Sorry I Accosted You.

I accosted a probably very friendly couple at a Barnes & Noble about a month ago. I feel bad about it, and yet I knew that accosting them was my duty. Read on:

I was standing in line with some friends at Barnes & Noble. Susannah was purchasing Robert Penn Warren's "All The King's Men" for summer reading, and as I waited for her to check out, I eyed the small CD rack. It was stocked with impulse soccer-mom buys, such as Michael Buble and Kenny G, but then, in the upper right corner, there was a copy of The Best of Radiohead. Now, as a huge Radiohead fan, I knew that this compilation album was in no way Thom Yorke's idea. It was a portion of EMI's plan of revenge after Radiohead left their label to give away In Rainbows. A twenty-something couple in front of me were browsing the CDs as well.

"Oh, Radiohead!" said the man, picking up a copy.
"They're great," replied his girlfriend tracing her finger down the back track listing.

I fretted. "These people can't purchase this sham of an album! Radiohead wouldn't want that!" I thought. So, I did what any partially insane teen would do.

"You can't buy that!" I said abruptly.

The couple stared at me blankly. I stared back.

"Um. EMI, Radiohead's old label, released it without permission. Radiohead, uh, doesn't want people to buy it," I stammered.

The couple stared at me blankly.

"Um. Ok," said the male with a forced chuckle, placing the album back on the rack. "Why is this nervous girl with braces yelling at me about Radiohead?" he was probably thinking.

My friend Victoria looked at me with an amused smile. I turned around and walked away. Mission accomplished.

My apologies for accosting you, friendly couple. But you really shouldn't buy the album.

Paste follows Radiohead's example

Until Thursday, Paste magazine (a 11-per-year music magazine with an included mix cd in each issue) is letting customers choose the price of their one-year subscription. I just ordered mine today, I suggest you do the same!!
Click HERE to order your subscription, then tell me what you paid!

Pot of Gold at The End of Radiohead's Rainbow?

A study was released yesterday that revealed the average of what buyers paid for Radiohead's new album, In Rainbows. The study, conducted by comScore Inc., showed that in a four-week period, 62% of buyers chose not to pay anything, while those who did pay averaged $6.00. However, the percent of people willing to shell out $X.XX for this album among U.S. residents was higher, at 40%, with a greater average payment of $8.05.
In Rainbows was released to much hype, due to it's innovative marketing approach (in case you hadn't heard or something). Radiohead chose not to renew their contract with EMI and instead released Rainbows themselves, through their website, giving fans (or just those who were curious) the opportunity to pay whatever their stingy little hearts desired. This means that if the purchaser so desired, they could plug 0.00 into the price box. For those confused, there was a question-mark link next to it, which when clicked displayed in block yellow caps, "IT'S UP TO YOU."
Is this too much power to give the consumer? Giving fans the option of paying nothing seems to defeat the purpose of calling the music industry an industry. Because in reality, when given an option, how many people would rather pay for a product than be legally given it for free? 38%, apparently. 38% is higher than I expected, actually. I think 38 is a hopeful number in this context. It shows that people still have appreciation for a person's work, or at least enough to shell out $6.00.
This scenario reminds me of a late-night news special I saw once, where a man had a freezer full of fresh fish set up in front of a shop, with a cash box on top. There was nobody manning the fish stand, and the man who set it up was relying purely on people's good morals to pay for the fish. Surprisingly, perhaps, he was right, and found at the end of the day he usually had exactly, if not more, than what he calculated he should have made (based on the fish missing from the freezer).
An unfortunate blip in Radiohead's plan versus the fish-man's, was that while most did pay for fish, most did not pay for the album. Why? Perhaps because music has become so focused around the Internet and illegal-downloading that the opportunity to legally get free music is merely a way to be guilt-free when browsing your iTunes library. People should recognize that Radiohead's decision to let buyers choose their price is a business decision (although some do argue, and it can be argued, that it is purely for publicity). People should pay for the album in the way that they would pay for the fish left in the freezer.

Purchase In Rainbows HERE