| Home | Articles | Interviews | Links & Literature | About Me |
|---|
"The advantage of an economy of attention"
E-mail Interview with Moritz Sauer
Moritz
Sauer is journalist, author, lecturer
and web-designer. His works are regularly published in German magazines
such as c't Magazin,
De:Bug and Intro. Moreover, he is
the responsible
editor of the online magazine Phlow.
He has been a lecturer at various
conferences and at the University
of Karlsruhe, Germany. Moritz Sauer
was also one of the initiators of the web-label ID.EOLOGY.
As
a co-founder of
ID.EOLOGY you
are a pioneer in the field of the
netlabels in Germany. By now the amount of weblabels has increased and
even famous bands as Radiohead publish their music online for free.
What
do you think about this development? Does it still relate to what you
had in mind with ID.EOLOGY?
First of all, after I was in charge for ID.EOLOGY for one and a half years, I left the label, since for me there was no further development in sight regarding the netlabel. Since I left at the end of 2004 the structure has hardly changed – looking at it from an outside perspective.
Unfortunately, ID.EOLOGY hasn’t developed into the direction I would preferably like to see it today. Even if we put music online as downloads at no charge, back then, my focus was directed at achieving an income for label and artist. Just as Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, Saul Williams and other likeminded artists, I see the advantage of an economy of attention. The Internet rolls over the distribution of (digital) goods by means of its technology. Moreover, young people as well as adults copy music illegally. Selling music as a cultural good is becoming increasingly difficult. The mp3-sales do not compensate the plunging CD-sales and they will neither do so in the future.
That’s why it is logical to distribute one’s music for free, at least a part of it, to – as Radiohead – target attention with it. One can’t earn money with unlimited goods, as with an mp3 that can be copied an unlimited number of times, but rather with limited goods. For the musicians this implies concerts, special editions, merchandising and special events for fans and industry. Then I didn’t have precisely this in my mind, but today I would drive a profit-oriented label into this direction, namely to produce limited goods as, for instance, concerts and merchandise and to advertise them with gratis goods (mp3).
In your article Freie Kultur, freie Musik[1] in your column for Intro you write that the change in the area of music-culture and –distribution caused through the Internet calls for a reorganization. How should such a new order look like and in how far would it be guiding the future of the music business?
The Internet is based on a technology that facilitates the exchange of data. Data as texts, videos, software and also music files are easily distributed via the Internet, in real-time and usually unlimited, hence „virtually for free“. As a fact Researchers and scientists developed the Internet especially for this purpose: they wanted to exchange information. Due to this the exchange process is one of the – if not even the – underlying feature of the Internet.
And as by far not everyone has understood this, the momentarily dominating structures are attempting to repeat themselves online. But this doesn’t work or will significantly change, respectively. For this reason the music industry will firstly continue to shrink. First reactions are new business models, as, for example, the 360-degree contracts. The music business will have to increasingly limit itself to their core competence: entertainment. I believe that the Internet will increasingly become the display window for the limited goods mentioned above. The Internet offers communication with the bands, with other fans and with the event as such. I assume that music will be increasingly distributed as a file at no charge and musicians as well as the music industry will have to think about gigs, merchandising and live events in general. There lies a chance for „profit“. Music sales perishes increasingly.
First of all, after I was in charge for ID.EOLOGY for one and a half years, I left the label, since for me there was no further development in sight regarding the netlabel. Since I left at the end of 2004 the structure has hardly changed – looking at it from an outside perspective.
Unfortunately, ID.EOLOGY hasn’t developed into the direction I would preferably like to see it today. Even if we put music online as downloads at no charge, back then, my focus was directed at achieving an income for label and artist. Just as Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, Saul Williams and other likeminded artists, I see the advantage of an economy of attention. The Internet rolls over the distribution of (digital) goods by means of its technology. Moreover, young people as well as adults copy music illegally. Selling music as a cultural good is becoming increasingly difficult. The mp3-sales do not compensate the plunging CD-sales and they will neither do so in the future.
That’s why it is logical to distribute one’s music for free, at least a part of it, to – as Radiohead – target attention with it. One can’t earn money with unlimited goods, as with an mp3 that can be copied an unlimited number of times, but rather with limited goods. For the musicians this implies concerts, special editions, merchandising and special events for fans and industry. Then I didn’t have precisely this in my mind, but today I would drive a profit-oriented label into this direction, namely to produce limited goods as, for instance, concerts and merchandise and to advertise them with gratis goods (mp3).
In your article Freie Kultur, freie Musik[1] in your column for Intro you write that the change in the area of music-culture and –distribution caused through the Internet calls for a reorganization. How should such a new order look like and in how far would it be guiding the future of the music business?
The Internet is based on a technology that facilitates the exchange of data. Data as texts, videos, software and also music files are easily distributed via the Internet, in real-time and usually unlimited, hence „virtually for free“. As a fact Researchers and scientists developed the Internet especially for this purpose: they wanted to exchange information. Due to this the exchange process is one of the – if not even the – underlying feature of the Internet.
And as by far not everyone has understood this, the momentarily dominating structures are attempting to repeat themselves online. But this doesn’t work or will significantly change, respectively. For this reason the music industry will firstly continue to shrink. First reactions are new business models, as, for example, the 360-degree contracts. The music business will have to increasingly limit itself to their core competence: entertainment. I believe that the Internet will increasingly become the display window for the limited goods mentioned above. The Internet offers communication with the bands, with other fans and with the event as such. I assume that music will be increasingly distributed as a file at no charge and musicians as well as the music industry will have to think about gigs, merchandising and live events in general. There lies a chance for „profit“. Music sales perishes increasingly.
Notes
The German version of this interview can be read here
[1] [Free culture, free music] (3 March 2007)
All content © 2008 Kathrin
Weinen