Dr. Howell wrote:
I have no idea ... whether you remember the Payola scandals of the '60s,
Though the payola scandals were within my lifetime, I'm not quite old enough to remember them. I was looking at the issue from the perspective of the "end user", suggesting that the commercial supported radio and television formats were the origin of contemporary attitudes held by most people not in the music business about whether or not one should be obligated to pay for an ~.mp3 downloaded, or whether it is acceptable to download without compensating those involved in the production of the content. The parallel I see is that when the listener turned on the radio (or the viewer turned on the television) there was not immediate connection to the cost; the content was free because commercial spots were available to those who wished to purchase them, the listener who was not attracted by the commercials, paid nothing for the content those commercials supported. I propose that this is a direct antecedent of the notion that "I should be able to download and listen to an ~.mp3 my friend recommended for free", on the one hand, and the notion of "think of the exposure you'll get", on the other.
ns _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
