I recall addressing a function staged by the Caribbean Association of Industry and Commerce at the dawn of this century, in the heady days of the dot-com boom. I made a presentation on the online prospects for the music industry. My commentary was not as rosy in its outlook as some members of the audience would have wanted and their displeasure was not disguised.

I told those present that we were investing too much faith in the expected economic benefits that online exposure and sales would bring to local actors in the music business. I pointed out that the laws of profit and loss had not been repealed in the digitally mediated reality and predicted that the outcomes would be far more modest than were expected.

Looking back, I cannot help thinking that the same kind of faith in fantasy — which would later see so many Jamaicans being bilked in Ponzi schemes — was palpably present in the room on that day. Many thought that, in the digital paradigm, artistes would be able to circumvent the stranglehold of the gatekeepers in the music industry and go directly to the final consumer of their recorded products.

The truth is that the Internet has certainly delivered on much of its promise providing cultural producers with opportunities to reach large numbers of their fans. However the barriers to entry have been lowered considerably to the point where almost anyone with Internet access can now distribute his or her own music. The challenge now facing those seeking exposure is not so much one of access, but one of attention. What we now have are many voices competing for our attention, which means that there is valuable material which will sometimes escape our notice in this very crowded environment. Those artistes who are familiar, or those who can jump out from the clutter, will often succeed in this new paradigm.

What is even more interesting is that radio play is still seen as the best indicator of the popularity of a song, despite the shift to the new media paradigm. This observation has been supported by recent research.

Watching this development, I am reminded of a line from Gilbert and Sullivan’s HMS Pinafore: “Things are seldom what they seem, skim milk masquerade as cream.”

Video was supposed to have killed the radio star and the Internet should have buried it.

I pointed out in another of my presentations at the Global Congress on Intellectual Property, in Rio de Janeiro, that in the prevailing crowded digital environment, gimmickry often trumps quality for our attention. If there are 100,000 videos competing for my attention, then usually the one which will catch my notice is the one which belongs to an artiste who is well known or to one who has an outrageous video which is being talked about.

Instead of there being greater diversity in songs appearing on the Billboard charts today, there are actually fewer songs and artistes than there were, say, 10 years ago. And those that do, are spending longer periods on the survey. What is more is that a song in theBillboard Top 10 now attracts 82 per cent more airplay than one in a similar position 10 years ago.

The more accurately those in the music industry are able to predict what we want to hear, the more they realise that there is greater homogeneity in our taste than would have been suspected.

Yes, we are far more conservative in our tastes than we actually believe we are, and far more alike in what we like than we readily recognise. We love the familiar; which explains why in an era when we are better able to track public sentiments the music is sounding more the same than ever before. This feature of the human condition helps to explain why covers have been so popular through the years.

A look at Jamaican hits on the British charts over the years shows a large number of covers being represented. These include My Boy Lollipop, Everything I Own, Young Gifted and Black, Oh Carolina, I Wanna Wake Up With You, and Breakfast in Bed. Desmond Dekker’s Israelite is one of the few notable exceptions, so too is OMI’s Cheerleader. I should also point out that Bob Marley was almost relentless in the covering of his own songs.

However, according to research, this yen for the familiar has strengthened considerably over the years. There was greater diversity not only among the songs making it to Billboard, but in the overall soundscape when we were more reliant on the taste of a Clive Davis or a Chris Blackwell to determine a hit than there is today, when the charts are supposedly more democratic.

Today many of the big hits basically have the same beats and chord progressions. In fact, the pop music producers are using methods that are not too dissimilar to those employed by dancehall and hip hop creators. Bands are largely absent from these productions. Songs are no longer built around melodies; instead they are written to fit an already existing beat.

If the music of Rihanna is sounding like Katy Perry’s, it is perhaps because they are made by the same people using similar techniques. Most of the pop hits today are made by the same people from Sweden and Norway. Yes, Stargate and Cheiron and similar outfits have been dominating the business of music production for some time now.

Algorithms are now able to predict with a surprising degree of accuracy, and with significant lead times, which songs will make it into the top 40. It was predicted weeks before — almost to the exact date — that OMI ‘s Cheerleader would be number one on the Billboard charts.

The reliance on big data removes a great deal of guesswork for record company executives who want to know which artiste they should try to sign, or for the radio stations which want to know which songs they should play. They now have data to make their determination, thanks to algorithms which mine sites such as Shazam, Wikipedia and Spotify. Artistes should bear in mind that activity on Wikipedia and Shazam is far more important to the advancement of their songs and careers than friends onFacebook and followers on twitter. People go to Wikipedia to find out more about a song they have just heard or about the artiste performing it. They go to Shazam when they hear a song and don’t know its name. If you want to know the title of a song or learn more about who is performing it, then chances are you have a genuine interest. This is why these sites are such reliable predictors of success.

If an artiste is going to speak to a representative of a record label today it might be necessary for him or her to be armed with data from

Hit Predictor or Shazam. In fact, so good has Shazam become in spotting artistes that the company has now set up its own label.

In the good old days, record labels used to depend on independent pluggers who would try to convince programme managers at radio stations to put their clients’ music into rotation. The better pluggers were able to get the deejays in the clubs to play the songs which would influence airplay. Today, it’s the programmer at iHeart Media (Clearchannel), the largest operator of FM stations in America.

It is important to note that, in the crowded prevailing online environment, artistes will also have to seek to subscribe to causes which are larger than themselves. This is one of the ways to jump out of the clutter. Shaggy has been able to secure greater endearment from the Jamaican people through his unstinting support for the Bustamante Hospital for Children. One does not have to be as big as Shaggy to espouse a worthwhile cause.

It is also helpful if an artiste is articulate, as having a personality or an image which is friendly and smart can attract fans who might not have seen an artiste perform or bought his music. Ironically, while I am a supporter of songs written in Jamaica patois, I believe that our artistes should be able to speak comfortably in English. Yes, and here I want to make a distinction between speaking intelligently and assuming an American accent. If it is that one stutters naturally it might be advisable to change accents in order to enhance fluency. Research has shown that adopting a different speech pattern or accent does help to overcome stuttering. There have been a number of notable singers who stuttered when they spoke.

Why am I emphasing the need to speak effectively? Well, through interviews an artiste is able to reach audiences to which they often would not have access. Artistes have been known to change impressions — for better or worse — based on how they conduct interviews. Artistes should recognise their weaknesses and seek the assistance to address their deficiencies. In the same way athletes invest in coaches and trainers, our artistes should work with people who can improve their performance both on and offstage. This might mean spending on a private tutor in English, learning to play an instrument, going to dance classes or doing voice training. It might also mean getting the kind of public relations capacity which can spring into action to do damage control.

cpamckenzie@gmail.com