Imagine if in the 1990's, there were CDs that only played on certain
players. In other words, what if Warner Brothers released the Red Hot
Chili Peppers' iconic album, "Blood Sugar Sex Magik", and it only worked
on CD players made by, say, Pioneer? Not only would it harm consumers,
but also limit the reach of the artist. If you did not own a Pioneer CD
player, you could not hear the album.
If a new
rumor by the New York Post
is to be believed, Apple is planning such a thing, but rather than CD
players, its iTunes and Beats Music would be the means of harming the
consumer. Yes, the fruit-logo company may be working with artists (and
ultimately record labels) to bring album-exclusives to its own music
services.
"It's been a while since we've heard much about Jimmy Iovine and Dr.
Dre's Beats Music, but our music industry spies say Iovine is having
fresh talks with artists about doing exclusives", says Claire
Atkinson of the New York Post.
Atkinson further explains, "Beats executives -- now Apple employees --
are looking to replicate the kind of success Beyoncé had with her iTunes
album, 'Beyoncé by Beyoncé'', back in December 2013".
Yes, many will point to Beyoncé's self-titled album as an example of
success; it was an iTunes exclusive for a week, before expanding to
greater availability. While this release sparked consumer interest on
its limited nature alone, it would not likely be duplicated if
commonplace.
Currently, iTunes and many retail stores, such as Target and Best Buy,
offer exclusive bonus tracks, in addition to the album. I find this to
be acceptable, as the perks are an added bonus. Apple's plan of limiting
albums to its own iTunes or Beats, however, is an entirely different
ball game, which does nothing to benefit the consumer.
Let's not forget, not everyone uses Apple products, such as iPads and
iPhones. While iTunes is available for Windows, what about Chromebook
users? or traditional Linux distribution users? Hell, some people use
Android exclusively. Not everyone will have access to iTunes, and quite
frankly, not everyone wants to access it.
Even worse is exclusivity to streaming services. If this practice were
to catch on, consumers might have to shell out multiple monthly
subscription fees in order to gain access to all of their favorite
artists. Even then, with the music spread across multiple services, the
user could not create playlists using all of the desired music.
Again, this is all rumor at this point, and I hope it is not true. With
that said, the potential harm to consumers is so great, that even the
mere notion should have music fans up in arms.
UPDATE: As a reader points out, iTunes already has some exclusives such
as The Beatles. Obviously, expanding this practice would further harm
consumers, much like not having the Fab Four on other services already
does.
Photo Credit: Africa Studio / Shutterstock
~ Brian Fagioli
