The Civil Wars On Piracy As Marketing
The Civil Wars have previously discussed marketing with free music and the importance of fans sharing the duo's music with their friends. However, I had not heard their take on piracy as a form of marketing prior to E.D. Kain's interview with The Civil Wars for Forbes. It's yet another example of the growing body of evidence that artists are finding ways to benefit from piracy when they approach it as another form of music sharing and discovery.
E.D. Kain says he first found out about The Civil Wars, Joy Williams and John Paul White, via a blogger who posted the music video "Dance Me to the End of Love." As it turns out, that video was their introduction to the world via YouTube.
Dance Me to the End of Love – Uploaded by The Civil Wars on Feb 13, 2009
John Paul White told Kain that they were "surprised by the immediate reaction" to that video which they uploaded in February of 2009. That summer they went on to record their second live show which they releases as a free album, "Live at Eddie's Attic," that's still available on their website and has seen over 100,000 downloads.
John Paul White states:
"We've also encouraged people to upload and share their footage from our shows via their social network of choice…It's become a powerful medium for us. It shows many different sides of us that an audio-only format can't."
Not only have they released lots of free music, from the live album to numerous YouTube videos, but they've come to recognize the power of piracy in building their fan base. As Joy Williams shares:
"Sure, piracy has it's drawbacks, but it also has positives…We've had people admit to us before that they were given a burned CD of our record from a friend. They'd go on to say that, once they heard the music, they bought tickets to the nearest show. And there, standing in line afterward to say hi – wearing a band shirt they bought that night – they recounted how many friends they'd turned on to our music. In short, we try not to be curmudgeons about piracy, but to embrace this shift in culture."
Note that she states that "piracy has it's drawbacks." The Civil Wars aren't taking an all-or-nothing everything should be free stance as some tech writers present in almost cultlike fashion. But Williams reveals that they've used the fact that live shows can be a way to monetize piracy as incentive to give great performances:
"One thing is true, you can pirate music, but you can't ever pirate the actual experience of going to a show and seeing someone perform live. We try to keep that in perspective, and it motivates us to make each night on stage count."
Life as a musician can be really tough, just as it is for any entertainer or artist. Embracing inevitable change rather than simply capitulating to Web myths is key if artists wish to move forward and build careers as such change accelerates.
More:
- The Civil Wars' Success Formula: Live Shows + Social Media + Music Placements
- Musicmetric's P2P Data Tour Planning App
Hypebot Features Writer Clyde Smith maintains his freelance writing hub at Flux Research and music industry resources at Music Biz Blogs. To suggest topics for Hypebot, contact: clyde(at)fluxresearch(dot)com.
It’s not piracy if its legal.
The key is as your wrote, “they released lots of free music.” This was their artistic decision. Clyde, your article has little relevance in a discussion of piracy. Editor please!
Two Words: Taylor Swift
Try reading the whole post before you comment.
Weak game, son.
Like I said, to HA, read the whole thing next time.
Your game is also weak.
2 or 3 stats I’d love to see:
1) How many records did Joy Williams sell as a solo artist?
2) What kind of ticket sales did she have as a solo act?
3) Before and after social media stats from when Taylor Swift start “tweeting” about them.
Thanks for these questions. That explains Matt’s ambiguous remark. Some of these commenters act like they know everything without ever moving anything forward!
When did Taylor Swift start tweeting about them?
I might be able to come up with some interesting info.
Clyde , could you elaborate on what you consider “Web myths” ?
I guess to me the question is how big a gap was there between Taylor Swift making public statements via Twitter or other outlets and announcing more specific connections such as working together. Once those kind of announcements start it’s a different game but I hadn’t thought about that earlier phase of social media attention from a celebrity and how that affected things.
Since I’m writing more for indie artists, I tend not to even address things like doing a song with a famous artist given that it would be really silly to say to an indie, “Hey, just work with somebody famous.”
And I can’t make those points every post because they seem so obvious.
Which also raises the question that I’ve had but hadn’t addressed was how key to their success was being songwriters? A lot of songwriters don’t get a popular audience but it does put them in a better position for being considered for high profile licensing.
And the licensing is great for both revenue and further connects and publicity.
I’m really thinking primarily of the kinds of statements people like Michael Arrington used to make that you also hear from other tech pundits.
Statements that put forth the idea that music can no longer be sold so artists should give away all music for free and make money only on other things.
To me that’s a key music industry-related web myth pushed by people who are ignoring empirical data that they find inconvenient.
Usually you can tell a myth or misconception is happening when somebody makes a binary, either/or, all or nothing type statement. That’s an immediate sign of a linear thinker attempting to impose their limited perceptions on a nonlinear world.
It becomes especially suspect when their business model connects to pleasing people who feel the same way because that’s how those people make their money.
Maybe more info than you requested but that’s what I mean in this case. That also goes for myths related to the knowledge and understanding of “digital natives” to point to another pet peeve of mine.
And, if I was ranting, I’d head into a tangent about the untrustworthiness of some of the Pew Research Center’s web surveys and those who rely on them without being able to critique their research methods.
Actually shouting out Taylor Swift is a good call. It’s kind of weird of me to write these things and not at least refer to that stage. I just need to get a better sense of how that played out.
1st off I love the Civil Wars and their story. Unfortunately I just don’t buy calling them a true full blown indie act/though they aren’t on a label. I do wander how much money was spent on PR and marketing, I suspect more than we think.
Joy was a very successful Christian artist I fell like everyone dimisses this she has sold over 250k on her own. Also, look at here wiki even as a solo act she had songs on Grey’s Anatomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_Williams_(singer)#Studio_albums)
JPW has had some nice cuts as a songwriter including a country top-15 with Jason Aldean. http://www.allmusic.com/artist/john-paul-white-p856488/songs
As far as the “Taylor” affect she was mentioning them on twitter before their record even came out. I’m not saying this is what helped them at all but I’d be curious to see the before and after analytics.
The one thing they had going early was the Nashville Buzz… In Nashville where it is near impossible to play shows and draw. They did just that they created an environment that way the cool industry hang and that is where the buzz started.
One fact still remains and that is they did offer free music and a ton of people consumed it. They are selling tickets and records.
A great story for our industry!
Thanks for sharing. Really interesting stuff.
And though you didn’t ask for it, here’s a perfect example of binary thinking leading people away from reality:
http://www.facebook.com/ReverbNation/posts/322162434486355
ReverbNation posted a link to this article on Facebook with the question:
“What’s your opinion? Should piracy be treated as marketing or should it be illegal?”
A discussion then ensues by people who obviously didn’t read the article that has nothing to do with what The Civil Wars or I said. It’s just another long list of opinions without dialogue that make ReverbNation’s FB page look active without helping anything move forward.
Taking advantage of the reality of pirating as marketing or at least thinking through what that means, can open one up to new possibilities while not requiring one to say, yeah, go steal it all.
I think most artists who successfully exploit pirating as marketing are taking a both/and stance. They’re generally not saying make it legal but they are finding ways to exploit that activity. That’s a both/and approach that reveals the poverty of linear thought and analysis.
When people focus on binaries they get stuck in a mode of thinking that makes it almost impossible to have a productive conversation or to move forward and find solutions that can actually work in a nonlinear world made up of real humans and rapidly changing technologies.
Just look at how quickly Lars of Metallica became branded as a rich kid who got mad at his fans. Fair or not, that’s the result of linear “command and control” approaches to social and legal issues.
Ok. I understand what you mean now.
And i agree with this thinking, although i think it also creates a somewhat “philosophically” unsustainable position for the artist.
Because if you both believe piracy is wrong, AND yet you try to take advantage of the situation, don’t you end up sending the wrong signal ?
By saying ( directly or indirectly) : “I’m against piracy AND i will take advantage of this situation “, won’t you end up having people responding “Well, if you say piracy has some advantages for you, why do you also say you’re against it ? Shouldn’t we pirate you even more then ? That way we will be actually supporting you even more 🙂 ”
In fact , it’s a rationalization that is often used for piracy : “See…some artists admit that piracy is good for them. Therefore there is no reason to stop or to refrain from it, in fact we should pirate them even more :-)”
It can easily backfire against you, because it’s an ambiguity that people will feed on to solve their cognitive dissonance dilemna : “I know deep down that what i’m doing is wrong (piracy), but i still want to do it, therefore i need to find a rationale to help me get out of this mental loop and justify my actions”
Now that said, i still kinda agree with you , and think that morally, artists have the right to be against piracy AND to try to take advantage from it ( if they can of course, it’s not always the case ). It’s a way of seeking reparation for damages.
It’s nice to see people willing to address subtleties!
I view reality as a fairly ambiguous and contingent situation. I also think people have all sorts of ways to rationalize things.
I guess if an artist was worried about people taking statements about piracy the wrong way, then they could simply do whatever they felt was appropriate while not drawing attention to the issue.
That said, the piracy debate is so big that artists are going to be asked about it by media and not everything they say will be reported. I appreciate artists who are honest about the fact that there are good and bad aspects to piracy and I prefer they say what they need to say and accept that it will get twisted and misconstrued.
Unfortunately the either/or binary has cast things into two positions:
one focused on legal action that has resulted in near total destruction of major brands that were not hated nearly so much in the past.
the other on the idea that people should be able to take what they wish if it can be easily copied and shared.
To give artists only those two choices is to reduce the complexity of human nature in a way that dehumanizes the artist.
And, of course, the comments from The Civil Wars relate to someone admitting they burned a cd and then bought a ticket, a tshirt and encouraged their friends to go.
I think it’s a difficult situation for content creators but, at the end of the day, embracing fans and people that care enough to listen to your music is always going to get you further than suing fans.
Look at the first two commenters on here and let me know if I’m supposed to be worried about sending the wrong message when people don’t even pay attention to the most obvious aspects of the message. It’s even worse for artists who are in the spotlight.
People see a headline and go off on it. That’s why politicians learn to say one thing over and over and over again. I really don’t want to see artists stoop to that level of depraved communication.