This analysis of Radiohead fans’ tendencies toward spending too much money for a download of In Rainbows raises some good points about the possibility of people showering the artists they love with maybe a little too much money (yes, even in today’s paying-for-music-averse times), but I’m guessing whoever was assigned to copyedit the thing didn’t realize that the piece’s anonymous writer was playing “spot the tortured reference to the band’s discography” from the first sentence. Which is: “Will Radiohead leave fans high and dry?”
It only gets better from there:
• “According to a poll conducted by United Kingdom music magazine NME, the average fan appears to be willing to pay $10 for a digital copy. Now, that may not sound like a blow out.”
• “Radiohead’s fitter, happier approach slices out even more cost. The band pulled the ripcord on EMI…”
• “As a well-known band it’s also able to take the knives out on marketing and promotion costs…”
And, finally:
• “To avoid letting down fans, it might be more productive to adopt a no-surprises policy and fix a simple, fair charge for its record.”
All in a 292-word piece, at that! (And I probably missed some along the way.) I’m just surprised that whoever wrote this didn’t go ahead and call the president of EMI Music a “creep,” although maybe that bit got struck out in the editing process.
What Price a Download? [WSJ]
I would’ve given the writer massive props if s/he had managed to work in lines like, “Even the most paranoid androids among Radiohead’s fanbase think highly of the band’s gambit,” or, “The band seems to imply by its actions that the label-based sales model is idioteque.”
This whole thing has me climbing up the walls.
The most impressive inclusion would have been “Lurgee.” Or “Packt Like Sardines In A Crushd Tin Box.”
Are we sure that Raftery isn’t writing for the WSJ now?
This reads like a Rob Sheffield album review in Rolling Stone.
There, there.
What I want to know is why does the band want to place the album’s CD and vinyl version in the same box set. That doesn’t offer much to the turntable-less. They might as well add in the minidisc, cassette and Voyage Golden Record versions.
Every price point in its right place.
Bullet proof…I hope this strategy is.
The best part of this is that the “majors” (and the minors) are scratching their heads. And the heads are rolling because they _still_ have not been able to figure out the digital paradigm shift. Maybe if the got off their asses and, like, actually tried to understand the artists, the audiences, and the “product” they might be able to sort it out. Until then- I hope that bands like Radiohead keep fucking with them.
hehe…
forgot- journalists don’t get it either. Sorry journos (not).
Someone should have told this guy, “Idiot, slow down.” then everything would’ve been in its right place until the gloaming.
His editors alarm bells, they should be ringing ’cause this guy’s article is rotten fruit, and he’s damaged goods. Someone should make him prove himself, but I can’t. I’m faithless (the wonder boy).
I’m optimistic that his next radiohead-related article will be disinfected, eager to please.
(Please, god, help me stop.)
People, people, you’re overthinking this all. Personally I’m content to wait to catch the band in concert again in Palo Alto.
While trying to be the trickster, Radiohead may wind up doing it to themselves. Wouldn’t that be just?
It’s a matter of math really, as 2+2=5, it seems the major’s are just a wolf at the door.
I might be wrong.
Radiohead should be really forward thinking and pay ME to listen to anything from “Kid A” forward.
The fans should consider themselves lucky that Radiohead is letting them pick the price. It would be a let down if the album wasn’t very good.
“With this bold strategy, Radiohead may well be showing the music industry How To Disappear Completely.”
sorry. it’s addictive.
I rarely name favorites but damnnit, this is the best blog post EVER. I’m just pissed I didn’t think of it first.