How I Pitched ‘For The Record’
In June 2009, The Music Network published my first commissioned article. It was the first in a five-part series called ‘For The Record’, a retrospective feature on the album format and whether it’s still relevant. Start with part one here.
I recall spending a couple of hours on a May morning putting all of my thoughts and feelings on ‘the album’ down onto paper, and then transcribing it into a document and emailing it to the assistant editor. At the time, these articles (and the resultant commissions) were just about all I had going, so I threw myself at the opportunity completely.
It’s funny and a bit embarrassing for me to look back over this pitch, as it’s quite childish, incoherent and – as I’ve since learned – the exact opposite of what most editors look for in story pitches: brevity and clarity.
Below is how I initially pitched the article to the magazine for their ‘Digital View’ section (which later became ‘Digital & Media’ after their redesign).
The Music Network – Death Of The Album pitch (this is a placeholder title, btw)
This is a feature discussing the reduced importance that consumers place on the concept of the album, and how the music industry should largely adopt a new ‘organising principle’ in order to match consumer demand. I will be careful to qualify this by stating that release schedules should be re-examined on a per-artist basis, though, because the album still has some place; it’s just been marginalised.
The articles will use a consistent, measured tone that injects humour and attitude, but forgoes condescension. I’ll strive for objectivity here, though this is a topic that I could easily rant about subjectively. ;)
I envisage five parts, though it could go one less or more. This will become apparent once I start writing.
Precis:
I: A history of the album
- Why does the album exist? Who imposed the 74-minute limitation?
- Summarise the development of the format; Sony, Phillips, competing technologies, how it took a decade for the CD to supersede the LP
- Album historically serves as the preferred way to contain profits and maintain both consumer interest and a release schedule. Containment and maintenance.
- From LP to CD to digital; the medium has changed but the ‘organising principle‘ (the album – a term attributed to Gang Of Four’s Dave Allen) remains the same
- The industry revolves around the album: release schedules, record deals, album reviews, pricing structure
- Why is this a problem? Hint at changing consumer habits, and part II
II: What’s changed?
- Objection: “I still listen to albums!” So do I. Because it’s still the most prevalent manner of distributing music.
- It is important to understand this point: albums are still sold, whether digital or physical, but the widened choice afforded to consumers has resulted in a decreased attention span.
- To illustrate: here’s a regular album. It’s front-loaded with some great songs, the ones that you heard before you bought it. Then you get to the second half of the album and, more than likely, it’s not as good. Think about all those times you’ve tried really hard to enjoy later tracks on album just so that you claim to honestly love it all. It’s hard work; I’d argue it’s an unnecessarily big ask on the listener.
- It’s a complaint as old as the album itself: “A few of these tracks are awesome, but the rest are a waste of time.” Hi, MGMT.
- Define consumer; who is buying music in which format? Different trends for different demographics
- Discuss ‘killer versus filler’: Bob Lefsetz quotes here
- No band deserves all of your attention, and it’s selfish of them to expect that from you. No band claims to be the best band in the world, except The Hives. So why do they tack noticeably sub-par songs onto the end of otherwise riveting albums? Because record labels are tied to the concept. Lead into part III.
III: What hasn’t changed?
- The main point to reinforce here is the change in consumer (listener) habit. Technology and portability has severed our attachment to the album format. Provide anecdotal evidence of what the album (LP) used to represent; a social object that could only be played in the home, or at a dance hall.
- Every notion you hold about albums – the great, the poor – are built upon a format created to streamline label profit
- If our attention has splintered beyond the confines of the standard 12 tracks/45 minutes, why do new albums keep appearing on store shelves, both virtual and physical?
- Quote iTunes facts here – single vs album sales
- Point out the correlation between these facts; that is, a division between consumer habit and industry habit.
- Visual analogy: picture listeners and labels as running on two parallel lines. While the latter ignores the changing habits of the former, the two shall never meet. Piracy and discontent will deepen the divide.
- Major label profits have dived as a result of piracy, sure, but consider an alternative: that consumers are sick of spending $20 on a disc with only a couple of good songs. It’s easier to download the lot and listen to what you want, or to just pick and choose individual tracks.
IV: What needs to change in order to better serve consumer interest?
- Marketing structures and strategies (thanks Jade!). Label-signed artists who are locked into multi-album deals have it tough.
- These multi-album deals perpetuate the ‘few strong songs, mostly average songs’ trend to which we’ve become accustomed. To which we’ve responded with ignorance, piracy or pick-and-choose song downloads.
- What we need is increased quality control on the label’s part. Work with artists to allow them to discover the medium with which they’re most comfortable releasing music, and then work with them to realise these goals.
- Gone are the days of slapping a ‘one-format-fits-all’ tag on all artists, with the end-goal of album after album. There may be artists who still want to do that, absolutely. But to portray the album as the only marker of recorded success? This is a fallacy has been disproven.
- It is vital that adequate pricing structures and business models are adopted for a variety of releases – single song, small collection of songs (EPs), live performances – to ensure that artists can live comfortably off their earnings. So that they may continue to make music.
- This is an aspect that is often forgotten among the frequent discussion surrounding ‘the music industry’. All too often, we forget that the industry is built on the creative talents of songwriters, musicians and performers whose music engages. Music is an inherently social creation that is only becoming more social, as fans connect online and artist revenue streams continue their shift from recording-based to performance-based.
- Discuss alternative business models; hint at part V
V: The future of a reduced reliance on the album as the organising principle
- I imagine a steady stream of single tracks, with occasional EP and album releases. I think Bloc Party have done this recently?
- Give examples of artists who have tried alternative release models + quotes
- Give examples of artists who have successfully trialled new models. Avoid relying on big cases here (eg Radiohead, NIN); if this is to be believed, I’ll need to give more compelling examples than artist with millions-strong fanbases.
- Reinforce why a reduced reliance on the album is not a bad thing. Our listening habits have changed, but we still feel an attachment to the album concept. Cognitive dissonance might be worth including here.. or that could just dilute my argument. Will see.
- Reinforce the ‘digital’ aspect here, for this is The Digital View, damnit! Digital is the entire reason that the album has become a less pertinent format of music dissemination.
- But – what of record stores, if a reduced reliance on albums (‘records’)? There’s a discussion for another column, one that’s not necessarily attached to this five-part album discussion.
After the articles were approved – and I totally rejoiced, as this was the first time I’d written anything other than CD or live reviews for money – I ran the above pitch past my friend, David Carter, who lectures at the Queensland Conservatorium. His expertise on matters concerning the music industry are documented on his blog, Where To Now?
David’s comments in (an appropriately academic) red.
I: A history of the album
- Why does the album exist? Who imposed the 74-minute limitation?
- Summarise the development of the format; Sony, Phillips, competing technologies, how it took a decade for the CD to supersede the LP
- Album historically serves as the preferred way to contain profits and maintain both consumer interest and a release schedule. Containment and maintenance. think you might be missing something here re production and distribution costs that need discussion up-front; what was the first album? why was the first album? these might be better ‘organising principles’ here – trace development of the album as a collection of singles to autonomous artwork – point out that the album-as-art had to do with innovative / creative use of the medium rather than an inherent element of the medium itself
- From LP to CD to digital; the medium has changed but the ‘organising principle’ (the album – a term attributed to Gang Of Four’s Dave Allen) remains the same
- The recorded music? industry revolves around the album: release schedules, record deals, album reviews, pricing structure ‘music’ industry has always included other revenue streams – side point but worth pointing out
- Why is this a problem? Hint at changing consumer habits, and part II
II: What’s changed?
- Objection: “I still listen to albums!” So do I. Because it’s still the most prevalent manner of distributing music perhaps a more important objection – ‘I still want to sell albums’?
- It is important to understand this point: albums are still sold, whether digital or physical, but the widened choice afforded to consumers has resulted in a decreased attention span not so sure about this – Your assertion that ‘widened choice’ has resulted in ‘shorter attention spans’ is problematic – I don’t think you can prove a causal relationship here and not sure if it’s really attention span you’re talking about or a lower tolerance for filler? I think you’re getting at changing methods of the consumption / reception of music thanks to advances in computing and telecommunication technologies and while this has resulted in wider access to certain types of content the key thing here for music listeners has been the ability to easily re-order and separate out albums. It’s not the ‘internet’ that has ‘killed’ the album but rather the ability for consumers to ‘roll their own’ albums. – one point I think you’re missing in terms of what’s changed is ‘technology’; particularly the iPod. It seems to be there in III but not explicit here? Another point to make is that online the cost of manufacturing and distribution approaches zero for both content creator and consumer and this has fundamentally changed the marketplace.
- To illustrate: here’s a regular album. It’s front-loaded with some great songs, the ones that you heard before you bought it. Then you get to the second half of the album and, more than likely, it’s not as good. Think about all those times you’ve tried really hard to enjoy later tracks on album just so that you claim to honestly love it all. It’s hard work; I’d argue it’s an unnecessarily big ask on the listener.
- It’s a complaint as old as the album itself: “A few of these tracks are awesome, but the rest are a waste of time.” Hi, MGMT. this has always been the case with pop music and why labels used to sell singles; need to think about / discuss why digital is different.
- Define consumer; who is buying music in which format? Different trends for different demographics and also think about what / why they’re buying and what they end up doing with it. Maybe there’s an element of musical discovery in exploring ‘album tracks’ by Nick Drake or Dylan (for example) that grow your appreciation for their artistry; maybe you want the physical backup of a CD; if your iPod is your only music storage device what happens to those mp3’s you don’t want to listen to anymore?
- Discuss ‘killer versus filler’: Bob Lefsetz quotes here
- No band deserves all of your attention, and it’s selfish of them to expect that from you. No band claims to be the best band in the world, except The Hives. So why do they tack noticeably sub-par songs onto the end of otherwise riveting albums? Because record labels are tied to the concept. Lead into part III. or because they don’t think the tracks are sub-par; because they’ve bought into the notion that the format is art rather than product; because the drummer wrote the song and was complaining about not getting enough writing / royalty credits; etc. – there are a lot of reasons albums contain filler, some of which pertain to market expectations but not all. Don’t think you’ve made this point convincingly.
III: What hasn’t changed?
- The main point to reinforce here is the change in consumer (listener) habit. Technology and portability has severed our attachment to the album format. Provide anecdotal evidence of what the album (LP) used to represent; a social object that could only be played in the home, or at a dance hall. think you can provide physical evidence here in terms of sales from the iTunes music store – overwhelmingly consumers are buying singles;
- Every notion you hold about albums – the great, the poor – are built upon a format created to streamline label profit and a format that still must make monetary sense to the labels – even online; why? discuss.
- If our attention has splintered beyond the confines of the standard 12 tracks/45 minutes, why do new albums keep appearing on store shelves, both virtual and physical?
- Quote iTunes facts here – single vs album sales
- Point out the correlation between these facts; that is, a division between consumer habit and industry habit.
- Visual analogy: picture listeners and labels as running on two parallel lines. While the latter ignores the changing habits of the former, the two shall never meet. Piracy and discontent will deepen the divide. suggest you need to discuss / take into account that albums and bands still make money off physical discs – at present people are still buying CD’s, despite all the rhetoric; perhaps not so much that the labels are running parrallel to consumer sentiment but that they haven’t viewed digital downloads as a fundamentally different product?
- Major label profits have dived as a result of piracy not sure if you should concede this point – have they dived because of piracy or because of a format / consumption shift? , sure, but consider an alternative: that consumers are sick of spending $20 on a disc with only a couple of good songs. It’s easier to download the lot and listen to what you want, or to just pick and choose individual tracks this is an old argument that I don’t think you need to embroil yourself in – this isn’t about copyright and piracy it’s about how (if) recorded music can be marketed and monetised.
IV: What needs to change in order to better serve consumer interest?
- Marketing structures and strategies (thanks Jade!). Label-signed artists who are locked into multi-album deals have it tough.
- These multi-album deals perpetuate the ‘few strong songs, mostly average songs’ trend why? ideally everyone involved wants an album worth of strong songs – what stops this happening? wonder if there’s something here to do with advances in technology / no development money allowing a lesser level of songwriter / composer access to an audience? to which we’ve become accustomed. To which we’ve responded with ignorance, piracy or pick-and-choose song downloads.
- What we need is increased quality control on the label’s part. Work with artists to allow them to discover the medium with which they’re most comfortable releasing music, and then work with them to realise these goals.
- Gone are the days of slapping a ‘one-format-fits-all’ tag on all artists, with the end-goal of album after album. There may be artists who still want to do that, absolutely. But to portray the album as the only marker of recorded success? This is a fallacy has been disproven. not sure this is what labels are doing though – again, they want to make the most money they can from a release in the context of a very unpredictable market; if they thought they could do this with singles they would; why haven’t they?
- It is vital that adequate pricing structures and business models are adopted for a variety of releases – single song, small collection of songs (EPs), live performances – to ensure that artists can live comfortably off their earnings there’s a fallacy going around that artists used to live comfortably off their earnings from record sales – it’s not true – very few artists (particularly major label artists) made / make significant personal profit from album sales; the real money for artists is and has always been in royalties, touring and merchandising. There is such a small percentage of records that actually make anyone any money it’s ridiculous – why then have record companies and artists perpetuated such a seemingly flawed business model? So that they may continue to make music.
- This is an aspect that is often forgotten among the frequent discussion surrounding ‘the music industry’. All too often, we forget that the industry is built on the creative talents of songwriters, musicians and performers whose music engages. Music is an inherently social creation that is only becoming more social, as fans connect online and artist revenue streams continue their shift from recording-based to performance-based think you need to address the differences between music as product vs music as service in here somewhere
- Discuss alternative business models; hint at part V
V: The future of a reduced reliance on the album as the organising principle think you might want to review / throw out some of this and incorporate whatever’s left into part IV – particularly artist examples. Don’t think there’s enough new ideas here to warrant a fifth part.
- I imagine a steady stream of single tracks, with occasional EP and album releases. I think Bloc Party have done this recently?
- Give examples of artists who have tried alternative release models + quotes
- Give examples of artists who have successfully trialled new models. Avoid relying on big cases here (eg Radiohead, NIN); if this is to be believed, I’ll need to give more compelling examples than artist with millions-strong fanbases.
- Reinforce why a reduced reliance on the album is not a bad thing. Our listening habits have changed, but we still feel an attachment to the album concept. Cognitive dissonance might be worth including here.. nah – be honest; too many people out there already saying ‘this is the future’. not enough willing to say ‘I’m unsure / conflicted / fascinated’ or that could just dilute my argument. Will see.
- Reinforce the ‘digital’ aspect here, for this is The Digital View, damnit! Digital is the entire reason that the album has become a less pertinent format of music dissemination.
- But – what of record stores, if a reduced reliance on albums (‘records’)? There’s a discussion for another column, one that’s not necessarily attached to this five-part album discussion.
Read the published articles here: part one, part two, part three, part four and part five.
Note how the latter half of the series totally deviated from the initial pitch, as – like David rightly pointed out – there weren’t enough new ideas to warrant needlessly dragging the feature out. So I decided to interview some musicians instead; always a reliable fallback for any stuck music journalist.