The current state of Haiti is horrible. Millions of people, terrible conditions, and much needed long-term help. As a result, MTV put together a telethon packed with celebrities and musicians in order to help raise money for relief efforts in Haiti. Several major broadcast networks and cable channels aired MTV Networks’ “Hope for Haiti“, an all-star telethon for Haitian earthquake relief, on Jan. 22.

The telethon was presented by different hosts in different cities – Wyclef Jean (Haiti native) in New York, George Clooney in Los Angeles, and Anderson Cooper directly from Haiti. All proceeds from the show go to Wyclef Jean’s Yele Haiti Foundation, as well as UNICEF, Oxfam America, Partners in Health, and the Red Cross.

Some people tend to get annoyed by the “Bono” type musicians trying to save this and save that, but I disagree with those people. Musicians and celebrities have gained stardom, and with that stardom the attention of millions of people. They are creating awareness about topics, places, and efforts that need our attention. They are actually doing some real good and attempting to help make this world a better place. What’s wrong with that? If more people sought out those opportunities or made helping others a part of their lives, this world would be a much better place – for everyone.

I applaud these celebrities and musicians who are taking part in this telethon, for finding a positive way they can contribute to the relief fund in Haiti.

Check out a video from the event, of Bono and Jay-Z’s Haiti Single “Stranded”…

To review on the “Hope For Haiti” telethon, which aired last week – it was a phenomenal success. The music choices were pretty cool – I got to see a good portion of the performances. I also found it quite impressive that the stars of the telethon were also on the phones. I was not expecting that. I thought that it was a great idea and an additional incentive to get people to call in and donate. Call and speak with Steven Spielberg, Stevie Wonder, or Taylor Swift – heck yeah, where’s the number! I applaud the stars for getting in the trenches a bit more, in addition to their performances. I started watching it with Madonna singing “Like A Prayer” (a personal favorite). In a few of the blogs that I subscribe to, they have had quite the discussion about whether her performance was lip synched or not.

The collaboration between Jay-Z, Rihanna, Bono, etc. – was jam packed with stars. Their performance is currently the most downloaded song from the event on iTunes. I also thoroughly enjoyed Justin Timberlake and Matt Morris’ rendition of “Hallelujah” by Leonard Cohen. Beautiful song, beautiful performance, and so fitting.

Overall, the telethon was entertaining and it raised a lot of help for Haiti.

According to Rolling Stone, the event raised over $61 million dollars to help the destruction and devastation that has occurred throughout Haiti. Also, the organizers of the telethon will continue to collect donations for the next 6 months!

In addition, you can also download the entire live performance on iTunes, as well as purchase the album of all of the live performances from the telethon. Check out http://www.cmt.com/haiti for links to all available music and videos, and a variety of online stores to purchase from. Again, all of the proceeds, that’s 100%, go to relief efforts in Haiti. Hopefully over the next 6 months a lot more donations keep coming in.

Which was your favorite performance of the night?

T. Lynn

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

I’ve always liked Apple. They may not have invented digital music, or the portable digital player, but they fine-tuned them and distributed them to mass markets to perfection. More music is being heard by more people in more places than ever before, and for that, we should be grateful. (Figuring out how to strategize and monetize these new markets is a different matter.)

It seems that iTunes has ruled the mp3 generation, but times and trends are moving ever faster, and there’s now a whole new generation of consumers that may never even own an mp3. Streaming is big business these days. Enter Lala, one of several successful (read: popular but not entirely profitable (yet?)) online music streaming services that has established itself with the non-owning and mobile music markets. Being able to listen to music through a web browser is something that gives music fans greater freedom, and access to their collection from any computer, smart phone or other mobile device, and is something that Apple lacks within iTunes.

Apple may well be looking at using the Lala team and functionality to enter into the streaming market, and with the way they have revolutionized similar parts of the music industry, who knows what may be in store.

One thing I hope Apple does figure out, is if they are paying $17m or $80m+ for Lala assets. Either way, it is a lot of money for a service that has et to find a profitable business model. Moving from CD-swapping to a (comparative to Pandora and Spotify) complicated streaming system has proved difficult, and investor Warner Music wrote down $11 million of the original $20 million it put down.

Lala had recently struck deals with both Google and Facebook, hoping to widen it’s user base with new search traffic and gift options. Apparently Google was also looking at acquiring Lala, and having narrowly missed out they may try and pursue other deals in the near future. Finding a way to tie it’s music search division in with either a download or freemium/ ad-funded streaming service seems inevitable, and well within Google’s scope. In fact, there have been several similar deals in recent months. Imeem was bought by Myspace, whom also previously acquired iLike.

Although Apple’s future movements may not be yet announced, I am certain they will continue to push the digital music industry forward (and outwards) with their services and reach new listeners across the globe.

Lee Jarvis.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

For many members searching for jobs in the music industry, each little bit of income helps, and streaming seemed to offer hope of another revenue source to help make a living from music. However, Spotify, the streaming application that is immensely popular in Europe (and due to launch in the US soon, has come under fire along with the performing rights societies about the minuscule amount that artists actually receive.

Hypebot recently reported that Spotify paid Lady Gaga just $167 For 1M Plays:
Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face” was one of the most popular tracks for 5 months on Spotify; being played more than 1 million times. But according to reports this weekend, the Swedish Performing Rights Society only paid her $167. If true, it confirms other complaints from other artists like those of Swedish musican Magnus Uggla who pulled his music off Spotify declaring, “I’d prefer to be raped by Pirate Bay than played on Spotify”.

When an artist starts out with earning no income from their music, they are quite happy to give it away for the exposure it may create. Obviously it is easier for a small band to offer a free mp3 and say “we may have lost a potential $1000 in order to gain some new fans”, than it would be for Universal to do it with a Lady Gaga single and consider losing (potentially) a lot more.

However, the idea of exposure still remains. Streaming can be a way for people to try out new artists without committing to a $15 album (of which, Universal made many, many terrible ones). There are already reports saying that streaming is drawing consumers away from P2P sites, and with the Pirate Bay trial and Joel Tenebaum ruling gaining so much press this year, some users will be scared off using such sites in the future. The Pandoras, Spotifys and LastFMs of the new music industry are an essential part of artist promotion in my opinion, and so I would consider pulling your music away from them is a foolish move.

As there is no way to measure the direct income derived from a person who streams two tracks, then goes to buy them from iTunes, and then pays $40 to see the artist in concert, it can be hard to judge.

I would stick my neck out and say that it helps though.

We’d love to hear your response on this – comments around the Music Jobs office range from outrage at the royalty rates for artists to “that’s about $166 too much”! Feel free to comment below.

Lee Jarvis

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The music streaming app that is currently taking the UK and Europe by storm is looking to set-up in the US in the very near future. (This may well help create music industry jobs in the USA, so keep checking the Jobs Board!)

Founded by two Swedish entrepreneurs, Spotify has over six million tracks available to stream, and gives users the ability to create, save and share playlists, offering greater interaction and discovery. They are working with US music publishers and labels to evolve a deal to enable them to offer the same service here. Having dealt with many of the key companies regarding European licenses, it’s a very real possibility that they will be operating here soon.

The relatively new start-up (October ’08) is hoping to launch it’s desktop application in the US by the end of this year. However, even greater potential could be reached if they are approved as an iPhone app. The issue there? It could be so good as to make Apple’s iTunes virtually redundant to millions of music consumers.

Spotify derives revenue from a number of audio commercials during playback (current EU advertisers include Nike, Ikea, H&M and more), or a monthly fee for a premium service with no commercials, greater audio quality and extra premium-only content. The monthly fee is currently £9.99 in the UK (approx $15), and word is that the mobile app would only be available to those who subscribe to this.

People are becoming excited about the possibility of a real contender to iTunes, and as a fan of aiding music discovery, I really hope that Spotify will push forward with the licensing deals. They provide a great service, and user word-of-mouth will ensure a global success.

Lee Jarvis.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Well, it’s always been on the cards, but the biggest news of the week is that Apple have finally been able to make iTunes tracks available without the Digital Rights Management that was essentially ‘watermarked’ into all previous tracks.

So you can now buy a tune from iTunes and play it on Microsoft’s Zune player or similar by SanDisk. It really took us until 2009 to get to that stage? The major labels and countless independents have been selling DRM-free tracks via Amazon for about a year, so why did they hold out on Apple?

Steve Jobs announced that EMI were willing to drop DRM back in 2007, but the rest of the majors (Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, and Sony Music Entertainment) have held out for some unknown reason. Actually, the reason is know; it’s because majors have no idea how to move forward in this music evolution. They were unwilling to hand over DRM-free copies to iTunes because of the scale of it’s sales, fearing a loss of control and rampant, escalating piracy. They struggle to keep hold of things like DRM so that people don’t ‘steal their money’.

Here’s a thought. Will Apple’s news make much difference? The people who already buy millions of tracks from iTunes are doing so (mostly) happily and playing them on their millions of iPods and iPhones. As far as they know (or care), DRM has never been an issue. People who have wanted to download DRM-free music for their non-Apple devices have been able to find it fairly easily. Will these settled buyers bother to jump ship? Especially with the new price rises too (more on that later). The infamous Bob Lefsetz thinks the news is very much a non-issue, saying that “the only people who care about DRM don’t pay for music, they just steal it. Otherwise, Amazon would have eclipsed Apple and the Seattle company would own the online music market”.

Is it all too-little too-late?

Lee Jarvis.

Cross-posted at our Music Jobs website in the UK

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!