Exclusivity it dead. Long live exclusivity.
Despite what the proliferation of streaming services may have lead you to believe, exclusivity in the music business is alive and well in 2016. Regardless of whether you’re discussing sales, streams, video content, or even written editorials, the demand from companies and blogs alike to lay claim to something no one else can offer has never been higher than it is right now. Even artists are in on the game, with Kanye West proclaiming Tidal as the only place he will ever allow The Life Of Pablo to be made available to the public online, or with Drake having his “Hotline Bling” video financed and premiered by Apple. The idea behind these moves is that it draws everyone’s attention to one place where the conversation is controlled by the party, or parties, responsible for the content being shared. It’s a concept known to many as windowing, and in theory it’s a real game-changer, but in reality it’s a process that ultimately devalues whatever content such activity is intended to promote.
“Windowing” is a term often thought of in relation to film, but in recent years it has become increasingly popular in conversations based around the music industry. The word refers to the idea of releasing a new piece of media in a select number of locations or to a select user set at first before later making the same content available in more places and to more people as it begins to age. In digital music, a windowed release would be one that is only available on Spotify or a similar streaming platform at first. Then, after several weeks or months has passed, the album is made available on Apple Music, Tidal, YouTube, and/or any other streaming platform you can think to name.
Sony Entertainment CEO Michael Lynton recently suggested that in future, we will see music releases being windowed like movies, with new music being made available exclusively on paid subscription services first, and only on free services later. Companies want to offer something their competition cannot, and as that trend continues the amount of money services will be willing to pay for exclusive access will rise. This mean labels and artists alike will be able to cash in on new material with a big payday up front as opposed to pursuing a traditional release and the uncertainty that comes with it. Windowing guarantees some return on investment, at least up front, even if the material isn’t all that great. After all, companies are paying for content, not quality.
The problem with windowing, especially in music, is that it assume consumers will change their behavior based on a corporate sponsorship that does not benefit them in any way whatsoever. Consumers have grown accustomed to having everything ever released available on demand, often for free, pretty much whenever they wish to access it. They have likely already chosen a streaming platform, or have at least used several free trials, and they have established a routine when it comes to new music consumption that they rarely deviate from. If they buy vinyl, a streaming exclusive won’t get them to use Tidal. If they pay for Spotify, a physical release of something might not find its way into their collection. This isn’t to say music fans are stuck in their ways, but they do tend to know how they prefer to engage with music and they rarely change their behavior without somehow finding it absolutely necessary to do so. Promises of better quality might work, which I suppose is the hope of hi-fi services such as Tidal, but the only people who care about such things are those who feel what they already have is not good enough.
Take Kanye’s latest, The Life Of Pablo, for example. The record, which was released exclusively on Tidal, reportedly helped the fledgling streaming platform more than double its total number of subscribers (from 1.5 million to 3 million), but it also lead to a boom in online piracy that quickly outpaced Tidal’s growth. Within 72-hours of the album first appearing online several torrent trackers reported the record to have already been illegally downloaded more than 500,000 times, and by the end of the album’s first week of release that number had already doubled. Kanye may see some return on those downloads in the form of praise from fans received over Twitter or another social network, but the real winners in this scenario are the pirate sites promoting the album’s illegal availability. Their pages have ads, often many, and they gain a few pennies for every click they receive. Times those pennies by a million or more and you begin to see real money, which will never reach Kanye or anyone he may be indebted to as a result of creating TLOP.
The short term gains of windowing releases in music is only a good thing when one does not consider the potential lost income and engagement that will arise from consumers forging their own path to your content. Instead of limiting access to material, artists big and small should be doing everything in their power to make their music available everywhere under the sun. Make it harder for people to find illegal links to your music by supplying them with endless legal options instead. Don’t limit yourself or your fans to just one service when you can use them all and have your content available anywhere on the planet at a moment’s notice. You might not receive a big check overnight, or even have the immediate press blitz you desire, but in the long run you will develop a more dedicated and engaged audience that is willing to put their money where their tweets are and financially support your efforts. That should be the ultimate goal for any artist, and it’s only possible by allowing your fans to be themselves and make their own decisions.
