Media article analysis and critical evaluation

¶ … media reproduction and distribution as it relates to music. The issue is analyzed within the context of the rapid technological change which has occurred over the last half century, especially the advent of digital means of reproduction and distribution through computers and the Internet. The relationship of this change to legal, economic, and philosophical consideration is also discussed. The article takes a relatively neutral tone towards the topics presented, taking no apparent position on any side of the controversial issues it discusses. This makes the information presented credible, it also prevents the article from providing a deeper analysis of the events being covered. The article is thus informative but ultimately lacking in a sophisticated of how the changes in how music is reproduced and distributed will affect music, culture, and society as a whole.

The Mechanical reproduction of music

The article begins by looking at the way in which music has been reproduced. It notes that while in previous centuries, music would have to be played in a live performance in order to be enjoyed, the 20th century ushered in an era in which music could be reproduced via machines; "The ability to use music at any time and any place refers as much as to Beeetoven's Ninth Symphony..as much as it does to the latest chart hit." While this did not eliminate the live performance, it did allow for the spread of music to the far corners of the Earth, and allowed for music to take on a much more important role in the lives of people, not only as a means to entertain or experience culture, but also as a means of self-expression and identity. The article takes note of this in more recent times, where ones group status tends to revolve around what genre of music one listens to. It is interesting to consider that in light of how the reproduction of music has changed. It seems that the march of technological development has made it easier and easier for music to be distributed and reproduced. This has allowed for far more varieties of music to become available to the masses, thus facilitating those who have specific tastes to enjoy a wide range of performers while still staying within a particular niche.

Taking things further, the article points out that record companies have tended to act as a kind of filtration system, sifting through all the mediocre acts and bringing to market only those artists which have real talent. Yet the article also states how companies such as EMI have stopped developing new talent in favor of expanding their current line up and focusing on sure fire pop hits. It would seem therefore that while technology allows for even more variety of music to be enjoyed, the record companies are not taking advantage of this.

The form of the technology and the media uses to which its put are "Socially formed."

Given the above, it seems clear that the record companies are standing in the way of the evolution of music, especially since they have pushed for legislation that gives them even more control over the distribution and reproduction of music. As the article mentions though, these efforts have largely proven to be failures because it has pushed technologically savvy users to create alternative means of distributing digital music files; "It was the actions of the music corporations that stimulated the development of distribution methods that draw on the distributed nature of the Internet itself." If we take this to its logical conclusion, it would seem that eventually music "piracy" will outstrip the ability for record companies to make a profit and the flow of music will stop. At least that is the argument apparently put forth by those companies who seek to prevent music from being copied and shared on the Internet for free. The actual result, which the article does not seem to consider, could be that technology makes record companies completely obsolete as a means to find, record, and distribute talent. In fact, as the article notes, technology has made it possible for people to record their own music, and edit it with almost professional quality. People are already doing this, and they are placing their music directly to the public on social networking sites like "My Space." The article claims though, that the record company will still be needed to "filter" content and bring the best to market, and thus will have claim to charge high prices for their official album releases.

The impact of social network access to distribution and the copying of music

However, if people are free to choose from a wide variety of music, and the cost of both recording and reproduction fall to near zero, then there is no need for a middle man in a suit looking for top talent. The public, through mechanism such as social networking, can directly decide who becomes "big." Further, given the immensity of the Internet, and the limitless tastes of those online, the whole concept of the rock-star may go out the window. In a time when as the article states, four companies could effectively control the majority of music presented to the population, it makes sense that only a few key bands will become known all over the world. When one can access whatever music one wants, at any time one wants, and when countless groups are out there wanting people to listen to their music, then there is no reason to defer to any record company or other official channel to get ones music. One simply goes for what one finds to be appealing. This produces a decentralized music distribution system where no one can gain dominance without appealing to every particular musical tastes all at once. This is ironic because we may see both an increase in the variety of music available, and an increase in some groups trying to be as "pop" as possible in order to reach everyone. Those with the widest appeal are thus likely to be the most simple and easy to get into.