Marketing Music to Moms

Last week I saw this.

A new pr and marketing program from Child's Play Communications dubbed Music Moms hopes to tap into that market by putting music in the hands of influential mommy bloggers. Music Moms reviews music across all genres including children's music, and Universal Motown has already used the service. "Mom, I Need Help Marketing My Music" Hypebot.com, 6/19/09.

That got me thinking about mothers as a target market.

I can see pitching songs about motherhood to them. For example, here are songs from two Denver-based singer/songwriters written after they became mothers.

Wendy Woo, "Another September"
Angie Stevens, "Sleepwalking"

I can also see interviewing artists about juggling music and motherhood. Here are a few examples I found.

I wasn’t even married. Now I’m a wife and a mother of two. ... My priorities are always going to be my husband and my family now. That’s a huge, huge thing. "Gwen Stefani," ELLE, July 2009

[My daughter's] only eight months old, but already I have less time to do my thing, which is good. I have this little boss now, who insists that I step away from work - pretty unique in a boss. Work less! Work less! I think it's good for me not to get so far inside my own head. "The radical singer Ani DiFranco on music, motherhood and politics," The Guardian, 10/10/07

The twins have gone on tour with us since they were 12 weeks old, so they’re old pros at it now. It’s definitely a balancing act. It’s a crazy road and I would leave it to raise my children, but I feel God has created me to do music and be a mom. It’s a unique and beautifully chaotic life. "Natalie Grant balancing Christian music stardom and motherhood," Everyday Christian, 5/27/09

I love being a mother. It's very satisfying to me but it is hard. I spend time with Ruby on the phone. When I'm on the road, I call in every day. I have her homework faxed to me so we can go over that on the telephone."Suzanne Vega,The Art of Balancing Motherhood and Music," celebrityparents.com

You can find even more interviews at Musicians parenting articles - CelebrityParents.com.

And here is an entire book on the subject. Rock Star Mommy: My Life as a Rocker Mom.

There are also blogs by music-loving mothers.
MelodicMom.com - Mommy Blog, Rock Music, and Motherhood
Rock and Roll Mama
The Motherhood - Music Mamas

What I'm not sure about is any concept that mothers are a definable music-buying market. What unites mothers are some common lifestyle interests/needs. They need clothes and supplies for their kids. They spend time involved in parenting. They want to learn about schools, kids' activities, and meal planning.

In terms of music, many of them get exposed to kids' songs through children's TV. They may also be looking for live music events that are family-friendly. So I can see where having children influences their decisions in these areas. And because they generally (1) have less free time to get out to see live music, (2) may need to be home at a reasonable hour, and (3) may not have a lot of money to spend on outside entertainment, there are opportunities in providing concerts and club shows that meet the needs/interests of that vast underserved market of music fans: parents.

But in terms of their own listening preferences, mothers, I believe, are as diverse in their musical tastes as anyone else. Some like country. Some like hard rock. Some like soft rock. Some like indie rock. Some like jazz. Yet, based on some of the artists being targeted to the mom blogosphere, I'm getting the impression that music marketers equate the mom market with the Oprah market. The artists being showcased at various blogger conventions and events seem to be young, good-looking, single, singer/songwriter types, both male and female. There's definitely a market for artists like this, but is it mom music?

If the artists themselves aren't mothers, aren't singing about parenting, and aren't singing music for kids, what's the mom connection? Is it that although moms have as diverse tastes as the rest of the music-consuming public, they prefer to learn about and discuss music with other moms? Are recommendations from other mothers going to influence their music searches? I'm asking, as both a music fan and a mother.

Suzanne Lainson
@slainson on Twitter

The Evolving Definition of Talent

I just ran across this blog entry.

The Economics of Creativity, Ooga Labs, July 12, 2008.

The author explores how musicians with different skill sets have been rewarded over the years. In the 1800s, the classical artists who played live in front of the European elite were the rock stars. Then radio lessened their value. Once recorded music hit its peak, those who did well in a recording studio moved up the value chain.

He doesn't discuss the shift to the video age, but as many musical history writers have noted, that's when appearance became especially important. Janis Joplin would probably not have been signed to a major label contract had she tried to make it in the MTV era.

And now, social media and the ability to create communities around your art have become important "creative" skills.

While music has been important for centuries, what elevates a subset of artists into stardom has been in flux. As technology changes, so does the definition of desirability. Within any given culture, what becomes valued are qualities perceived to be rare.

Let me start by illustrating my point with some non-music examples. Back in the day when commoners worked in fields and could barely get enough to eat, the upper classes were pale and plumb. That's what people aspired to.

Then when the lower classes turned pale from working inside factories all day, the status look was to have a tan, signaling that its owner had spent time at the pool, on the golf course, or on the tennis court. Thin became the desired shape because the poor were eating cheap food that made them overweight.

In terms of music, there was a time when being able to play and sing on key was important. That became less of an issue with the introduction of studio tricks which could fix flaws. So then, when everyone could do a decent recording, appearance became the determining factor setting the top stars apart from everyone else.

But now that we have an overabundance of sound-alike, great-looking performers, we're shifting back to artists who exude more authenticity. Amy Winehouse is distinctive because she is the antithesis of the pretty, packaged pop star.

Currently the new technology in music isn't in recording or performing, but in marketing and distribution. Those who excel at using those tools may be the next rock stars. It isn't that music performance has become less important. It's that we're looking for different filters to separate the good from the great. Talent now includes being able to relate to your fans in a more intimate way. Think of it as a new version of stage presence.

Suzanne Lainson
@slainson on Twitter

"Will buy media for food"

Everyone in the ad world is talking about this cute lil' viral clip that uses Don McLean's "American Pie" melody to bemoan the death of traditional media. I'm thinking someone should re-cut Billy Joel's laundry list "We Didn't Start The Fire" with a new version called "We Failed To Stay Inspired".

Here's my take on the current state of ad media:

TV -- Up fronts did just fine; still the best way to achieve REACH; longterm impacts of time shifting/DVR unknown but the more clever creatives are developing work-arounds
Print -- Until media readers like Kindle are cheaper and offer a better user experience (where ARE you Steve Jobs?), there will always be a market for long form hand-held news and information content
Radio -- This is the one that surprises me; why is there no digital recorder in our cars that allows us to rewind, FF through commercials, etc? until there is there's no better way to reach gridlocked "fish in a barrel" aka commuters
Outdoor -- Will just keep getting more pervasive; we're like 5 years from a Blade Runner/Minority Report-style dystopia
Display -- Dead dead dead; sub zero CPMs; this one's totally on the agencies, not technology -- advertisers have GOT to get better at engaging and converting; dancing gekkos? REALLY?
Search -- The semantic web will open a new world of possibilities; "intelligent search" almost negates the need for marketers; we will phone it in from golf courses and martini bars; oh wait sorry that means Google will run it and we'll work as greeters at Walmart
Video -- See display above, 10-15 seconds is a big enough canvas to be creative but nobody's innovating; buyers need to be sensitive to the fact that people HATE ads while consuming media so they've got to create ad content which is compelling
Social media -- This all turns on the question of privacy and the mood of regulators; in a best case scenario, publishers who have lost billions due to piracy of "free" music/video/games/software will prevail and the toll to the web will increase; to reduce this toll users can exchange data for access -- you can consume all the goodies you want, keep using Facebook, Wikipedia, etc for "free" but we get to use your data (and by the way the ads will become highly contextual and relevant so quit yer whining)
Branded content -- We will see more hybrid agencies combining copywriting with scriptwriting; the lines between news, education, entertainment and promotional content will blur
Cause marketing -- As the world (hopefully) turns less inward, companies will migrate toward "triple bottom line" responsibility reporting which will open new opportunities for mash-ups of advertising and public policy; as competitors try to "out behave" one another they will require innovative platforms to message their activities

The problem is the publically-traded consolidators (WPP, Omnicom and Publicis) have over-invested and entrenched themselves in the first four and allowed the tech geeks to own the last six. Same thing the entertainment industry did: stick to old models while pimply faced kids in Silicon Valley developed disruptive work-arounds that responded to real consumer demand.

Greenfield redux found here. Is it any surprise the company's managers are pumping and dumping? Hopefully Pali and Goldman will do a quick about face.

Enough about "Free"

I think most music is and will be free. Lots of people play and record music for their own pleasure. They do it for self-expression. Finding an audience is a bonus. They willingly provide their music to listeners for free.

And so much music is available online for free (both legally and illegally) that free has become the expectation for many fans and artists.

Reinforcing that trend, a number of bloggers have been touting the free music model. They don't mean that musicians shouldn't be paid, but that giving away something for free (or using the "pay-what-you-want" model) is good marketing and will lead to sales of some sort. Here are some of the more prominent "free" discussions.

Free! Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business, Wired, 2/28/08

Review Of The Free Music Debate, hypebot, 4/6/09

How Bands Can Make More Money By Not Putting A Price on a CD, pampelmoose, 2/10/09

Mike Masnick's music business model articles for Techdirt  (He has posted so many articles about free and its variations that I'll just point you to a search list of them.)

But now that the subject has been covered so much, is there anything left to say? The war has been won. "Free" has become a reality in music. No need to sell the idea anymore.

So let's move on to discussions about what fans WILL buy. (And by this, I don't mean more discussions about digital music pricing. That topic has been done to death, too. And I'm also not talking about "monetization." That concept may be relevant to startups but doesn't really tell us much about fan purchase behavior.) In these tough economic times, what are we learning about the economic exchange between fans and artists? 

One of the few places that is actually providing some info about direct marketing to fans is this site. They aren't yet giving specifics about who is selling and who is buying what, but it is a start.

100 Days of Data (or Why Execution Matters), Topspin, 5/1/09

And here is a link from the radio show Hearts of Space explaining what they have done.

No one was going to give us any kind of funding, and our traffic numbers made any thought of advertising support a fantasy.

That said, it has taken us a long time to understand the value calculation that users make when deciding whether to pay. We have found that the entire area is very nuanced, and the relationship between free, paid, and 'freemium' models takes careful experimentation to get right. We wound up with 3 major levels of service and no less than 25 different pricing options! (see PLANS at www.hos.com) "Cheap is the new free," spatial relations, 4/20/09 

Also: Why Pay for Hearts of Space?

Free is the reality. But don't tell me about it anymore. 

Suzanne Lainson

@slainson on Twitter

UPDATE 9/13/09

Here's another resource if you want to explore the "give it away for free" discussion. Freemium Blog - 37 Best Freemium Links

The Renaissance Musician

I've been exploring the idea that today's successful musician is expected to communicate well with fans in addition to writing and playing music. 

But after reading this by singer/songwriter Shaun Groves, I realized what we really want are renaissance musicians. We need them to be creative across multiple platforms.  

... labels are used to creating and maintaining the image of an artist: focusing and filtering, controlling who can and can’t have access, and how much, when and where. There’s one official bio and one fact sheet carefully crafted in a record company office and then parroted by every media outlet. That’s not possible on-line. And that’s distressing, fatal even, if an artist has nothing to say or, worse, has lots to say about things that don’t matter to anyone but them. Hair products, high priced jeans and guitar pedals aren’t all that interesting to folks with real jobs. The public is now discovering through an artist’s blog what publicists have known for quite some time and expertly covered up: This guy’s just a singer. And that’s no basis for a relationship. "If the Music Business Dies,"Shlog, 5/21/09

The online world accentuates the differences between those who are especially creative and those who are fundamentally dull and unimaginative.

Of course, we've always valued musicians who have pushed boundaries. The Beatles not only wrote and performed music, they starred in movies, they gave funny interviews, and they went on spiritual pilgrimages. In addition, Lennon wrote fiction, drew pictures, and staged performance art.

More recently we've had David Byrne who, in addition to founding Talking Heads and collaborating with Brian Eno, has scored operas and a ballet, started a record label, and exhibited art, photography, and design work in a number of galleries. 

And even more recently, we've had Nellie McKay who, in addition to being a critically acclaimed singer/songwriter, has performed on Broadway, has appeared in a movie, does book reviews for the New York Times, is a social activist,  and is currently scoring a musical.

Looking for examples of multi-taskers who are also very active online, there's John Mayer. He writes, records, and performs music. He's also written for Esquire, done stand-up comedy, and hosted a TV special. And he has become a Twitter celebrity.

Even more influential in cyberspace is Trent Reznor. 

Trent Reznor, frontman and mastermind of Nine Inch Nails, has become the poster boy for modern artist etiquette, having paved the way for an entirely new music business attitude through forward-thinking marketing concepts that center on communicating with fans directly, rather than the bureaucratic multilayered insulation of the past. Reznor never hides behind a larger-than-life character persona, instead representing himself as a real person, very frequently posting updates to his own site and sharing his insights/fears/hopes/frustrations with his fans directly. He's even active on Twitter. But as remarkable as that somehow still is, it's small potatoes compared to the bigger outside-the-box schemes Reznor's pulled in recent years. "Trent Reznor: Rewriting the Playbook," CraveOnline.com, 3/3/09

And someone I have cited in a number of blog entries is Amanda Palmer.

Flavorpill: Do you think of yourself as an artist, or as a musician, as someone who’s involved with theater, in literary endeavors, things like that.

Amanda Palmer: I don’t really think much about it. I know how I don’t feel. I don’t really feel like a songwriter, even though I do it all the time… I certainly don’t feel like a piano player. I feel like a hack in all of those categories. I’m also not an actress, and I’m not really a director. I’m not really a writer. But I do all of these things… When I clean my apartment, I clean one fork and one spoon, and then I go thumb through a book on the floor. I used to think that was fucked up, but now I realize that just how I work. I don’t feel so guilty anymore. And, you know, eventually it’s clean. The people that I saw when I was a kid, my idols – Cyndi Lauper and Prince, David Bowie – those people were never just doing one thing. I was lured into that particular job. "Amanda Palmer On Why Dresden Dolls Are Over and Roadrunner Is Out," Flavorwire, 5/20/09

So we may be missing the big picture if we put so much emphasis on social media as a music marketing tool. Many artists will bomb at it. The ones likely to excel will be those who are fundamentally interesting. It's going to be less important for an artist to look good. It's going to be much more important for an artist to be someone you'd like to be stranded on a desert island with.

Suzanne Lainson

UPDATE 6/10/09

Trent Reznor has decided to get off Twitter. 

What you've seen happen with the marketing and presentation of NIN over the last years is a direct result of living next to you, listening to you, consuming with you and interacting with you. Directly. There's no handlers or PR people here, it's me and my guys - that's it. There's no real plan, even - it's just trying to do the right thing that respects you the fan, the music, and me the artist. That's the goal - a mutual and shared respect.

When Twitter made it's way to my radar I looked at it as a curiosity, then started experimenting. I thought it through and in light of where I was / am in my career I decided to lower the curtain a bit and let you see more of my personality. ...

... The problem with really getting engaged in a community is getting through the clutter and noise. In a closed environment like nin.com a lot of this can be moderated away, or code can be implemented to make it more difficult for troublemakers to persist. It's tedious and feels like wasted energy doing that shit, but some people exist to ruin it for others - and they are the ones who have nothing better to do with their time. "Online communities, etc." NIN Forum, 6/10/09

UPDATE, 6/20/09

Here's part of a great interview with Amanda Palmer talking about being a multi-tasker.

I simply feel blessed that I’m an emotional exhibitionist right around the time is seems to be expected and en vogue. I love it - so I'm lucky. Plenty of musicians and artists out there AREN'T built that way, and so there's a level of unfairness.... I also feel lucky because I only loosely define myself as a musician. I got into music and taught myself how to play the piano and write songs as a means to an end - connection and art. I never wanted to be a great piano player, or a great singer.

It's closer to say I wanted to be a great PERFORMER. Of any kind. And performing via blog, twitter and twitpic is completely legitimate; it feeds my needs just fine. Whereas if I'd really been interested in just being an artist solely respected for my virtuosic musical talents (like, perhaps, a classical musician might), I might find all this connecting and online performing very bothersome. But I don't. I enjoy the medium it as a satisfying end in itself. If asked, nowadays, what I am, I could easily say "I'm a musician...and an online performance artist". Why not? "Interview: Amanda 'Fucking' Palmer (Part 1)," Hypebot, 7/20/09.