Believe that. JD's talking about music dissemination, formats, and pricing. All he's saying is, if Radiohead can decide to put out music on their terms (i.e. "no really it's up to you" pricing), then Jay-Z can do it his way ("fuck iTunes, you can't just buy the "Roc Boys" single, you have to buy the whole album at a price I dictate"). Jermaine, Jay was doing just fine before you stepped to his defense.
But that titular quote came from Jermaine as the result of some call-and-response between Dupri and music business wonk, industry crank (and generally prescient) newsletter king Bob Lefsetz, who took Jermaine to task for his anachronistic, self-pitying, multiply flawed blog-post rant on the state of the iTunes and online sales over at Huffington Post. A little bit:
Some people find it hard to understand my man Jay-Z's decision not to let iTunes break up his American Gangster album and sell it as single tracks. They say he's fighting the future and losing out on sales from fans who only want to download singles. But I say it was a stand somebody had to take in the music industry. Jay is speaking for all of us.
He's not the first. He's not the lone cowboy in all of this. Radiohead and AC/DC have turned their backs on iTunes for the same reason. Doug Morris, the CEO of Universal Group, has been fighting Steve Jobs on this for a minute now. But Jay is at a level people are going to pay attention to. He's had 10 number one albums. He may run Def Jam but he's also an artist who put his heart and soul into something that he wants people to hear all the way through. As the creator and investor, he has every right to demand this.
But it isn't so much that Jermaine is arguing Sean Carter should have the freedom to sell his record any way he wants; it's a free market, obviously he can kick it Jay-Z's way all he likes in that context, no need for argument there. It's more that JD is arguing against the sale of singles online, against the way the game has gone, and for a return to the halcyon days of getting people to pony up for a full-album to get any taste at all. Basically, he wants a return to the state of affairs that led to people seeking out affordable (read: free) means of obtaining the music they want. Jermaine insists "WE made iTunes," and that by refusing to allow iTunes to sell his fellow artist's albums, Apple's bottom line will suffer tremendously, and there will be "No more iPods!"
Bob Lefsetz to the rescue:
What, is Universal a gang?
I think so, because that?s how they operate.
This is the kind of bullshit I want gone from this business. Rich businessmen who believe they?re ENTITLED!
Hey Jermaine, APPLE DIDN?T SAY YOU COULDN?T BUY THE ENTIRE ALBUM!
I?m just waiting for Doug Morris to break the Apple cartel. I want to see what happens. All of a sudden revenues are gonna jump back up and the CD business will be replaced and we?ll all be drinking champagne? Yup, when Apple allows us to sell our music as albums, the way we make them, then we?ll be in nirvana.
Horseshit.
Jermaine Dupri?s misunderstanding of Apple?s place in the music landscape needs to be commented upon. APPLE figured out a way to charge for online music. Not Doug Morris. PressPlay was a money pit. Apple didn?t invent the hand-held MP3 player, it just perfected it. Even if the iTunes Store is shut down, Apple?s gonna sell a fuckload of iPods. Because of the player and software integration. No other company comes close! Apple?s success isn?t built upon selling tracks at a buck apiece. It?s built on giving people what they want, all their music on one handy device, to go!
Bob goes on...
I?m sick and tired of the bullying. And that?s what Universal is up to. That?s what Doug Morris specializes in. And you?ve got to ask, HAS IT WORKED?
They were behind suing file-traders. File-trading HAS GONE UP!
They have said no to so many people, believing their music is priceless, that it must be sold on their terms, that their business has been decimated. It?s not like Universal?s overall sales haven?t dropped this century, just like everybody else?s.
No wonder the business is in trouble. All Universal knows is behind the scenes dealings, winning through intimidation. But now that fewer people are listening to their paid for radio, and Steve Jobs is not playing their retail distribution games, they?re crying. They don?t want to save music, that?s utter bullshit, they want to save their private jet lifestyles!
You want to keep earning the bucks? Figure out how to charge for music! If iTunes were such a big fucking success, people wouldn?t still be stealing P2P. Apple isn?t the problem, it?s a drop in the bucket sideshow. To focus on Apple is to ignore the much larger landscape, where revenue can be collected. And how are you going to do this? By selling music the way people want it.
I doubt Jermaine Dupri is buying music. Or maybe it?s that he?s so wealthy, he doesn?t feel the pinch. He needs to live in the customer?s shoes. The customer can only afford so much. What if he buys someone else?s wares instead of yours, Jermaine? What then? Wouldn?t you rather a person buy ONE of your tracks, to get a taste? That?s how we converted people back in the day, before they cut out singles. You purchased the 45 and became addicted, you then bought the album.
The problem with Steve Jobs is he?s living in the digital world. Where it?s about how smart you are. It?s about excellence, not intimidation.
Jermaine, I?d love to see you have success in the future. And the way to do this is to cut great records. If you do this, people will want EVERYTHING the act has ever recorded. That?s the addiction of music.
Music is a drug, akin to heroin. You?ve got to start people, get them hooked. Imagine if the first hit cost $1000! Then many people would never partake. But the drug dealer usually gives the first hit free. Make the first hit cheap Jermaine, 99 cents. Or as part of a bucket of tracks. Get people involved.
CD sales were at their greatest at the height of Napster. The country was music crazy! People tasted music and wanted to own it. The more we?ve tried to lock up the music since, the more sales have plummeted. I say sell it however the public wants it. Get them to pay for it. That?s what every other marketer does. They don?t insult their customers, they treat them like gold, because they depend on them.
It?s a free country. Jay-Z can sell his album however he wants.
But if you?re telling me restrictions are the way of the future, I gotta tell you, you?re DREAMING!
So when did that Jay-Z/Radiohead analogy come into play? When JD wrote Bob a letter, trying to clarify his initial point:
Bob,
I'd really like to take this back to my original point, which was just that some albums are meant to be listened to as albums - and that artists should have the right to make sure they're sold that way. I spend a lot of time working with artists who give their all to make the hottest music they can. Sometimes this music works great as a collection of singles. But sometimes the artist puts his heart and soul into creating something that needs to be listened to from start to finish. But hey, I'm a consumer too. I use iTunes and I love it. But I also know that the iTunes model of slicing everything into singles isn't the best approach for every album. It isn't just about money, either. Radiohead didn't offer their new album as individual tracks - you could only download the whole thing, because that's how they wanted people to experience the music. But they let consumers set their own price. They kicked it the Radiohead way. I'm just saying Jay-Z should be able to kick it Jay-Z's way. It's frustrating to hear people saying "Gimme my singles right now!" when alot of the same folks are complaining about how they don't hear any good albums anymore. I believe that if we give artists a little room to put records out in a way that serves their art, we can really raise the level of the game.
-JD
"Not only that, I believe [Jay-Z]'s starting a movement that's necessary. More artists and producers are gonna take back control of how their art is sold because his strategy has paid off," Jermaine says in his HuffPo post. Again, myopic. Just like few think Radiohead kicking it their way is a tenable option for the majority of recording artists, Jay-Z's all-or-nothing sales method won't really work for the bulk of hip hop artists Jermaine himself is probably producing. But the major fallacy of Jermaine's argument is thinking that when it comes to digital music distribution Doug Morris has a shred of insight or knowledge about what the fuck he's doing. 'Cause he doesn't.
