More on SoundExchange: Samantha Murphy to Replace Simson?
In our last installment about SoundExchange, we highlighted some shady accounting on artist royalty payouts and news of the exit of Executive Director John Simson. Well, we’ve learned a couple of things since then that I thought you might find interesting.
Shady payouts? How about exorbitant salaries? From a tip from Digital Music News, Simson is taking about $350K a year for his work with the organization. He has caught some serious criticism about it and it seems pretty obvious why. Whether it’s true or not, lack of transparent accounting + low artist payouts + large compensation for executives = super shady. Perhaps I’m just a conspiracy theorist, but his exit from the company seems a little too timely.
So who is going to take his place? Well, the most prominent candidate at the moment is someone you might not expect. It’s Samantha Murphy, an artist with her eye on the prize and an artist-friendly campaign strategy to boot. After all, who better to put in the top seat of a “by artists, for artists” non-profit than an artist. I love this angle, but I can’t say I know who Ms. Murphy is. Even after poking around a bit and looking at her site I can’t tell you much except that this is a great way to promote her singer/songwriter career and that she certainly isn’t terrible to look at. As far as talent (as if that mattered when running one of America’s most important non-profits), I would say it isn’t my cup of tea, but I have to give her credit for having the nerve to step up and ask for the position. That said, I don’t think it will do anything to change SoundExchange’s transparency issues. Pretending like she doesn’t have to answer to SoundExchange’s board is ridiculous.
SoundExchange seems to be having open elections and Ms. Murphy has a petition going around if you want to give her your support (full disclosure: she isn’t getting my vote). Maybe I should run.
I didn’t realize that SoundExchange elected people. I was busy thinking that they hired them. My question is: if SoundExchange is just a shady collection agency backed by the even shadier RIAA, why would you want to get involved?
SE isn’t having open elections – it’s a closed process. But Samantha seems to have hit on something here, drawing attention to their insular nature. I wish her the best.
If you think SoundExchange is a shady operation, you’re off base. If they could get away with it, the music services would simply keep royalties that belongs to artists. SoundExchange collects money that would otherwise never even have a chance at getting to content creators, and they try in earnest to pay the right people (i.e., artists, not labels). SoundExchange is a non-profit organization that lives by specific rules (see the Copyright Act provisions). Samantha is clearly a musician, and not a business person (proving the oxymoron of music business yet again). Please leave royalty collection to people who understand laws and finance, not chords and lyrics.
That’s a good point. However, by “shady operation” I was more so referring to the lack of transparency, not that SoundExchange is stealing money from artists. As a non-profit and as an important service for artists and sound recording copyright owners, their function is truly important and I definitely respect their purpose. However, as of late it seems to me that their actions aren’t a great reflection of their “mission statement” to collect and pay. Transparency is my concern.
There is a reason why I’ve chosen to use the term election. Elections are about people and government and I feel it’s time that BOTH became aware and involved in the issues surrounding SoundExchange and the RIAA. Of course I realize SoundExchange is hiring, and most likely not me.
I’ve sat down with both John Simson and Dick Huey to interview them for my TV show The Highway Girl, which examines life in the digital age for artists. I’ve also spent time with Michael Hausman and Walter McDonough, two other board members. I’ve done business with Pat Rains, who’s also on SX’s board.
It’s a shame that people have to write musicians off as not being good business people. I’ve worked with computers since the 1980’s when I was at Dun & Bradstreet. I’ve always been fascinated by technology and began producing one of the first music podcasts in late 2004. I created and have run The Highway Girl in 2005, a multimedia entertainment company for artists and travelers. The company was one of only 10 out of over 400 applications selected for the prestigious Techstars Program in Boulder, CO.
I love the Internet and I have a strong understanding of SEO. Google Singer Songwriter and I’m the first name you’ll find. I did that myself. I also built the prototype website for my company The Highway Girl and I maintain the site to this day. I’m proud to say we are a company run by three people who care about artists and changing the music industry. We’re one of the first channels on the Roku Player and will continue to use to technology to further the careers of independent artists.
Thank you for your support.
Royalty collection/distribution is not rocket science. It’s a matter of transparency, disclosure, and integrity. Historically, record companies and music publishing companies have had a tendency to “under-account” royalties to artists and writers. The artist’s remedy for this was typically a contractual clause allowing annual audits of the company’s books. The artist, along with his attorney, could be his own watchdog.
SoundExchange is no different in its tendency to under-account. Yet there is currently no watchdog mechanism for artists and writers. Where is the public record of the royalty calculation/payment formula used by this non-profit organization? The total budget breakdown with overhead included? With BMI, ASCAP and SESAC, competition between the three agencies encouraged accurate reporting. The current highly-paid leadership of SX has no such incentive and, unbelievably, no background in the music industry.
Having a performing artist in place at SoundExchange may not be the sole answer. But it’s certainly a step in the right direction. It will push the agency closer to the transparency that’s missing. Having an artist advocate in place makes sense in an organization which exists for the purpose of getting artists and writers paid. Someone has to watch the so-called watcher.