yeah, i couldn't afford to have shugo reviewed in marquee.

{sigh} once again why am I not surprised at this?

I remember the first time I heard that most "live houses" have a pay to play policy, and that art galeries are "pay to exhibit", etc etc etc...

I remember the first time I heard that most "live houses" have a pay to play policy

Most live houses have a "noruma" which is a minimum number of people a band must bring. If 10-20 don't come to see you, you have to make up the rest. The idea is to pass all the risk on to the bands instead of the live house. They don't care if you suck nor if you bring no one, because you'll be paying the bill.

The other thing I wanted to point out, Chris, is that while this may be old hat for you, I think most people assume that the Japanese entertainment/music/media system is exactly the same as the American model. It's not, and the differences in its structure explain a lot of differences in the overall cultural ouput.

The 'pay to play' idea isn't necessarily bad - it COULD mean that it's say 2 man for the venue and everything you get on top of that you receive yourselves (and bar takings are for the venue, for example.)

Sure it means that the crap bands have to pay to play, but for a successful band it should mean you take home more than you would otherwise... and the crap bands are more likely to team up with other bands and all play together etc.

The downside is that I imageine you don't have venues that are trying to build an audience by going out and finding good bands - instead you just rent out a stage, which means it's much harder to create a music scene than it might be if the owner's business success depended on generating an audience that comes back often.

Marxy, todays post is hardly old hat to me. More like a new baseball cap, or perhaps a fez...

I'm not surprised at all that you have to pay to get on Hey!x3. But what about the other shows? Music Station? What about the cable/satellite music channels (SSTV, et al)? Should I assume it's the same across the board?

Is the ROJ comment a joke or not? I was always very impressed at the interviews and such in ROJ. That makes things very interesting if you truly have to pay to get featured.

See, here's my thing. Looking at this from what you've just posted, the music shows are merely another form of advertisement for your product. Pay a fee, just like you would for a commercial, and you can advertise your latest release. But I've always thought this was a big collaborative effort with the networks/advertising agencies/jimusho. Like lets say Imai Miki has a new single. That single happens to be a tie-up with Kanebo shampoo. Kanebo is a big sponsor of Hey!x3. So Imai Miki shows up on the show. A lot of quid pro quo. Is this wrong?

well, if its wrong or not.. thats all personal. is "payola" wrong? [paying radio stations to play your song]. technicaly. no.
but it does show a complete lack of interest of what people [the public?] like. or a completely lack of interest in what is actually good. sort of like when stock brokers are paid to push a stock, regardless of weather its good or not. is the person with the most money the best? well, in current world terms, yes. but that sorta sucks.

No, I meant, is my idea of how acts get booked on tv shows wrong. According to marxy, it's just a pay-to-play system. I was more under the impression it was a "collaborative effort" between advertisers, sponsors, etc.

I'm not surprised at all that you have to pay to get on Hey!x3. But what about the other shows? Music Station? What about the cable/satellite music channels (SSTV, et al)? Should I assume it's the same across the board?

I'm not sure that it's the same with every show, and it's best not to assume so. The cable channels work in this way: you buy ad time and they play your video.

Is the ROJ comment a joke or not? I was always very impressed at the interviews and such in ROJ. That makes things very interesting if you truly have to pay to get featured.

No, this is how ROJ works. You buy an adspread for $1000 or whatever, and they do an indepth feature on you. I'm sure they love Shiina Ringo, so she gets a discount, but not necessarily a free ride like in Western magazines.

Re; Payola. Any quid pro quo payment for airplay/editorial space is pretty much illegal in the US. You can find ways to go around it, but it's ethically and legally suspect. That's why magazines have to write "Advertorial" in small letters in the States.

That single happens to be a tie-up with Kanebo shampoo. Kanebo is a big sponsor of Hey!x3. So Imai Miki shows up on the show.

Yes, this is also how it works. Before you pay Hey Hey Hey, you have to be invited, so it's not necessarily all buying. On Music Station at least, if you're a male idol group outside of Johnny's, you won't be invited. If your song is the theme song on a hit Fuji TV drama, you won't be invited.

For the record, payola was actually started by indie labels trying to break in the market and the majors are the ones who barked about it to the Feds. Once it became illegal, the majors were the only ones who then had the capital in the 70s to do the new kind of Payola schemes.

You really have to be more specific what you mean by fees. In the U.S. bands get union scale (like $500 something a person) from Letterman or Leno or the "Today" show. Costs more often than not to mount a professional live performance - especially involving equipment and hired backing performers who need rehearsing are going to run way more.

But yes, if it's a "fee" like you pay someone a bribe to "choose" you or you have to hire X number of their people at your expense (who might not physically do a thing) - then yeah, that's funny business.

BTW, as to the live house subject, it really comes down to who gets what cut of the door. There's all kinds of arrangements, I can't say I know the most common. The one I was in on to observe is the event organizer plays the club a fee for the evening and then they keep the door.

The fairness or scam ratio of a gallery set up too goes hand in hand with the cut of what's sold, but a live club has the buffer provided by all the drink sales and their cut of the door. So if a gallery is actually representing you they'll take their cut on sales during and potentially after the show. Or you can just rent the space for money to present your work, they might try to insist on a cut of the sales but it hopefully would be much less.

As for the they choose you thing - one has to remember where the big profits are, selling ads. Anything questionable they are taking in for pay to play is going to pale beside losing audience by playing something that will get their target audience to turn them off. I'm sure that was a key factor in why MTV USA so seldomly actually plays many music videos.

You really have to be more specific what you mean by fees. In the U.S. bands get union scale (like $500 something a person) from Letterman or Leno or the "Today" show. Costs more often than not to mount a professional live performance - especially involving equipment and hired backing performers who need rehearsing are going to run way more.

I get a sense that it's one step more suspicious than this and one less than full out bribery. It's more like the live house scheme or ROJ: we don't really care if you're "good," as long as you pay the bills. In the case of Hey Hey Hey, they need entertaining guests, so not everyone can come on, but I do think that smaller indie labels may lack the capital to pay the fees and be on the show.

The whole problem with this Pay-to-Play mentality is that it greatly increases the amount of capital needed to have a real career. Independent music reviews can level the playing field by supporting nobody artists from nobody labels for free.

I'm sure that was a key factor in why MTV USA so seldomly actually plays many music videos.

My MTV friend tells me that videos were getting very low ratings compared to the shows, and also, people skip around, so playing the same 6 videos every hour has a better chance of getting people to stay tuned.

As for the they choose you thing - one has to remember where the big profits are, selling ads.

In Japan, they also sell editorial space!

>In Japan, they also sell editorial space!

But isn't that more or less what happens everywhere. You buy ads you get coverage. It's only publishers doing it as a hobby or I guess some niche reader supported models where that doesn't happen.

>The whole problem with this Pay-to-Play mentality is that it greatly increases the amount of capital needed to have a real career.

Totally agree there. Remember the media companies doing the programming won't gain anything by opening the playing field.

But isn't that more or less what happens everywhere. You buy ads you get coverage. It's only publishers doing it as a hobby or I guess some niche reader supported models where that doesn't happen.

No, it's not. I've worked for pretty progressive magazines, so my experience may be skewed, but the advertising dep't and editorial dep't haev a lot of separation in an American magazine. There may be some pressure and the occasional article, but for example, Tokion doesn't ask its interviewees to pay for ad buys. Japanese magazines do. Beikoku Ongaku is an exception, I'd like to add - but this is why it may take them so long to put together the magazine.