Myspace - one part regression therapy and one part spankin' good time.
(Mike Grebb, musician and journalist - 'The Power of Friends: Making Myspace - Your Space")
Myspace Music is a subsidiary of Myspace, currently the sixth most visited website on the internet and the most popular social networking website of all time.[1] It is a forum which allows both the organic extension of the pre-existing networking opportunities as well as creating previously unachievable opportunities. This essay will focus on the ways that musicians and artists utilize Myspace Music’s social networking aspect to realise these opportunities, and in turn, the way that Myspace Music uses them for its commercial benefit.
Music is social networking’s central cultural element. As well as being at the forefront of debates concerning control, ownership and legality of digital content, musical preference is a key factor in the establishment of the online identity of Myspace users. Social networking has created a unique environment for the production and distribution of media, which has facilitated the transformation to what Poster calls the “second media age” – one that is “defined by the emergence of decentralized and multidimensional media structures that usurp the broadcast models of the first media age.” [2] However, the recent News Corp acquisition problematized the scope of possibilities that social networking provides and draws attention to the inherent tensions between artists as individuals and the overarching goals of a corporation. In this essay I will firstly provide a brief background to my analysis by providing a history of the perception of social networking, the News Corp acquisition, and describe Myspace Music’s distinguishing features. Secondly, I will look at the opportunities that Myspace Music provides for artists, then contrast this with the effects of these commercially owned sites. Finally, I will conclude whether there is a way to move beyond this tension.
FROM UTOPIA TO COMMERCIAL CONTROL: A BRIEF HISTORY OF NETWORKS
The concept of “internet as a network” has been comprehensively developed by Castells. He argues “in spite all efforts to regulate, privatize and commercialize the internet and its tributary systems, CMC networks…are characterized by their pervasiveness, their multifaceted decentralization and their flexibility”.[3] The common perception of the nature of this networked community has undergone a radical transformation since the early days of the technology, where the rhetoric was “explicitly utopian” and cyberspace was lauded as being a “a libertarian free frontier, independent of social, political, or ideological control.”[4] Scharman contends that the transition from an idealistic belief in the possibilities of the internet is partly due to the “commodification of online space as product”[5] While it can be argued that the internet’s transition to the user-controlled Web 2.0 framework indicates the original ideology is still relevant, the majority of the key open-access websites are commercially owned. This is a major issue in the networking aspect of Myspace Music.
Myspace Music succeeds on two levels. Firstly, it allows musicians to create their own, free-of charge personal website. As well as listing a profile with basic information about the band (such as biography, upcoming gigs, news and photos) Myspace Music comes with a raft of additional features tailored specifically to musicians, including a MP3 player where they can upload samples of their music to be streamed directly. Many Myspace Music websites link directly to a store where either full CDs or individual songs can be purchased.
Secondly, Myspace Music meshes seamlessly with Myspace’s social networks and opens the door to a potential audience of millions. Musicians can source potential audience members by visiting genre groups and then contacting their members individually. They can build and solidify their fan base through personal messages left on their “friends” walls. They can also create a buzz by spreading their own viral campaigns. DeWolfe, the CEO of Myspace, believes the change in the fan-to-band dynamic is “the most exciting use of Myspace Music.” [6] Using these techniques, artists such as My Chemical Romance, The Arctic Monkeys and Lily Allen have launched their musical careers almost entirely through Myspace Music, gathering hundreds of thousands of potential consumers before being signed with major record companies.
Myspace Music exhibits the key indicators of convergence culture – it is a product of the decentralizing effects of new and accessible media technologies which have “lowered production and distribution costs,” yet it is owned by News Corp, one of the world’s largest media corporations which exercises control over a vast amount of media content across multiple continents and mediums. [7] The way that social networks have enhanced the possibilities for bands will be examined in the next section of my essay, where, following a brief analysis of the News Corp acquisition, I will examine the democratisation of “musician”, the disruption of the producer-consumer dichotomy and the complex issues surrounding content ownership.
In August 2005, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation bought Myspace’s parent company, Intermix Media, for $580 million.[8] At the time, Murdoch said of the acquisition "We see a great opportunity to combine the popularity of Intermix's sites, particularly MySpace, with our existing online assets to provide a richer experience for today's internet users."[9] News Corp also indicated that they hope to direct Myspace users to their official sites, such as of Fox Interactive Media.[10] It is clear that purchasing Myspace is part of News Corp’s strategy to expand their influence beyond is traditional stronghold on news media and films, as well as tapping into Myspace’s lucrative tech-savvy, cultural-consumerist core demographic.
Despite the fact that the look and feel of Myspace Music has not changed dramatically since the acquisition,[11] there are concerns from the alternative music community that Fox’s cross-promotion of their mainstream media will “detract from the attention paid to indie artists and labels.”[12] However, some point out that News Corp’s established audience, their global reach and their long-standing experience in the entertainment industry will mean that Myspace Music is a slicker, more effective means for bands to promote themselves.[13] In this next section I will look at the way that promotion through viral marketing has found a natural home in Myspace Music’s social networking scene.
MYSPACE –THE “DEFINITION” OF VIRAL MARKETING
Myspace’s social networks provide the perfect breeding ground for viral marketing campaigns. Goldsmith defines viral marketing as “simply word-of-mouth marketing via a digital platform.”[15] He argues that in viral marketing “motivations are emotional…influenced by friends, families and colleagues.”[16] Garfield confirms this theory, arguing that the success of Myspace Music singer Sandi Thom stemmed from her ability to “advertise to young people without making them feel they're being sold anything” [17]
Viral marketing works extraordinarily very well on Myspace, since it is grounded in social interaction and it is a quick way to build social capital. [18] DeWolfe, Myspace’s CEO, believes that Myspace Music operates as an organic extension of the existing possibilities of networking, in that it “lets people find music online in the same way they find out about music in person: through their friends. Millions of friends come to MySpace to socialize, and through that process -- word of mouth and recommendations of friends -- bands get exposure to new fans and fans to new music." [19] This is all good news for artists, who can access new places and networks.
There are differences of opinion as how effective viral marketing actually is. Tim Sweeny believes that the success of a viral marketing campaign on Myspace relies on the conversion of “Friends” into concert goers or CD purchasers.[20] In contrast, Scott G argues that while viral marketing itself may not result in an actual tangible income, it provides the “potential” for bands to then sell their products (such as concerts, merchandise). [21]
Since viral marketing is inherently commercial, there appears to be litttle tension between the respective interests of the artists and News Corp. Instead of spending money investing in advertising campaigns, as the title of Goldsmith’s book suggests, the network is “doing the work for you”. However, Scharman believes that the effect of viral marketing is that “interaction between users is effectively eliminating lines between personal communication and advertising”.[22] This is indicative of the commercial overtones of Myspace Music and I will explore this tension in the next two sections.
Myspace Music plays a key role in the transition to a second media age through its breakdown of the traditional “brick-and-mortar”, method of media distribution.[23] Before the advent of digital media like Myspace and iTunes, musicians would have to contend with production and distribution before their product could reach their audience, in many cases their success being entirely dependent on the record company’s opinion as to whether they could return a profit. Flew argues that by eliminating these “gatekeeper” roles, social networks are now “allowing for a more direct commercial relationship between the content creators and their audiences/consumers.”[24] Myspace artists can upload their songs directly onto the internet, and have them heard by a global audience.
Myspace Music has also narrowed the gap between the producers and consumers of cultural content. The ease of which artists can reach their audience has resulted in a democratization of media production, with an accompanying broadening of the term “musician.” Where musicians once needed significant resources (both time and money) to become successful, now anyone with a microphone can become a certified Myspace Music artist. Beer argues that this “collapse of the boundaries between the previously distinct categories of producer, distributor, and consumer” is a prominent feature of the shift to a second media age.[25] Garfield concurs, saying that this technology-assisted disintegration of the traditional classifications has ushered in a period of media production where “musicians (have become) their own record labels…….This trend…has dismantled the old artistic and business order in the same way that iTunes has shaken record buying.”[26]
However, it could be argued that this is an overly simplistic view of the situation. While Myspace Music does allow for artists to bypass traditional production and distribution channels, it does not circumvent them completely. Uploading content onto Myspace Music is still a step in the production and distribution chain. Myspace Music can still effectively make or break the fortunes of a band, depending on which artists Myspace choose to promote or ignore. Hence, Myspace Music does not break the bonds of production and consumption and therefore cannot be free from the commercial imperatives that surround this process. Music sharing website P2P is positioning itself as an alternative form of music distribution that doesn’t have a commercially-orientated intermediary.[27] However, until an alternative website can pose a serious challenge to Myspace Music’s hold over the musical market, it is unlikely that this will change.
OWNERSHIP AND ROYALTIES: CREDIT WHERE IT IS DUE
Until recently, Myspace Music possessed partial legal ownership rights in all the content that was uploaded onto the website. A clause in the Myspace Terms of Use Agreement gave the owners of the company “a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license…to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services."[28] In August 2006 Billy Bragg pulled his songs from the site in protest of this clause, rightly claiming that it gave News Corp the right to receive royalties from his music and use it at their discretion.[29] Myspace stated that this was not their intention, and within two weeks posted an amended Terms of Use Agreement which reiterated that the Myspace users possessed all ownership rights in their content.[30]
Considering the amount of profitable content that is uploaded onto Myspace every day, the fact that this clause went unnoticed for so long is a damning indictment of the naivety of Myspace Music users. It appears that Web 2.0’s promise of user-controlled internet has lulled many into a false sense of security in the hands of Myspace. It is up to the users of Myspace to be mindful of the fact that they are utilizing a commercial space. As Beer cautioned when reflecting on News Corp’s acquisition:
It is an oversimplification to think of networks like MySpace as disintermediated spaces in which music distribution and consumption are democratised or open to all. It is misleading to assume that because these sites are free-to-access that they somehow escape the flows, hierarchies, and structures of capitalism. [31]
Although the offending clause has been removed, News Corp is still profiting from musicians’ uploaded content. Myspace Music, from the point of view of News Corp, is a perfect way of capturing the attention of a particularly lucrative demographic. News Corp makes a handsome profit from advertisers who pay for the “eyeballs” that Myspace can attract. Consumer Affairs remarks, somewhat cynically, that “MySpace is perhaps the first (community site) to be controlled by experienced mass-media marketers who understand the connection between building the audience your advertisers are seeking at the lowest possible cost” [32] The end result is that Myspace Music is structured so “users themselves provide all of the content that draws the traffic to the site “[33] (emphasis added). This is an aspect of tension that exist in social networking sites which calls for a rethinking of “ownership” and the shifting power dynamics between the producers and consumers of media content.
As I have argued, while Myspace Music’s social networking aspect provides bountiful opportunities for artists, they exist because and for the benefit of the News Corp conglomeration. To move beyond this tension would involve a balancing act between these two separate interests. But are social networks inherently corporate? Flew argues that “The network society is a capitalist society.”[34] Hassan goes further:
There would be no internet and no network society (as we
know it) without capitalism…without big business persistently pushing the envelope our way for reasons that have less to do with personal ;’ freedom’, ‘creativity’ or ‘efficiency’ and more with business freedom to use networks creatively in order for us to buy from them in extremely efficient and profitable ways. [35]
To reconceptualise a move beyond the tensions of commercial versus individual interests, Beer advocates a move away from analyzing the ramifications of social networking using a black-and-white dichotomy, with complete democratic liberation of the internet on the one hand and the “dystopian vision of a newly digitalized 'culture industry' on the other.[36] In the face of mounting evidence of convergence culture, it is evident that the traditional conceptions of producers and consumers are changing – as categories blur and merge, so does the extent of their agency.
However, despite the effectiveness of Bragg’s protest, convergence culture has not reached the stage where the everyday artists can make demands on conglomerates. It seems that, at least in the short term, a way to move beyond this tension would be to literally move somewhere else. The problem is, argues Lovink, that there are hardly any “freely available public services that are ‘cool’ enough for tens of millions of young Internet users to gather”[37] Lovink criticises the inertia and lack of initiative of activist groups, and their failure to provide a non-commercial alternative, and argues “What’s missing is cultural competence to jump over the walls that have been built between disciplines and generations.”[38] However, the fact that any start-up website would be competing with the monolithic Myspace Music with its global reach and established audience, creating successful alternatives is not as easy to achieve as Lovink implies.
Myspace Music’s social networking facet is an extremely effective tool for artists. On an individual level, it provides the perfect place to create publicity, share music, build a support base and meet fans. Although it is not ideal (it is still a mediated space), it helps to blur the boundaries between producer and consumer, is the perfect place for viral marketing campaigns, and effectively democratizes the definition of artist.
However, it is when the social networking site is considered with perspective – regarding the interests of Myspace Music artists as a group – that problems with the commercial aggregation of this website emerge. Although the initial effects of News Corp’s acquisition are positive, the deeper problems are entrenched in the fact that Myspace Music is essentially a commercial entity and all decisions are primarily for economic benefit. As individuals gain greater agency through the realisation of convergence culture, it will be possible for change to occur from the inside and this may be a way to move beyond the tension. However, in the near future it up to social networking communities to create an alternative in which they can achieve all the possibilities that Myspace Music provides – in a space that does not compromise their artistic freedom by commercial imperatives.
words: 2737
REFERENCES
[1] Alexa Internet, (2007) ‘Alexa.com's website rankings system’
[2] David Beer, 'The Pop-Pickers Have Picked Decentralised Media: the Fall of Top of the Pops and the Rise of the Second Media Age' (2006) 11(3) Sociological Research Online <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/3/beer.html>at 13 May 2007.
[3] Manuel Castells, The network society : a cross-cultural perspective (2005), 385.
[4] Fred Scharman, You Must Be Logged In To Do That! Myspace and Control
[5] Ibid, 9th May 2007.
[6] Scott G, 'Social Networking and Music: Myspace Puts It All Together in a Virtual Community' (2005) Ezine Articles
[7] Henry Jenkins, 'The cultural logic of media convergence' (2004) 7(3) International Journal of Cultural Studies, 33.
[8] Jeremy Scott-Joynt, 'What Myspace means to Murdoch' (2005) BBC News
[9] Consumer Affairs, What's Inside Myspace.com? (2006)
[10] Jeremy Scott-Joynt, 'What Myspace means to Murdoch' (2005) BBC News
[11] Mike Grebb, 'The Dark Side of Myspace' (2006) Atlas Unplugged
[12] Ibid, at 14 May 2007.
[13] Citing Reed Baker, CEO and owner of New York City-based label Sophist Productions, quoted in Mike Grebb, 'The Dark Side of Myspace' (2006) Atlas Unplugged
[14] Mike Grebb, 'The Power of Friends: Making Myspace - Your Space' (2006) Atlas Unplugged
[15] Russell Goldsmith, Viral marketing : get your audience to do your marketing for you (2002), 7.
[16] Ibid, 27
[17] Simon Garfield, 'How to make 80 million friends and influence people ' (2006) The Observer
[18] Fred Scharman, You Must Be Logged In To Do That! Myspace and Control
[19] Scott G, 'Social Networking and Music: Myspace Puts It All Together in a Virtual Community' (2005) Ezine Articles
[20] Mike Grebb, The Dark Side of Myspace (2006) Atlas Unplugged
[21] Scott G, 'Social Networking and Music: Myspace Puts It All Together in a Virtual Community' (2005) Ezine Articles
[22] Fred Scharman, You Must Be Logged In To Do That! Myspace and Control
[23] Scott G, 'Social Networking and Music: Myspace Puts It All Together in a Virtual Community' (2005) Ezine Articles
[24] Terry Flew, New media : an introduction (2nd ed, 2005), 94
[25] David Beer, 'The Pop-Pickers Have Picked Decentralised Media: the Fall of Top of the Pops and the Rise of the Second Media Age' (2006) 11(3) Sociological Research Online <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/3/beer.html>at 13 May 2007
[26] Simon Garfield, 'How to make 80 million friends and influence people'(2006) The Observer, <http://www.blogger.com/%3Chttp:/observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1799881,00.html%3E at 14 May 2007.
[27] p2pnet.net News, Myspace targets indie music (2006)
[28] ‘Myspace’ Wikipedia
[29] Simon Garfield, 'How to make 80 million friends and influence people'(2006) The Observer, <http://www.blogger.com/%3Chttp:/observer.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,,1799881,00.html%3E at 14 May 2007.
[30] Myspace.com Terms of Use Agreement’ (15 June 2006) Myspace
[31] David Beer, 'The Pop-Pickers Have Picked Decentralised Media: the Fall of Top of the Pops and the Rise of the Second Media Age' (2006) 11(3) Sociological Research Online <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/3/beer.html>at 13 May 2007
[32] Consumer Affairs, What's Inside Myspace.com? (2006)
[33] Fred Scharman, You Must Be Logged In To Do That! Myspace and Control
[34] Terry Flew, New media : an introduction (2nd ed, 2005), 56.
[35] Robert Hassan, Media, politics and the network society (2004), 18.
[36] David Beer, 'The Pop-Pickers Have Picked Decentralised Media: the Fall of Top of the Pops and the Rise of the Second Media Age' (2006) 11(3) Sociological Research Online <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/11/3/beer.html>at 13 May 2007.
[37] Geert Lovink, 'Escaping the Control Loops: Understanding Myspace' (2006) 1 Kontrol
[38] Ibid, at 12th May 2007.
