Why The New Music Biz Gurus Are Frauds

[richardmac]

SMALL CORRECTION: your ability to look photogenic as a performer is massively relevant. There will never be another Janis Joplin........ No , I'm not being negative or jaded ... It's just the facts.

 

Susan Boyle.

 

I guess it's not a fact, but rather just an opinion?

 

OK, OK, I know, Susan Boyle isn't the artist that Janis Joplin was. She's just an ugly fat lady with a great voice, and the world is full of them. She just sort of lucked into her success. My point is, you can't throw absolutes around, especially in this day and age - because there is an exception to everything and because it's a "flat earth," we are going to eventually hear about it.

 

I disagree with you anyway - I don't think you have to be a model. But I would say that if you are ugly you have virtually no chance, which is different than absolutely no chance. John Mayer is not a model. Dave Mathews sure as hell isn't one either. But if either one of those guys looked like Larry the Cable Guy, they would NOT have succeeded to the same extent. That I believe.

[sventvkg]

 

Great points as always, Pat. I'd add, from observation but not experience: 6) You need to make great music, and you're probably not a good judge of your own music. I think it would be good if somehow there were a business you could go to, pay them a small amount of $, and they'd give you an accurate estimate of the quality of your music. Like: A. You should play family parties. B. You should play open mics. C. You should play coffee shops. D. You should play small nightclubs. E. You should play big nightclubs. F. You should play small tours. G. Big tours. H. Stadiums. Yeah, I know, I know, that would be impossible. Still, most artists are clueless as to how good or bad their music really is.

 

 

Come to Nashville and start playing open mics at Douglas Corner, Bluebird and other venues. You'll know quickly if your songs are good.

[sventvkg]

 

That's not what I've read. I'm sure that's what musicians want to believe though. Supposedly there is this magic that happens aside form music where you make a connection with the audience. Supposedly it is that very thing that matters most. When you get guns and roses in front of an audience in a small venue something special happens as compared to the average band. They could both be playing the same thing and performing just as well. Same with No Doubt. I've read this live connection thing numerous times from different sources. The more you don't have it, the harder it will be to draw in new fans. People are very shallow. People like to watch good looking, attractive people and connect with them. The quality of the performance? Meh.. I'd rate that second of importance.

 

 

You can always work on your performance with coaches and choreographers etc..But if you have no great music you're {censored}ed. That's the meat and by FAR...THE SONG IS KING.

[sventvkg]

 

Well, first of all, I doubt you know any of the qualifications of anyone on this forum, but believe it or not, there are people here who have done this for a living, worked for major labels, and so on. Hopefully, you do realize that if there were any definitive "high authorities", the industry wouldn't be scratching it's ass wondering which direction to go in, right? At best, you're getting educated guesses that in the end are still only guesses. The fact is, no one knows for sure what works now and what doesn't. For every success story you can point to, I can show you 1000 others doing the same things and it didn't work. And for every accepted 'rule', I can show you a dozen examples of people ignoring them and finding success. It's great to follow advice, but most advice is based on what has worked in the past. But the business is changing constantly and rapidly, so what worked even 3 years ago might be ancient history. You keep mentioning what you've read. That's great, but until you do it, it's all academic. And the reality is in today's music business, there are no rules and no formulas. Everyone is like a blind guy fumbling in the dark for the key to the door. If you think some guy writing a book or worse, a music lawyer, has all the answers, well...I can guarantee you they're making more money than anyone following their advice is. Ultimately, after you've done all you can do, it still comes down to having the right product and the right look in front of the right person at the right time in the right place. I don't think there's a set way of making that happen.

 

 

Yup, they say here in Nashville that everyone is as clueless about everything as everyone else!!

[sventvkg]

 

SMALL CORRECTION: your ability to look photogenic as a performer is massively relevant. . There will never be another Janis Joplin........ No , I'm not being negative or jaded ... It's just the facts. .

 

 

 

The facts don't seem to play out with your statement. Look at Mumford and sons, Arcade Fire, The National, Decemberists, and just about all the popular bands out there..It's back to the 70's again thank God where these people look like regular human beings. Even in the Pop world..The biggest artist is Lady GaGa who is downright weird and homely looking.

[richardmac]

 

Come to Nashville and start playing open mics at Douglas Corner, Bluebird and other venues. You'll know quickly if your songs are good.

 

 

I am NOT TALKING ABOUT ME!!!!! Every time I post an opinion on something, someone says "You should do this or that."

 

TN is a pretty state - we vacation in Sevierville about once every five years. You can get a wonderful cabin with a hot tub, pool table, etc, with an awesome view, for not a lot of money. Nashville is three and a half hours away.

 

I know people who've gone to Nashville and played at open mics. Mostly what they told me was that all the other musicians were awesome. Kind of a long drive to play in an open mic, though.

[sventvkg]

 

I am NOT TALKING ABOUT ME!!!!! Every time I post an opinion on something, someone says "You should do this or that." TN is a pretty state - we vacation in Sevierville about once every five years. You can get a wonderful cabin with a hot tub, pool table, etc, with an awesome view, for not a lot of money. Nashville is three and a half hours away. I know people who've gone to Nashville and played at open mics. Mostly what they told me was that all the other musicians were awesome. Kind of a long drive to play in an open mic, though.

 

 

Dude...OBVIOUSLY..I get you..I was speaking Rhetorically. Backing up what you were saying. It's about the tunes. Most people think their tunes are good but paying them in a town full of good tunes is a sure way to find out, FAST! Funny stuff!!! and I too love the the discourse.

[richardmac]

 

Dude...OBVIOUSLY..I get you..I was speaking Rhetorically. Backing up what you were saying. It's about the tunes. Most people think their tunes are good but paying them in a town full of good tunes is a sure way to find out, FAST! Funny stuff!!! and I too love the the discourse.

 

 

OK, good. Sorry to have shouted! It's because I got schooled in a different thread (or it might even have been this one... I'm too lazy to go back and look) about what I should be out there doing if I want a career in music and it annoyed me so I'm oversensitive.

[flatfinger]

 

OK, OK, I know, Susan Boyle isn't the artist that Janis Joplin was. She's just an ugly fat lady with a great voice, and the world is full of them. She just sort of lucked into her success. My point is, you can't throw absolutes around, especially in this day and age - because there is an exception to everything and because it's a "flat earth," we are going to eventually hear about it. I disagree with you anyway - I don't think you have to be a model. But I would say that if you are ugly you have virtually no chance, which is different than absolutely no chance. John Mayer is not a model. Dave Mathews sure as hell isn't one either. But if either one of those guys looked like Larry the Cable Guy, they would NOT have succeeded to the same extent. That I believe .

 

 

 

Agree that guys have it easier; I think in this day and age women can't big or too average ...... The lady GA GA "stick Chick " prototype is pretty much envouge....(See "lady-gaga-endorses-boyfriends-drunk-diet" http://wonderwall.msn.com/music/lady-gaga-endorses-boyfriends-drunk-diet-1605759.story?gt1=28135)

 

( that's an area where I love some of the R&B appreciation of some junk in the trunk , J. Lopez action. When you get older , a little cushion for your pushin ain't so bad:love: !!!)

[mikedavid00]

 

But if you have no great music you're {censored}ed. That's the meat and by FAR...THE SONG IS KING.

 

 

Overall I disagree. Just having 'good/mediocre' songs is good enough I would say if you have youth, looks, and connect with the audience. Especially A&R people.. I would say you're much more fooked in my opinion if you if you don't have the looks and youth. You can have all the greatest songs you want (that's why there are song writers).

 

In the OLD days it was about quality and age/looks didn't matter, but since the Spice Girls it seems something changed in the industry.

 

I also think it's a bad idea to focus on exceptions. Dave mathews was grinding for years before he was signed.

 

Here's a pic of the group when they were signed. It should be noted that this was in 1993. They weren't an ugly/old band in my opinion. It wasn't till the early 2000's or so that things went really wrong and things got messed up.

 

http://www.torrentspath.com/upload/preview/music/6/2/2/cc49bc8ada8958e4bfc6b15293134ee8.jpg

 

Again, I really, really don't recommend artists focus on exceptions to rules in the music industry, but rather, focus on realities and what is most likely to work for you.

[mikedavid00]

The facts don't seem to play out with your statement. Look at Mumford and sons, Arcade Fire, The National, Decemberists, and just about all the popular bands out there..It's back to the 70's again thank God where these people look like regular human beings. Even in the Pop world..The biggest artist is Lady GaGa who is downright weird and homely looking.

 

Are you seriously saying that in the current industry that people are normal looking?

 

Lady Gaga is a young, over the top blond that wears wigs and shows skin. There was never a model only industry, but if you are 45 and write great songs or are heavy, good luck to you.

 

The biggest artist is Lady GaGa who is downright weird and homely looking.

 

I mean.. brother you are dreaming so much you are fooling yourself into believing the industry signs normal looking people. Look at a pic of Gaga below and tell me if that's normal:

 

[mikedavid00]

. but I do believe that even with all that soul , Poor Janis wouldn't stand a chance in the present environment . What a shame .

 

I totally agree.

 

What about the all powerfull you-tube ??

 

Youtube isn't very powerful at all. You can have 5 million views on a vid. Great. Now make a living or business off that hit Youtube video.. Not going to happen. Yes, there are lottery winning *EXCEPTIONS* who got signed form MySpace and Youtube, but for the tens or hundreds of thousands of music artists on there, Youtube in itself is just doesn't work. Again from what I understand, only playing live 'works' to get fans. I don't believe Youtube works because the vids are usually amateur, also, people cannot download the video and song to an ipod so they can't put it on 'repeat'. It's a challenge to visit the same video again and again to listen to it.

 

Also a lot of people have little PC speakers that are turned off, and boom-boxes for their iphones where they listen to background music. The boomboxes also recharge the iphones. There's lots of reasons why Youtube doesn't seem to work. When you play live, you gain a fan, when you are on Youtube, you gain a view.

 

If I ever find artists for my label that I plan on starting, every video will have a down-loadable link for mp3's and even a mini video that is compatible with iphones. Everything will have to be free because it's the urban genre.

[sventvkg]

 

Overall I disagree. Just having 'good/mediocre' songs is good enough I would say if you have youth, looks, and connect with the audience. Especially A&R people.. I would say you're much more fooked in my opinion if you if you don't have the looks and youth. You can have all the greatest songs you want (that's why there are song writers). In the OLD days it was about quality and age/looks didn't matter, but since the Spice Girls it seems something changed in the industry. I also think it's a bad idea to focus on exceptions. Dave mathews was grinding for years before he was signed. Here's a pic of the group when they were signed. It should be noted that this was in 1993. They weren't an ugly/old band in my opinion. It wasn't till the early 2000's or so that things went really wrong and things got messed up. http://www.torrentspath.com/upload/preview/music/6/2/2/cc49bc8ada8958e4bfc6b15293134ee8.jpg Again, I really, really don't recommend artists focus on exceptions to rules in the music industry, but rather, focus on realities and what is most likely to work for you.

 

 

Yea, you don't get it. It's always been about songs and always will be. There was always cheeze flash in the pan and always will be. It doesn't last and neither will the current group.

 

Also, Pop music is the worst and it's always been largely drivel.

[sventvkg]

Are you seriously saying that in the current industry that people are normal looking? Lady Gaga is a young, over the top blond that wears wigs and shows skin. There was never a model only industry, but if you are 45 and write great songs or are heavy, good luck to you. I mean.. brother you are dreaming so much you are fooling yourself into believing the industry signs normal looking people. Look at a pic of Gaga below and tell me if that's normal:

 

Gaga is disgusting looking...I do agree that these people aren't NORMAL looking..I guess it is more looks focused in Pop..I don't know because I've never paid attention to that genre in my life and can only name the ones that i see written about.

 

In other genre's like the bands I previously mentioned and certainly country, rock, folk, singer songwriter...YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE BEAUTIFUL.

[mikedavid00]

 

Yea, you don't get it. It's always been about songs and always will be.

 

 

If that was true, the song writers who write all the hits would be performing them. They don't perform them because it is NOT all about the songs.

 

 

There was always cheeze flash in the pan and always will be. It doesn't last and neither will the current group.

 

 

Don't be so sure about that. I'm not sure if you are familiar with JPop. It's Japanese music. It's corporate controlled industry 100% and they spoon feed the people the most generic stuff it's unbelievable. Their music is awful. It's ALL about being a model, dying hair blond, and singing cheesy songs.

 

Many think that what's really happening is that we are turning into a Japanese style market do to over corporate control.

 

 

Also, Pop music is the worst and it's always been largely drivel.

 

 

You don't like pop from the 80's?

[richardmac]

 

If that was true, the song writers who write all the hits would be performing them. They don't perform them because it is NOT all about the songs. Don't be so sure about that. I'm not sure if you are familiar with JPop. It's Japanese music. It's corporate controlled industry 100% and they spoon feed the people the most generic stuff it's unbelievable. Their music is awful. It's ALL about being a model, dying hair blond, and singing cheesy songs. Many think that what's really happening is that we are turning into a Japanese style market do to over corporate control. You don't like pop from the 80's?

 

 

Oh. Um... that's... actually, that's a very good point about JPop. I think it is extremely funny music. I crack up any time I hear it. It sounds a little like our dance music, but sped up in tempo and raised in pitch. If you took a silly pop/dance song 33 and played it at 45, it would sound like JPop. And I would definitely be counted among the many who think that pop music in the US is becoming more and more controlled by a small number of major label folks, with obviously some exceptions. I hate to keep bringing this up, but people here in the forum give John Mayer all kinds of {censored}, and yet he's one of the few artists who's making the kind of music HE wants to make and not doing what the record company tells him to do. In today's music market he's wildly successful and they're smart enough to not mess with him too much. Except for that horrid duet with Taylor Swift. Raise your hand if you'd rather bang Taylor Swift than listen to her sing...

 

Anyway, I think that's a good point. But I think I agree with sventvkg that you are missing the point about the songs. What he is saying is that what people really care about is the song. The song is what makes the connection. Anna Nalick put out her debut album in 2005 which was part brilliant part big label calculated crap, but she hit one point on the head with these lyrics

 

And I feel like I'm naked in front of a crowd

Cause these words are my diary, screaming out loud

And I know that you'll use them however you want to

 

People attach to lines in songs and form these deep bonds with the song because they connect with the lyrics. You put a song out there, you got no control over how people interpret the lyrics. Anti-abortion people rallied behind the Genesis song "Mama" because to them it was about an unborn baby screaming that it wants to live, but that's not what the song was about. People will grab one line from a song and latch onto it. It happens all the time. Or people grab the sentiment of the song and run with it. We've discussed this before, but in bad economic times people want happy music that takes their mind off the fact that all the prices keep increasing but they haven't seen a raise in 3 years. The Black Eyed Peas are here at the perfect time because we do want tonight to be a good night. That damn song is catchy as hell. If it did not connect with people and was not as catchy, that group would not be as big. The song is the most important thing.

 

But that doesn't mean that looks and image don't matter. They do. But it's song first, looks second. Katy Perry is pretty but not model pretty. But her songs, crafted no doubt by songwriting gurus and computers, her songs are extremely catchy, textbook pop songwriting.

[sventvkg]

 

If that was true, the song writers who write all the hits would be performing them. They don't perform them because it is NOT all about the songs. Don't be so sure about that. I'm not sure if you are familiar with JPop. It's Japanese music. It's corporate controlled industry 100% and they spoon feed the people the most generic stuff it's unbelievable. Their music is awful. It's ALL about being a model, dying hair blond, and singing cheesy songs. Many think that what's really happening is that we are turning into a Japanese style market do to over corporate control. You don't like pop from the 80's?

 

 

Seriously, I don't know anyone besides my 5 and 8 year old stepsons who watch Icarly and Big Time Rush on Disney channel, who listens to Pop music of any kind. In MUSIC AS A WHOLE, it's the song that matters first. I agree that looks play a part in it for that genre but the publishing is made from repeated spins of the song through the years so the tune has to stand the test of time first.

 

As for the 80's I personally couldn't stand most of the pop on the radio but there were songs I liked. The teenybopper {censored} that I just call Blinkety blink carp with {censored}ty FM synth sounds everywhere I hated. Other radio stuff like Mr. Mr., Peter Gabriel, Early Duran Duran I liked.

[BlueStrat]

 

Seriously, I don't know anyone besides my 5 and 8 year old stepsons who watch Icarly and Big Time Rush on Disney channel, who listens to Pop music of any kind. In MUSIC AS A WHOLE, it's the song that matters first. I agree that looks play a part in it for that genre but the publishing is made from repeated spins of the song through the years so the tune has to stand the test of time first. As for the 80's I personally couldn't stand most of the pop on the radio but there were songs I liked. The teenybopper {censored} that I just call Blinkety blink carp with {censored}ty FM synth sounds everywhere I hated. Other radio stuff like Mr. Mr., Peter Gabriel, Early Duran Duran I liked.

 

 

 

See, this is the entire crux of the debate, IMO. The fact is, today, generalities are irrelevant and don't apply. To say "you have to have looks", " marketing trumps quality", "The song is everything", and so on, might have applied a few years ago. But the truth is, for every statement someone cares to make, numerous exceptions can be found. This is what is so frustrating to everyone in the biz. Music is more compartmentalized, more niche oriented and specialty marketed than ever before. What works for one niche market won't work for another. And tis is what niche marketing has brought us: we tend to think that the 'rules' for what we like and are interested in work across the board. They don't. What propels a Japanese kiddie pop band to stardom isn't going to work for a metal band. What works for a metal band isn't going to work for a singer/songwriter. What works for a singer songwriter isn't going to work for a country band. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why modern day gurus are full of {censored}. What they advocate may work somewhat for one specific genre, but not all of them, not by a long shot. And this is why we end up talking past one another in these discussions- we all like to think that what we're into applies to everyone.

[sventvkg]

See, this is the entire crux of the debate, IMO. The fact is, today, generalities are irrelevant and don't apply. To say "you have to have looks", " marketing trumps quality", "The song is everything", and so on, might have applied a few years ago. But the truth is, for every statement someone cares to make, numerous exceptions can be found. This is what is so frustrating to everyone in the biz. Music is more compartmentalized, more niche oriented and specialty marketed than ever before. What works for one niche market won't work for another. And tis is what niche marketing has brought us: we tend to think that the 'rules' for what we like and are interested in work across the board. They don't. What propels a Japanese kiddie pop band to stardom isn't going to work for a metal band. What works for a metal band isn't going to work for a singer/songwriter. What works for a singer songwriter isn't going to work for a country band. And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why modern day gurus are full of {censored}. What they advocate may work somewhat for one specific genre, but not all of them, not by a long shot. And this is why we end up talking past one another in these discussions- we all like to think that what we're into applies to everyone.

 

 

This is exactly my view on things as well. I just didn't have the patience to write it all down!

[flatfinger]

While I can agree that the lack of a homogeneous landscape is in effect , I would argue that at the heart of the whole shebang is the currency of the biz .... The song .

 

However once you start to analyze the song you open up a pretty big can of variables ...

 

 

 

I have a rug rat or two bouncing around here , so I'm more that familiar with the corporate content providers attempt to be style makers on nickelodeon and Disney .

 

I can only assume that the bean counters aren't aware and/or compelled to pay for any skilled songwriters ... It's all so very generic . Maybe that's there aim , to make it easy to digest and depend mostly on the pretty faces !! ( there is also mucho linking and trying to piggyback.... Did you guys know that there is a BTR video playing on Nickelodeon that has a cameo from Snoop DOG ?, .....Barf...)

 

Some artist are not titans of the craft but never the less popular.. ( think Arnold S. is an actor or a movie star ??)

 

 

 

Obviously some genres are more Dependant on being able to turn a phrase... But other times it's just coming up with something stupid , but that hasn't been done before ( Pokher-Face )

 

Country has allot of word smithing, but allot of it's forgettable goofing .

 

Music that connects on a real emotional level is the only kind that's not going to fade away in the long run ...

 

 

 

I think that older people want to have an experience that includes being able to identify with and know the creator who said something profound or easy to relate to and emphasize with . I would hope that after a certain age , whether the artist has a square jaw or a nice rack would diminish in priority !

 

The younger crowd is still worried about finding a place to fit in and will go with the inertia of the group they are in ....

 

( or at least I hope that's the main reason many want to listen to horrible songs that are a celebration of Misogyny)

 

Obviously some in the content creation community are going to be slip shot and take the road MOST traveled by trying to get attention by being provocative...

 

 

It will all come out in the wash though !!!

 

Who can go the distance ; will find out in the long run !!!!!!

 

 

.

[flatfinger]

 

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why modern day gurus are full of {censored}. What they advocate may work somewhat for one specific genre, but not all of them, not by a long shot.

 

 

+ 1000000000

[BlueStrat]

 

While I can agree that the lack of a homogeneous landscape is in effect , I would argue that at the heart of the whole shebang is the currency of the biz .... The song . However once you start to analyze the song you open up a pretty big can of variables ... I have a rug rat or two bouncing around here , so I'm more that familiar with the corporate content providers attempt to be style makers on nickelodeon and Disney . I can only assume that the bean counters aren't aware and/or compelled to pay for any skilled songwriters ... It's all so very generic . Maybe that's there aim , to make it easy to digest and depend mostly on the pretty faces !! ( there is also mucho linking and trying to piggyback.... Did you guys know that there is a BTR video playing on Nickelodeon that has a cameo from Snoop DOG ?, .....Barf...) Some artist are not titans of the craft but popular never the less popular ( think Arnold S. is an actor or a movie star ??) Obviously some genres are more Dependant on being able to turn a phrase... But other times it's just coming up with something stupid , but that hasn't been done before ( Pokher-Face ) Country has allot of word smithing, but allot of it's forgettable goofing . Music that connects on a real emotional level is the only kind that's not going to fade away in the long run ... I think that older people want to have an experience that includes being able to identify with and know the creator who said something profound or easy to relate to and emphasize with . I would hope that after a certain age , whether the artist has a square jaw or a nice rack would diminish in priority ! The younger crowd is still worried about finding a place to fit in and will go with the inertia of the group they are in .... ( or at least I hope that's the main reason many want to listen to horrible songs that are a celebration of Misogyny) Obviously some in the content creation community are going to be slip shot and take the road MOST traveled by trying to get attention by being provocative... It will all come out in the wash though !!! Who can go the distance ; will find out in the long run !!!!!! .

 

 

It may be "the song" for every genre, but but I have a sense that the days of songs being hits all oer the country, let alone the world, may be over. "Poker Face" way well be a huge it for Lady Gaga, but I would bet my house that the majority of Americans have never heard it. Much like "celebrities' no one has ever heard of that adorn the covers of magazines grocery store checkouts, so too is music rapidly morphing into. What results is the loss of shared cultural experience, something that everyone can relate to. In the 60s, everyone knew Blue Suede Shoes and I Wanna Hold Your Hand. In the 70s, everyone knew "Stayin' Alive" and such. In the 80s, everyone knew Beat It. . Even in the 90s, everyone knew "Friends in Low Places" and so on. Who songs are known by the majority of people today?

[mikedavid00]

 

But that doesn't mean that looks and image don't matter. They do. But it's song first, looks second. Katy Perry is pretty but not model pretty. But her songs, crafted no doubt by songwriting gurus and computers, her songs are extremely catchy, textbook pop songwriting.

 

 

Oh sorry ok I was taking it from a standpoint of an independent artist getting signed. In that case, I do not think the songs matter as much because after you're signed, the label and management can always buy you songs. What the label is really looking for is a sensation.. a unique voice. special look.. Something special. Not song writing skills.

 

Ultimately you are right the songs matter most of course when it comes to listening, but that supposes you are already signed and have label backing to get those songs. You can write great songs like pro Songwriters, but the reason why they don't perform them is usually because of their looks. In the 60's, songwriters were actually performing their own songs.. Crosby stills and nash.. good luck signing them these days.

[mikedavid00]

 

But the truth is, for every statement someone cares to make, numerous exceptions can be found.

 

 

That's the problem though. Way, way too many artists focus on exceptions. That just isn't a wise choice for the up and coming artist to focus on exceptions. Yes exceptions happen, but lets focus on reality:

 

-If you are a 'sting' style band, you have to play live to get a fan base. Internet doesn't work.

-If you have this 'connection' with the audience, you will get more fans.

-If you are older, overweight, and don't look good, etc it will be very difficult to get a major deal.

-If you make urban, you'll have to do the free mixtape, Youtube/Twitter online hustle and have to fund this yourself.

 

These are safe 'laws' for any aspiring artists to follow. To be truthful, if you disagree and grasp onto the exceptions, you are more of a 'dreamer' than a realist. The artistic mind tends to dream more than stay down to earth.

[mikedavid00]

 

It's all so very generic . Maybe that's there aim , to make it easy to digest and depend mostly on the pretty faces !!

 

 

Yes. This is how it's done in Japan. The thing is Japan is overly corporatized and there you can pay for rotation. Some feel the same might happen here seing as the big labels pretty much own radio rotation through payola loopholes.

 

Try to get nationwide radio play without being on a major. Go and try. You can easily get this in the UK. Not here. (watch someone is going to bring up another exception and keep clinging on to the exception to the rule.. bad way of thinking)