Why Indie Acts Are Everywhere–Except on the Radio
You’ve probably noticed that indie acts are occupying an evergrowing slice of the musical mainstream: Lana Del Rey and Sleigh Bells on SNL; the exploding sizes of CMW and SXSW and the attendant media coverage; Bon Iver wins two Grammys; stories in magzines like Entertainment Weekly.
So why is there so little indie rock on the radio? This was the question Ian Gormely of Macleans magazine set out to answer whe he interviewed a number of people on the subject–including me.
I encourage you to read this entire article and then offer up your opinions and comments. I really want to know what you think.
She stands in the spotlight, swaying back and forth, her eyes staring off at no one in particular. The lips that launched a thousand think pieces are obscured by a black mic as she sings, rather unremarkably.
Lana Del Rey’s debut Saturday Night Live appearance was by most accounts an unmitigated disaster, confirming in the eyes of critics that she was the manufactured fake many had assumed her to be. But perhaps more significant was the fact that Del Rey was able to transform her burgeoning online celebrity into an appearance on the late-night institution without the support of commercial radio.
She’s hardly the only indie act to break into the mainstream. The last decade has brought forth a slew of artists subscribing to the same aesthetic whose success can be attributed almost entirely to online buzz. Fêted by tastemaker sites like Pitchfork, and supported by eye-popping videos and savvy use of social media, these acts, including Del Rey and indie acts like Sleigh Bells and Bon Iver, who appear to be everywhere, have infiltrated the mainstream via festival slots, song placements in commercials and film and late-night television appearances.
Yet they’re all suspiciously absent on the one medium where you’d expect to find them. “We’re seeing this divide between the acceptance of certain indie aesthetics in other media,” confirms Alan Cross, radio personality and former senior program director at modern rock radio station CFNY, The Edge in Toronto, “and not so much on radio.”
The full article can be found here. It’s worth your time. Meanwhile, have a listen to Squish, the online alt-rock station that I program for Astral Radio. Lots of indie and well-known stuff. No commercials, either.
“It’s not radio’s job to break new music,” says Dave Farough, Vice President, Brands and Programming for Corus Entertainment’s 37 commercial stations.
That pretty much sums up why commercial radio is dying a slow, painful death. Those at the top refuse to accept that the new indie music proliferating the online world is part of their job, and it's to their own peril. They SHOULD be including this music and allowing their listeners to tell THEM whether it's good or it's crap.
They'd rather play 'Enter Sandman' for the 3,274th time and sandwich it between 6 minutes of commercials and mindless battle of the sexes banter between male and female un-personalities.
But what do I know, I'm just a 35 – 42 year old educated male with disposable income.
Hi Alan – very intersting article. I'm in the 30+ age group yet I tend to not listen to radio anymore largely because every station I come across seems to be rigidly locked into a specific playlist/format. Why can't a radio station play current indie artists like Bon Iver, Sleigh Bells, etc. along side legacy artists like Led Zeppelin, the Beatles, etc. And for that matter, why not throw in some of the lesser known artists from years gone by into the mix too (Joy Division, maybe??).
Contempory radio stations play what they think their listeners want to hear within their chosen format – which may be the case (and is probably why they tend to play the same songs over and over again…). It would be nice to have a format-less station that draws from all styles of rock music from all periods (i.e. indie, alt, punk, new, old, classic rock, etc.) and plays both singles and albums tracks.
The Maclean's article seems to draw the conclusion that radio needs to evolve with the times. The lines between different styles of music are blurring with indie rock taking an even bigger place than ever. Radio seems to not have picked up on this as its stuck in rigid formats and playlists.
This Macleans article did nothing to address the exact same problem with its own corporate family of Rogers' stations, like CHFI and Kiss-fm. It acts like only ALT-rock is underground or indie; I've been touting good 'ol excluded POP-and-rock for years.
I rarely listen to radio anymore.
– So little of what gets played is new to me I'll discover more new bands in an hour or two trawling YouTube than a month listening to the radio. The hard part is stopping after an hour or two…
– What radio I do hear tends to be someone else's when I'm working. No matter what station, or what decade(s) they play music from, they all have the same problem. Not just the same artists, but the same songs by those same artists, over and over again.
Recently I was at a jobsite and noticed that, the whole time I was there, they played the same 2 songs each by a couple bands, and 1 song each from several others. Every single shift for 2 weeks! Each band has been around for decades and has at least a dozen albums of great music to choose from. Out of 30+ songs that got extensive radio play when released (and many more good ones that didn't), why would I want to hear only one of them 16 times?
It's not just they won't expand to new stuff, they won't even play all the great older stuff. If a station wants to play mostly older stuff, fine. There's little excuse, though, for the same artist more than once a day, and never the same song more than once a week. I've got 13,000 songs, that's 5 weeks without a repeat and still haven't made digital copies of all the CD's, vinyl and cassettes I acquired in my youth. Multiple times every 8 hours is just plain stupid!
– The stupidest part of the article by far though “It’s not radio’s job to break new music”
No, that's EXACTLY what radio's job used to, and still should, be. What's changed is the source of the new music to the station. It used to be from the record companies promoting their most recent sign-on. Now though, they don't sign new acts until after they've caught on by themselves online. Several examples were included in the story. Programming directors need to skip the middle man and just spend that hour or two surfing each day.
Want to have a viable business long term? Add some value vs loading WinAmp and hitting shuffle.
I still have some interest in college radio & some CBC programming, but as far as "modern rock" FM rubbish and "classic rock" stations go, why bother? In Toronto, at least, 102.1 stopped being relevant years/decades ago, and Q107 plays the hits that I don't really need to hear ever again.
In an age where you can find all the music under the sun online and customize a playlist of thousands of songs & stick it in your pocket, why would anyone possibly look to the radio for new sounds? They're in it to sell advertising & that's it. Not interested.
My 15 yr old son loves new music. He also likes CFNY's afternoon jock, Fred, because he talks about movies, sci fi and video game that my son is into. But the station doesn't play the new music he's into. No one does (except for internet radio). The short sightedness of corporate radio executives is saddening. They're ignoring their future revenues. It also frustrates me that a band who has built up an audience (like The National) still doesn't get airplay. Does the draw they have for live shows not translate to radio listeners? Active radio listeners who go see live shows, buy records, and BMW's, beer and go out to restaurants? it's frustrating to say the least. (and those 30 yr old listeners who love their 90's music got to love that music because the stations broke new bands. duh)
Radio likes to play it safe. Indie music does not. Ontop of that, you can't formulate your own tastes with radio. A preset tracklist versus a social media juggernaut is a losing battle.
I feel like radio is in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation where new music is concerned. One of the reasons why radio has worked (especially Top 40) is that people do like hearing the same thing over and over. Back in the day when I was actually on-air, I can't tell you how many times I'd get requests for songs I'd just played — but people wanted to hear them again. I talked to a friend who programs an Alternative station, and he experimented with breaking more new artists and songs and putting more emphasis on new music — but his ratings went down when he did. When he scaled back and started concentrating on the usual stuff, his ratings went back up. People *want* to hear the stuff they know when they turn on the radio, and when they don't, they either change the station or turn it off. On the other hand, there are people who crucify radio for not breaking new music and who don't listen specifically because they hear the same stuff repeated over and over and get bored by it.
And Mark, there was a station that crossed a bunch of rock genres — WRXP in New York debuted with the intention of being a "rock experience," playing everything from The Arcade Fire to Van Halen. Listeners were nonexistent until the programming staff refocused the station and began concentrating on titles that "fit the Alternative format," but the damage was done and the station never really gained traction, so the owners sold it and it was flipped to FM News/Talk.
Interesting article. I echo many of the comments already posted. It is true that radio stations are not there to break new music; they are there to make money. The short-sightedness of radio stations is, as David R says, the reason why radio is dying. Their failure to play new music has created their own extinction. I'm in my 40s and grew up in the "Classic Rock" style. When those people are gone then radio will probably be gone because the new generation of listeners will be used to finding their musical fixes elsewhere. Radio has a place in my life (even if a smaller one) because I grew up listening to the radio. It was on the radio that I first heard the songs that meant something to me as a teenager. That's ending. I'm a huge Rage Against the Machine fan, but I've only heard them on the radio once in my life (and you played them). Maybe it's because I'm in a smallish Canadian city. Where are people to go to find new music? Youtube not the radio, They have doomed themselves.
I've said this in the past, and I still believe it to be true. Radio Stations should be obligated to play 1 hour of local, indie music every week.
1 hour, thats it…
They could pick a Sat night time slot, 7-8, or whatever (my only 'rule' would be that they can't play it when no one would be likely to hear it…ie 3 am on a Tuesday morning.)
Even if the music falls 'outside' of their normal genre, it still would help local people learn about local acts.
But I am sure I am asking for too much.
People, people – Commercial radio is not for you and I. Obviously, we care too much about the music. Music is not just there to fill the silence for us, which is exactly what radio stations do for most people.
Some of the informed comments above have indicated that the masses don't want to hear new music, and that's fine. Give the people what they want, right? Remember, we're the minority.
But I think the question being asked is why don't bands like Bon Iver and The National get played on the radio when they obviously have a massive fan-base? Heck, even anything Radiohead has released post 90's isn't played.
I think it's just that each of these bands, and certainly many others, have a sound that makes the radio stations nervous. Their sound might not be for their listeners, so they stay away. Better safe than sorry. Don't want to alienate anybody.
Sounds familiar, eh Wilco?
It's funny, reading back on my post, it's like I'm defending commercial radio. But I only ever listen to Alan Cross. Unless I'm driving and I've forgotten my iPhone at home, the radio is not used. So I guess it's used to fill the silence for me too.
Go figure.
In my house radio is on in the Kitchen while cooking and in the car while driving. Sometimes for news, weather entertainment etc… As for Indie music in my day FM radio was the alternative music before it made it's jump to AM mainstream new genre's were born and what was new music was also indie before it too became a genre. FM was fed by the University stations that were DJ'd by music lovers that went looking for it in the record stores and the clubs. The Demo tape was often played on air. Today indie is everywhere and Chorus has begun their indie shows on their stations partnering up with Supernova the Battle of the Bands outfit and as with the way grunge came from the underground to the mainstream we are seeing the screamo moving in the same direction because of this. It is not that Radio is not playing it, it is just an evolving process and radio will continue to bring the music to the masses. For every aspiring artist their goal is to hear their song on the radio as they can listen to it on the computer anytime. I think the big story though is in the legal that Chorus has on their Indie sign up sites. Given the way that it is written and how quickly bands sign up as it is a chance to hear their music on the radio, Chorus will own the rights to all music within 10 years. The musician will also still own it, but if you read the legal you will see that they will be able to play without having to pay, take any tune sell it as jingles give it to another artist take a slice for another tune pretty much unlimited if you can think it they can do it without having to pay the artists a dime. Furthermore it will limit what music you will here in the future to those in their pipeline. I applaud Chorus for bringing new music to the masses I just wish they would change their legal to make it more fair to the artist. I feel sorry for those who have given away the farm in hopes of stardom and only hope that Chorus doesn't exercise their rights they have gained through this process.