religion sells out huge venues but they never went with the status quo. They kept true to what being punk means. I think a punk band is the antithesis of pop star, so of course the glam life kinda stays out of reach. But it's by choice, I don't see it as a double standard industry wise. Besides even punk bands have labels and they rake in millions with the best of them.

Pop stars tend to be solo acts too. So they need a different approach to the stage. Bands, well bands have a harder time making it work.

Then there's the audience. The single biggest revenue generator for any musician remains ticket sales. Way more ticket buying fans are into pop than punk. Just the way it is.

 

[M15t3R E]

Punk rock music is not nearly as mainstream, which may have something to do with the fact that club music is all pop and party hip-hop music. There's more pop artists out there capitalizing on that "feel good" aspect of modern pop music. Most consumers are very shallow and prefer this over songs with meaningful lyrics such as in punk rock music. This happens in hip-hop as well. I only listen to underground hip-hop with good lyrics like songs by Tech N9ne, for example. Meanwhile Lil' Wayne gets on the air rappin' nonsense about his lollipop. So producers latch onto this to collect the dough as it rolls in. And that, my friend, is how our country works, like it or not.

 

[Foxus]

The thing about punk rock and hip hop is because they both talk about relative subjects (and this is coming from someone who can't stand the latter) "street" talk as its also known by. While hip hop tends to be more about getting out of prison, both it and punk rock are songs that are raw and passionate. Difference is Tech Nine will gain 90 million and Tim Armstrong at best 10 million (anyone who knows Rancid knows "And Out Come The Wolves..." should've given them enough moolah to retire on the spot if they wanted to (that's when album sales actually mattered).

I think record labels need to be more open to punk music, they definitely were for The Offspring and Rise Against (well, Brett Gurewiz sold The Offspring to Columbia to avoid ruining Epitaph's indie status after "Smash". Offspring are arguably not punk anymore). But Rise Against were signed to Geffen in 2004 and then eventually Interscope up until this year (when they suddenly disappeared from Interscope's artists list).

That same "openness" seen in the 90's and 2000's can still continue, its simply about being more diversified. The money is definitely there (just look at Warped Tour).

Oddly enough, harder rock bands like Bring Me The Horizon, Bullet For My Valentine, and Five Finger Death Punch have gotten more attention from major record labels recently. Weird how the harsher stuff gets attention.

 

[Whia]

The money definitely isn't there, 'cause if it was, this thread wouldn't exist.

 

[M15t3R E]

The worst part of pop being favored above all is that this attracts all kinds of talentless pop stars to make enthusiastic beats with vapid lyrics which are nothing but nonsense. I haven't truly enjoyed listening to the radio in years.

 

[EarthCrash]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRguZr0xCOc