Following the recent vote to repeal net neutrality decided upon by the FCC, the glimmer of hope for the future shared by myself along with millions of other independent artists was further dimmed by the rollback enacted by this 3-2 party-line vote. I can’t say I’m too surprised by this, based on the ambitions that this current administration has proven to exhibit over the course of the year- but I’ll admit that I’m unnerved by the lack of regard for the people that this country’s leaders all seem to share, with FCC chairman Ajit Pai calling our now-preliminary web freedom nothing more than “government overreach”.
I’m not going to make you read another article on what exactly the repeal of net neutrality does, and how “this all means that if you pay more money to ISPs you will have access to a ‘fast lane’ of the Internet”, because that’s not the case. These fast lanes are not for you, a consumer; these fast lanes are being offered to large corporations in exchange for a big hunk of change. Anyone who isn’t able to pay for these fast lanes will just be trapped into some sort of Internet “bumper-to-bumper” traffic sh*tstorm.
So how is all of this going to affect the music industry that we all know, love, and have unlimited access to?
Over the last six years, I’ve been involved in a handful of different bands/musical projects. The existence of which have all seemed to begin with the conception of our Facebook profiles. Having a Facebook profile seems to be a rule of thumb for your band if you want to be taken seriously. Facebook serves our generation as a sort of monopolistic entity fixated upon preserving our relationships between people we used to know and love along with those we still do know and love. I honestly can’t imagine how differently I would’ve gone about marketing these bands and publicizing them if it wasn’t for Facebook, or the Internet in general.
Before the Internet, the music industry revolved around the concept of scarcity. There was only so much space on a shelf to hold records, and more artists than record companies, studios, and radio stations combined. Not every musician was able to reach an audience and be heard. Since its inception, the Internet has reconditioned the industry into a realm of no limits. My shelves now hold unlimited space, I can find any radio station online, I can even gain a following in Micronesia if I wanted.
As an aficionado of good music, the Internet has become my stomping ground for discovering, supporting, and listening to countless artists since I learned how to type. Millions of other people will gladly say the same. Being both a fan and a musician has impacted the way I use the internet- influencing the websites I visit and the services I currently decide to pay for. My band(s) along with any relevant band/artist in the industry today will tell you that they utilize the web to distribute, stream, promote, and sell their music digitally. Musicians across the globe can take advantage of this tool to promote shows, communicate with their fans, share information, hype releases, and so on. We do this because it’s simple, it’s smart, and it’s free.
It’s not actually free, though.
If I want my band’s posts to reach more than 10 people (a generous example), I can “boost” the post for an extra $5 per post. By giving Facebook my money, I am then able to be taken seriously by their algorithm, and reach more people instead. They take my band’s data, money, and reach and it’s allocated into the feed of someone who likely to engage (like, comment, click) with my post. This is essentially what the FCC and the Trump administration aim to accomplish with the repeal of net neutrality. If I’m already paying to simply access Facebook at a moderate speed, how much more willing would I be to pay an additional fee just to have a few more people engage with my band? Independent artists like myself wouldn’t be more willing, because we already have significantly less money to work with, but a commercial artist who’s signed to a major label definitely has the funding to do so.
Today, I make my music available directly to the customer, I may have downloads available on my site, or maybe my Bandcamp. When music is purchased this way, I may pay Bandcamp a small fraction of the money I earn, and the rest is mine to keep. If my music is available for purchase (or stream) on a larger site, like iTunes, it’s the other way around. Either way, I’m personally happy that my music is being sold. However, with the repeal of Title II Net Neutrality, Bandcamp may not have the money to access the fast lane, and the music will take forever to download. iTunes will be able to afford it however, so more downloads will be purchased through iTunes, thus Bandcamp eventually going under. The same goes for streaming music. If music is streamed directly from the artist’s website, it will probably have to buffer for a while before you get to the first chorus.
Similar to when mass market retailers began including music in their inventory, closing down independent record stores, the repeal of net neutrality will drive independent musicians, labels, and services out of business. This will turn the internet into a divided system based upon financial access and privilege. The already popular will become more powerful while those who haven’t yet found success with their music will be cropped out of the picture.
The lifelines of all businesses, not just in music but within just about every other industry rely heavily upon the internet. This is not going to change. If musicians don’t sign onto major labels or sell their music through large outlets, their livelihoods could be ruined. Once ISPs are allowed to sell faster connections only to those who can afford them, musicians with less financial stability will lose access to the invaluable resources they can currently use. For many, this means they will lose their livelihood. Losing an open internet will eradicate the freedom of all artists, and will allow major corporations like Facebook and iTunes to profit from our creativity.
