June 12, 2010 Has the bubble burst on fan culture?
I was brought up in the 80’s and 90’s with my family heavily involved in the music business. (My Dad played guitar for Wet Wet Wet.) I remember being at gigs and the fans literally screaming and passing out. The first aid room at the side of the auditorium almost always had at least one person in there at any given time having their hysteria induced injuries taken care of. For the fans there was the hype of the massive show, favourite songs played on radio weeks before, the anticipation of the band coming to your city to play and queuing outside the record shop for signed copies of the single. For some the gig experience included camping out the night before tickets went on sale and camping out again to secure a place at stage front. Die hards would wait outside in the freezing cold for hours and hours to get a photo with the band after the gig, or a glimpse of them as they turn up early for the sound check, some traveling around the whole country after the tour bus with tickets bought for every gig. I remember, in the early days with the Wets, Glasgow city centre coming to a stand still due to the mass of people that had turned up to the record shop for the ‘in store’ performance. Chaotic, exciting, the stuff rock and roll dreams are made of and perhaps all bit OTT???
In some ways I think it is sad that we have lost that sense of anticipation. Waiting and hoping to hear that song you love on the radio, tuning in to TOTP to see your favourite act, the delayed gratification when you can finally purchase the 7 inch or the tape (hmmm) or the CD single and own it for yourself and eventually, oh joyous day, go and buy the full album and have it as a little piece of the band that you own for yourself.
From the 90‘s till the twenty tens the changes in the music industry have been cataclysmic. So now when you hear a band you even vaguely like you can instantly listen to the entire back catalogue and all current music on Spotify, view all their videos, even the crap ones, on YouTube, see them talking rubbish on Twitter, Google them, find them on MySpace, leave a comment on their page if you can be bothered, and just generally have complete and total access right away. No build up, no hype, no anticipation, no waiting. We don’t have to do anything, go anywhere, or make any effort on behalf of the music we like. So it is no wonder the crazy love affair of pop star and fan seems to be cooling.
I think that things needed to change in a way. To be honest the obsessive fan culture that saw us loving our pop stars so much there were national help lines set up when the bands split (thinking of the late 90‘s Take That example!) was a bit nuts to say the least. The idolizing and worshiping of another human being just because they make the music you enjoy does seem a bit excessive, and is (or was) probably not healthy for either party.
But where does it leave the music business? Total and instant access does not in my opinion make us like or value our artists and musicians more. It means we take it for granted, we get used to it being free. But it can’t be free or at least it can’t carry on being free. Recorded music is not free to make, promote or produce so it should not be free to listen to or musicians can’t keep making it. We need, as musicians, labels and managers, to retain a level of intrigue and mystique around the acts that we promote. Sure promote but don’t give it all away (or certainly don’t give it all away on someone else’s website!) or to folk who are not even interested or interested enough to make any kind of move. Maybe give away enough to entice then give away or reveal more gradually as the commitment and trust grows between music lover and artist. In the new media world it is anybody’s game to figure out how that is best done. It will be trial and error, giving away too much, or not enough. However, I believe that there are folk out there, myself included who want beautiful music to love, and will and should be willing to pay for access to that music and some, if limited, access to the artist that makes it.
It can only be to the good if the new fan/artist relationship was a more sustainable affair, perhaps less high drama, but with the possibility of more longevity and mutual respect.
This blog was written by Esther O’Connor. Esther is a singer songwriter based in Scotland. She has been described as ‘David Geffen crossed with Stevie Nicks’ by the Sunday Times. Tom Morton of BBC Radio Scotland describing one of her tracks as “Neil Young meets Beyonce round at Joni Mitchell’s house”, recognizing the retro flare that runs through Esther’s music and her love of a sassy pop hook. Journalists and fans alike recognize that Esther is a trailblazer, a talented musician forging the way ahead in this new musical landscape.
For more infomation on Esther O’Connor and a free download visit http://www.estheroconnorfreetrack.co.uk/
;)
Reader Comments (26)
Great advice!
-Bruce
I've been thinking a lot about fan culture and whether it is on a permanent downward decline.
I began to notice how fans would come to shows and then spend more time texting, taking photos of themselves, and taping to post on YouTube than actually paying attention to the band. They were there to show themselves at the show rather than to listen to the music.
And with so many tech tools that allow people to make their own music, videos, etc., I think more people are seeing themselves as being creative and they are less inclined to be passive followers of someone else.
The CEO of College Humor says the same thing:
College Humor CEO Shares His 10 Web Content Urban Legends: "Myth # 6). Experience beats documentation: We have a new generation that puts documentation above experience. It’s all about Flickr feeds and Facebook status updates. It’s basically high-tech bragging.
- if you’re a marketer, create experiences that allow people to show off how cool they are."
What Esther is aptly describing is a pendulum swing. Which means that the obsessive fan culture was just as much of an extreme as the current scene in which people seem to want everything for free and don't even care about paying attention to the music. Perhaps we have swung here precisely because we started there.
In any case, it's nonsensical to presume that this current climate is an end point. The pendulum never stops at one side or the other.
Regardless of what gets reported, regardless of technology, this is always going to be true. There were plenty of people in the midst of the obsessive fan days who were not obsessive fans, just as there are plenty of people now who are not more interested in Twittering their experience than in having it. The extremes get the attention but that's not where reality ultimately settles.
"So it is no wonder the crazy love affair of pop star and fan seems to be cooling."
Really? Is it, though? Is there any...evidence...any real reason to actually question if the "bubble burst" or not? Why does it seem to be cooling to you?
To me, I see music fans absolutely everywhere I go. Music matters to everyone I know. I see more and more new acts becoming independently successful even as Nielsen's experts grimly insist we're all going broke and totally doomed. This site is full of success stories where artists engage and excite their fans. You give the fans total access and they'll still pay for even more. Premium pricing and top-tier fan packages are creating huge new revenue streams for independent and major label acts alike.
I mean, Coran Capshaw built a hugely successful business off the "Fan Bubble" with Musictoday, and extended his company from merchandising musicians to making products for news personalities, athletes and celebrities with no reason to be famous and no business even breathing. New fan clubs are founded every day for everyone from politicians to porn stars.
The "fan culture bubble" is part of American DNA -- it's consumer culture. I see no signs anywhere that indicate it's dying, or even slowing down.
You, personally, don't like these new trends...that much is clear. But is there anything to your question aside from your own opinions?
Hadn't contemplated this before, so thanks for posting, Esther, and making your point with such lucid detail.
However, I do believe it misses the target...the fan relationship may have CHANGED, but I don't see any "bubble burst".
As you point out, technology (as usual), has allowed/created a significant shift in ACCESS - so the anticipation and rabid waiting has evolved to interaction between fans and artists (and other fans) in real-time via social networking such as FB, MySpace, blogs, etc..
But that doesn't mean fans are uninterested in a "relationship" - it is hard to imagine a more intense fan driven loyalty than Twitter following, with many artists having milllions of fans eagerly, yes, anticipating, their heros' next move.
I do think fans' attention spans are shorter, and the focus on pseudo-celebrities - whose fame can be linked only to having been on a reality show or even just having a bunch of kids - is truly bizarre.
Suzanne raises an interesting point, but I think rather than fans not wanting to passively follow, the behavior indicates a desire for INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT. (For the heck of it I checked NIN website and there was over 1200 fans remixing songs at that random moment - how many fans would have been there otherwise, all of whom, with such a strong relationship builder, are good candidates to buy music, merch, tickets, etc.)
INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT - that is something that aspiring artists should focus on - and if it gives the fan a chance to "show how cool they are", so much the better.
Changing times, changing media, changing habits...but the fans still want artist relationships - perhaps more than ever.
It is up to today's artists and their management to step back from griping about the changes - and put that energy into exploring and creating ways to tap into fans' still-rabid desires. Artist 2.0 is dead. Gotta become Artist 3.0 or languish in the long tail. We can do it.
Thanks guys for posting your replies,
Really interesting stuff.
will post a follow up
e x
Thanks guys for posting your replies,
Really interesting stuff. I think this is an important discussion for us all to be having. I agree that the fan/ artist relationship in not dying but changing. All of us as musicians/ labels/ managers (or hybrids of all three as many of us are) need to be doing some serious thinking about how we approach and deliver music to the music lovers in the way that they want it. 100% agree on the importance of creative interaction. Thought that was a great video post on this site about that actually. I am not sorry that things are changing from the way they have been, I think the pendulum had to swing, but as Jeremy points out, its maybe time to work at regaining the balance again. The question of how much to give away and how much to hold back, how much to give for free, and how much to charge for, is crucial to get right for the industry to survive. There are a lot of people 'winning' in the new media world, (myspace, itunes, spotify, streaming sites etc etc) from indie artists giving everything away on other peoples domains and hardly making any money themselves. I also strongly agree that there is still a desire for music to love and artists to admire, I just don't think people freak out as much as they used to (and that's probably not a bad thing!) We need to move with the times but be thoughtful, creative and considered about how we go about it. Create a new and magical music business, its ours for the making.
esther
www.estheroconnor.com
I think participatory art is where it is all headed. So I think musicians who serve more as community organizers rather rock stars will be the most successful.
Here's one article I wrote on the subject. The People Formerly Known as Fans
And here are some more articles on audience participation.
I have a hard time with this subject, because it's hard to differentiate the change in my age & the change in the times. I graduated high school in 1993 & this was a time that was fairly exciting in music - grunge was ruling with pop punk on the rise & interesting things going on in hip hop & the rave/dance seen was vibrant & genuinely interesting & of course metal was around with Metallica just putting out the black album & everyone talked about 120 minutes every monday morning on the alternative scene (MTV still played music 95% of the time as well). It seemed like at that time band shirts were the thing to wear. In any classroom this branding was half of the clothing you saw. I don't really see kids wearing band shirts these days or anyone else for that matter. Maybe it's not true that more people are now defining themselves by their favorite movies & video games & TV shows & websites, but it certainly does feel that way. Though maybe it's the change from being a teenager to being in my 30s.
I do think an element of discovery is key & part of this has to do with bands now releasing albums before they've had a first show. Not only do fans not get the discovery experience, bands lose a certain amount of the natural maturity process.
My "audience participation" link wasn't working.
Here are some of the individual article links.
Participatory Art Is Revolutionary
The Recession and "Amateur" Talent
Elements of Music Participation
Audience Participation in Music
It's a subject that I'm very interested in. The relationship between music professional and the audience changes considerably if the audience wants feel like they are music creators too, and not just music consumers.
'... thoughtful, creative and considered...' Music biz? Not as long as the potential rewards for bank account and ego remain as they are.
A new industry? Or the old one, slightly slimmer with a few organised artists who understand HTML and SEO maximisation (see, I'm picking it up!) joining in when they can?
Deciding when and where your music is free? As soon as your music is digitized that decision is no longer yours.
@Suzanne. Any more participation than the audience singing an artist's songs right back at them from the beginning to the end of a set and the need for anything more than a hologram of an MC on stage will be totally unnecessary. Like church.
If your audience aren't interested in you unless you allow them to fiddle with your bits then they aren't really interested. You're not selling music and charisma, you're selling a minor social experiment. That's not pop, that's reality TV.
"@Suzanne. Any more participation than the audience singing an artist's songs right back at them from the beginning to the end of a set and the need for anything more than a hologram of an MC on stage will be totally unnecessary. Like church."
Actually the church model is one I often visualize. That is participation. Everyone is invited to sing along. Talent isn't necessary. And the process of group participation builds community. The music leader is not there to be the star, but to get people involved.
Some of my musician friends got their musical starts as part of "praise and worship" music groups. They are singing secular music now, but they developed their training in church and I think it gave them a strong appreciation for interacting with audiences during shows.
If we're talking Little Richard or Jerry Lee Lewis then I'm in the front pews, but I'll be watching and screaming, not taking part. If we're talking God Channel or some of the more sanctimonious C&W then I will walk the lonely path of the sinner into the shadow of the devdidleedevil and love every sexy minute of it.
I'm a-railin' against the Alpha Coursing of rocknroll...
You do realize I'm not necessarily talking about church literally. I'm talking about how church music invites participation. I think live music in general will be headed that way.
On many local scenes the bands that can get people up and dancing are popular. They don't have to be great songwriters, and in many cases are playing songs other people wrote, but dancing gets people involved and it is fun.
Bands that encourage singalongs are fun.
People have so many choices, why should they be passive fans when they can get more involved themselves? Think of how much different classical music experiences are from club music experiences. Classical music isn't what the masses tend to gravitate to.
The industry is chaning.
With new age labels, such pioneering www.icecoldrecordings.com
which is turning the tide on the business of music, by embracing digifan
and giving back to the artist the power to be creative again.
And remain in control of what they creat.
There is not a business anymore it's a passion, a love, a creative force.
It is up to you the lovers of music to make the call.
You have dowloaded it free, you have coppied and shared it.
Now will you come see the artist?
This post just came out and is along the lines of what I am talking about. There is greater value in playing music than just listening to it.
Listening vs. doing | Createquity.
I've been fascinated by the explosion of iPhone and iPad apps that allow people with little or no musical training to make music. Some people argue that it isn't necessarily good music. But in my mind that isn't the important thing. It's helping people get involved in music. So personally I think fan culture is less satisfying than creative culture.
Suzanne, I understood what you meant.
There's a difference between religious practise and church. And there's a difference between watching a charismatic priest leading a service and a hopeful-holy quoting the bible at a bored senseless congregation.
And having been brought up in the so-called 'Congregationalist' tradition I have vivid memories of the latter situation, despite my partcicpation.
But the former has the potential to be rock and roll, where a secret sexual thrill runs from nape to ankles as a good looking, flamboyant vicar takes the congregation to a place they couldn't hope to find by themselves, or as a crowd, without him (still normally a 'him' in the UK).
I appreciate the power of music to help - as a musical director on theatre shows with large casts I don't allow anyone not to at least have a go at singing. Initiatives like the UK's Sing Up where primary aged schoolkids are all encouraged to find a singing voice are fantastic.
But I would hate communality to be the main musical force in our world. There is a low undertow of fascist communism inherent here (he said, dramatically), subsuming individuality for the sake of a warm glow all round. It's what led to record burnings in the States - The Beatles weren't an affront to god, they were challenging the societal status quo, with their cute bowl-cuts and pointy boots. Disco records didn't suck, some of them were very good, but they challenged macho middle-American plaid shirt values, with their emphasis on having a good time, dressing cool and doing the hustle.
I think fan culture allows for and encourages individualistic self expression that leads to sparks of genius inspiration, whereas 'creative culture', that will always need to take place in an atmosphere of communal tolerance, will suffocate the sparks for sake of singalong fun. I don't want to encourage it, I don't want fans messing with perfection, I don't want an orgy of mildness.
Now I'm going to sit in the corner and sulk while the rest of the class sing "The Wheels On The Bus'...
Problem solved: http://fanaticfactory.com
Tim- I'm completely with you on this. And Suzanne, while I completely respect your expertise and point of view, and applaud any efforts to encourage more people to play music, I couldn't disagree more about the idea that music should become all about participation. *Some* participation, in certain contexts, sure, that would be nice. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with "just" listening; it's actually a bit of rhetorical sleight of hand to call it "passive" listening.
Unless we have given over to a culture of hopeless narcissism, there can and should be room in the world for musicians (and writers; and moviemakers; etc.) who are *more accomplished artists* than someone with no training and a clever piece of technology in his or her hands. By all means, let's more of us make our own music, and be given the opportunity to join in with others when the occasion arises. But it will be a sad day for civilization should, through 100 percent participation, we lose the gift of the brilliant individual artist. And therefore maybe also lose the gift of being open to the thoughts and feelings of another human being, rather than being so wrapped up in our own that we can't even listen to someone else's music without wanting to fiddle with it.
In the end, however, I think any vision of mass audience participation is utopian, so I'm not too worried about it coming to pass. Here in the real world, despite all the hype from people selling interactive technologies, there remains a genuine need on the audience side for "passive" experience, and a genuine need on the artist side to express individual thoughts and feelings. Technology may change very quickly but human nature does not.
The magic is gone.
Reality TV may have pushed us over the edge. Now a number of people feel they can become celebrities by merely getting on one of these shows. So it doesn't necessary take either talent or hard word to become somebody.
I saw this coming in 2000. I've been an Olympics junkie. I used to watch everything. I loved those Bud Greespan movies that were always so inspiring.
I lived in Colorado Springs for 8 years. That's where the major Olympics Training Center is. Where the United States Olympics Committee is based, plus lots of sports associations. So I saw lots of talented hard working athletes.
In 2000, having moved to Boulder but still involved in sports marketing, I remember watching the 2000 Summer Olympics and the debut of Survivor. And Survivor was the better show.
Instead of people having to spend years for their "one moment in time," the same life changing changing experience now can happen by winning a reality TV show. Similar fame with much less effort.
So I think the easy access to celebrity overall is changing fandom. Anyone can aspire to getting on a reality TV show.
sweet how she said not to give it away and then she is saying she is giving it away at the bottom in her by-line hehe. Nah, just kidding I get what she is saying and doing more power to her!
I said not to give it ALL away.... x
Fan culture is alive and well. Remember the Bieber/Twitter fiasco? I tour with a guy who has fans drive hours to come see him and wait in line for merch and autographs afterwards. They also provide him with places to stay, free gadgets, etc. Oh, and they also buy his music.
Why? Because his fans admire and relate to him. They also feel catered to. Mostly, though, he doesn't have the overly precious attitude towards his music that is so common among the singer-songwriter set: "I have released my masterpiece and now expect success."
I agree with the mystique angle of Esther's post, though. Just like in relationships, giving too much away too soon can make things boring.
I totally disagree with this article!
I have found more accessability to my fans, along with the challenge of making our show worth going to! Thereby making money off of the gigs AND the merch that they have already downloaded (mostly at a reduced sound quality)...my experience is that you now have to be a good performer, not just someone whose good at standing there and playing your songs...people will always want to be entertained, whether they download your content or not, and there are many ways to creatively engage your existing fans and attract new ones on a daily basis!
Neilson soundscan can go to hell!! They charge a pretty penny to have access to your sales, all I know is that everyday our albums are on the iTunes electronic top 100! I know what means for our self-released albums, but not our label albums. Why? Because with our self-releases, the digital distribution company gives us monthly reports on our sales and gives us breakdons of stats, for $2.95...when it comes to the 2 albums distributed by universal, they HAVE to go through soundscan - rip off!
Point being, if it wasn't for our fans, we would be nowhere! I will not stop giving away remixes and new tracks for free, not gonna do it!
Let fans make music, let your show change their life and inspire a movement of creativity! Is that not how we all started? Make a song today, release it tomorrow! Please!
When music was expensive musicians had value, they were kings, the product and art they created was like gold, they truly were the alchemist kings. Then "free media" culture started to encroach and devalue the worthiness of musicians and their art. The luster of godlike stature was further eroded by kerioki contests like American Idol flooding the minds of the masses that anyone can do what these former god like kings did. Musicians are no longer gods or kings, they are annoying knats on myspace and facebook begging for fans attention, instead of fans begging for theirs. Their company, attention and product all seem worthless to most. The more musicians give away themselves and their product the less in demand they become, which was the point of the article. I'm just putting into the record the fact that Free music, Band Spam and X Factor and American Idol are to blame. The great part about this article is it lets some young people know how it was to be on top in the Rock Star Era of the late 1980's through the 90's.
http://www.myspace.com/crowfeatherproject