A star is born. Yesterday today's number one on the charts was still a Nobody, now his face and music appear             everywhere: on the radio, on MTV, in the shops, clubs, cars, from every stereo. The musician did not have to do much; everything was well-planned by specialist. This traditional approach of artist-discovery is definitely industry centred. It seems as if the musician as well as the consumer can only adopt a passive role. As Adorno stated, the music industry becomes “the villain in this story […] depend[ing] for their success on a passive audience and create a passive attitude among their customers” (Adorno in Dolfsma, 1999, p. 11). The decisions are made by those in charge, knowing the business. They are the Artist & Repertoire (A&R) and marketing people in the record companies, always having the right idea of what is the new trend and what the consumer wants (Negus, 1991).

 The filter flow model invented by Paul Hirsch in 1970 is such a classic theory of how artists are discovered. In the different stages of the filter flow model the media and industry gatekeepers “rank, order and filter” (Negus, 1991, p. 25) a musical product until it reaches the public. It used to be the common understanding of the music industry that those gatekeepers have the absolute power about what is filtered through. However, the model has been criticized not to take all factors that influence the success of music into account - it is too linear. An extension of the filter flow is the so-called Production of Culture by Richard Peterson (1976). His model is a decision chain in which different specialists work at their respective levels. A new level can be added if the process of production requires it. Throughout all levels there is a certain consensus and hence the musical product is a “joint venture” of all those specialists. However, it is – as the filter flow - too pragmatic, strategic and difficult to apply in practice, since not everyone involved will have the same ideas. A consensus can hardly be reached. Moreover, both models do not take the artist and consumer and their influence into account. They are simply too passive.

Antoine Hennion (1984) has attempted to integrate the audience’s 'pulse' into his theory on artist discovery. For him the production of music as a good is rather collective and democratic. However, this happens only within the structures of the music industry. According to Hennion, the members of the industry “do not manipulate the public as much as they feel its pulse” (in Negus, 1991, p. 27). Keith Negus in contrast, feels that this is an argumentation often used by record company staff, but which does not tell the complete truth. He rather thinks that people working in the music industry are "cultural intermediaries” (Negus, 1991, p. 25), who mediate between the production and the consumption side. For Negus, A&R and marketing are the two departments that know about the selling point of the artist (what is so special about him and why the audience will buy his records). Their role lies mainly in the development of an artist. However, what the audience should like and what the artist should look and sound like is often in the heads of the A&R and marketing specialist.

As I already mentioned in my article Musical Freebies Online needs and demands are often imposed onto the consumers by those ‘specialists’. They claim that they seriously know best about those needs, but at the same time this could also be understood as a form of cultural dictatorship. The idea that musicians should not only sound nice, but should at the same time have the potential to stardom is prevalent in their opinion. The media that are worked with in the industry are sound and vision. The musicians who cannot provide both and hence do not fit into this scheme does not get a chance. Once again the industry considers the artist only as product, and the fan as a consumer. According to the abovementioned theories both do not have much influence on where they get and what they get, respectively. Both have taken up a passive role in the production and marketing of music. The views described before are part of a deterministic view of the production of pop music. They describe the recording industry as a “closed bureaucratic machine filtering products to the public according to the commercial logic of capitalism” (Negus, 1991, p. 24).

But there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel of passiveness. Recent studies (Dhar & Chang, 2007; Chang, 2007; Grace et al., 2007) have established that the Web 2.0 – the apparent second generation of the Internet - and its user-generated content in weblogs and social networks can be seen as a means to break with the tradition. The Web 2.0 is supposed to be a platform for the consumers’ real needs expressed through newly created forms of media and cultural artefacts. Thus, it is supposed to be a means to create a more individual and diverse music culture. Naturally the Web 2.0 is assumed to bring advantages for the music industry, but it is even more important to artists and consumers in terms of providing them with the opportunity for self-determination and participation. This role of the Web 2.0 in making the music business more participatory fits into the romantic view on music production (Negus, 1991) opposed to the deterministic view explained above. This approach depicts the music industry as “medium which somehow manages to provide products expressing the creativity of artists, the social ideas of the time or the needs and desires of consumers” (Negus, 1991, p. 24).

In the following two sub-articles I will look at the opportunities the Web 2.0 and its user-generated content give to artists and consumers. I will examine it from the perspectives of the artist and the consumer, respectively, showing how it gives room for a ‘Do-it-yourself’ approach for the former and a participatory approach for the latter. Furthermore, I will investigate how the Web 2.0 allows both to actively influence the music culture and which possibilities it provides to the music industry.

The 'Do-it-yourself'                   A Part of the Party!?
          Guide to Stardom                  Fan-culture on the web 2.0 as a way
Artist-made music-marketing on the web 2.0 social network MySpace                towards a participatory music culture