It's Hard to Argue the Other Side and Not Sound Like You're Stealing
April 15, 2021 11:18 AM   Subscribe

This body of songwriters will not give publishing or songwriting credit to anyone who did not create or change the lyric or melody or otherwise contribute to the composition without a reasonably equivalent/meaningful exchange for all the writers on the song. Meet the songwriters who told pop stars: 'Don't steal from us' [BBC] posted by chavenet (11 comments total) 16 users marked this as a favorite
 
"I don't care that much if an artist needs to have their name on there," says Warren, recognising that a singer can bolster their credibility if they can "go to an interview and say they wrote the song".

I just love this. It's just so representative of our collective stupidity. I mean it's true, somehow it isn't good enough that a singer sings well and performs a song beautifully for them to be completely respected, they have to set down the words and/or write the music for that honor.

So lying to your audience becomes a path to "credibility", where want for respect doesn't need actual accomplishment, just enough fame to claim the right. And we're mostly fine with that as it is pretty much business as usual for how so many systems work.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:51 PM on April 15, 2021 [9 favorites]


I knew of the Joe Josea bullshit on BB King's songs; where the producers basically added their name to all Black artists' songs. But I thought that was a thing of the past.

Till I read about Robin Thicke's addition to the Blurred lines songwriter credit; and Pharrell basically admitting that it was a lie.

Here's Pharrell's words:
Williams said he was “in the driver’s seat” for this song, but explained that sharing credit is the norm for the music industry.

I was shocked that this was still a thing to begin with. I would have thought that the songwriters reps would have used the repercussions from this to put an end to this kinda shady stuff, by emphasizing the backlash Thicke got for it. If I remember, his wife basically divorced him for this, right?

Wow. The more you know ...
posted by indianbadger1 at 12:57 PM on April 15, 2021 [2 favorites]


I think there’s a documentary in this, something along the lines of 20 Feet From Stardom.
posted by TedW at 1:30 PM on April 15, 2021 [1 favorite]


I mean it's true, somehow it isn't good enough that a singer sings well and performs a song beautifully for them to be completely respected, they have to set down the words and/or write the music for that honor.

They don't even have to knock out much of a performance these days, either. There's software for that.
posted by sinfony at 1:44 PM on April 15, 2021 [3 favorites]


I know nothing about music as an industry except for some vague awareness of things called ASCAP and BMI and something about mechanical royalties. So I'm shocked to learn that, at least in some genres and geographic locations, there isn't a songwriters' union that has basic rules about credits and minimum financial arrangements.
posted by ElKevbo at 1:57 PM on April 15, 2021 [1 favorite]


they have to set down the words and/or write the music for that honor.

Uhhhh. . . this is entirely about money. "Honor" or "respect" or whatever is just the barest fig leaf of plausible deniability that it's not aaaaaallllll about the singer getting a chunk of the publishing rights, which means lifetime royalties.
posted by soundguy99 at 1:58 PM on April 15, 2021 [10 favorites]


Uhhhh. . . this is entirely about money.

The quote is pulled from the article and that respect and money come from the power to claim it is kinda the point.
And it's more a corollary to plausible deniability, implausible credibility; we know almost certainly isn't warranted, but, hey, their name's on the label so it could be true, they are wealthy and famous after all, so it must be deserved.
posted by gusottertrout at 2:09 PM on April 15, 2021 [3 favorites]


I mean it isn't just the music industry, listen to Trump, Musk, or any of so, so others, where the constant need to claim credit or insert their name is essential to their image and feeds their fame and wealth by the public eating that shit up.
posted by gusottertrout at 2:16 PM on April 15, 2021 [3 favorites]


I mean, ok, on a sort of abstract level it's about power and respect and honor, I guess. My point is that Warren even citing those ideas is a bit of deflection to take some of the sting out, and any singer or their management claiming it's about these things is mostly either full out bullshitting or high on their own supply.

Are mobsters motivated by honor and respect? Maybe, sure, on some level why not? But when you get down to brass tacks they're sociopaths motivated by greed, and that's what's going on here: "Nice song ya got there, buddy. Be a shame if nobody ever heard it. Tell ya what, you give my boy a big piece of the pie forever and ever and he'll sing it so good, guaranteed hit record, lotsa dough for you, we get our piece, everybody's happy."
posted by soundguy99 at 3:53 PM on April 15, 2021 [5 favorites]


It’s less about credibility than money. There are persistent revenue streams attached to the songwriting credit that don’t come to the recording artist and their people. Yet the recording artist and their producer are in a position of power to make a song a lucrative hit or toss it in the bin.

Therefore recording artists and their management have a strong incentive to exert their power and insist on a share of the songwriting royalties in exchange for recording the song, achieved by a writing credit. Songwriters have an even stronger incentive to go along with this, because it’s share the money or don’t get paid.

At least that’s how it works in Nashville. And it’s f’d up. Artistic credibility for the pretty-faced singer is a side benefit, but it’s the do-re-mi that drives the dishonesty.
posted by spitbull at 7:01 PM on April 15, 2021 [5 favorites]


It’s less about credibility than money.

I don't disagree about the money being at the center of the issue, I'm just noting that its a circular process that we accept even though it makes no real sense. The money and power allows a singer to demand rights they otherwise wouldn't be able to get, the popularity of the songs maintains the power of demand the singer has and maintains the cycle of societal respect that comes from having wealth and power.

I'd say having money allows you to buy respect, but that isn't exactly true because you get it free of cost and are able to increase your wealth simply by having recognition for it. We play along with that and accord those who have the wealth an added layer of credibility because in a society with money at its center, wealth is credibility and credibility gains you more wealth.
posted by gusottertrout at 3:20 AM on April 16, 2021 [2 favorites]


« Older White Nationalists Gleefully Embrace Tucker...   |   Cannonball Vaccine Run Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments