Thoughts On American Gospel Music
I finally got to see a copy of the American Gospel Music proposal. The document had no date, so I'm assuming it's the original proposal that was floating around before NQC. If you'd like to read it for yourself, click HERE. (This link resides on Sogospelnews' server, so thanks is due to the Unthanks for providing access.)
The document's full title is:
The Plan to Power Brand: A Proposal to the Southern Gospel Music Industry from Christian Music Presenters, Inc., Vivici Marketing, Inc. and the National Quartet Convention, Inc.
By Dr. Randall A. Bayne, Dr. Roy J. Hayes, Mr. Jim Gibson and Mr. Clarke W. Beasley
This proposal is indeed a bold move...quite possibly, it's the bold move that will grow Southern Gospel in the long-term. I definitely believe growth of the industry could come from having a unifying brand for the best artists and denying access to that brand for artists who fail to meet quality standards. At it's core, the proposal is positive.
I have to admire the blunt way they describe the current state of the industry, and how they've directed their attention to just about every area of the industry that matters. Here's how they describe the current climate, and I think they're right on target with this statement.
a climate whereby doors are closed to the upper echelon professionals of our industry because of being lumped together with the poor quality of the custom recording amateurs.
The proposal isn't perfect, though. I've read Doug Harrison's four "logic flaws" regarding AGM, and while I agree with him in principle, I think there's a more serious area. This area has nothing to do with whether NQC can be trusted to choose which artists qualify as AGM artists (they probably can, but some will disagree); or whether the church really wants to hear the top echelon of current Southern Gospel artists (they do, but just don't know it); or whether artists will want to pay to be spiritually "certified" (they will, if it means singing at huge events); or whether or not the word "american" opens more doors than the word "southern" (it probably does).
The flaw is that AGM assumes the answer to EVERY area of the market is licensing their brand. If everyone pays, no one is the salesman. AGM is too "license happy." Sure, artists, record labels, etc. should pay for access to the brand, but the media (even radio) is expected to pony up licensing fees as well.
The title is right. This is definitely "The Plan To Power Brand."
In some ways, it can be viewed as a house of cards. This won't work unless a number of key entities get on board. They pretty much admit that if Singing News balks, their plan won't work. Here's a quote from the document that emphasizes just how crucial they consider a Singing News endorsement to be:
This re-branding would need to be promoted and emphasized by the Singing News, both in the positioning of their magazine and their editorial content. We would need support from the Singing News focusing the vast majority of their coverage on the artists and events that qualify to carry the brand.
Whether or not they sign on to be an official AGM publication, I suspect Singing News will get on board with promoting AGM given the number of ads AGM should be able to afford to buy, what with licensing fees coming in from virtually every corner of the market...but what if radio doesn't get on board? Media outlets"really aren't expected to sign up until they see the success of the brand in other areas. The document states:
With the brand secured and established, media outlets would want to use the brand...
Wouldn't it make a lot more sense in terms of establishing the brand to give media outlets a license for FREE from the outset, as long as their content qualifies?
It makes no financial sense to ask budget strapped, tight-wad SG radio owners to pay for the privilege of promoting AGM artists...$3000 annually, no less, to be able to say, "You're listening to the best in American Gospel Music" and print the AGM logo on their business cards. Here's the biggest whopping logic flaw of all...RADIO WOULD BE PAYING AGM FOR THE HONOR OF RESTRICTING THEIR PLAYLIST TO AGM ARTISTS. Isn't that something AGM ought be buying? I'm not talking about payola, of course...of course I'm not...I'm just pointing out how ludicrous this seems.
It would make a lot more sense to to bring radio on board as one of the key beneficiaries of AGM's efforts, not one of the providers for AGM's success. I should mention that the $3000 annual fee also gives radio stations the opportunity to report to the AGM chart and be considered in the AGM Awards. They want radio to PAY to report to a chart. Get that? PAY.
I think AGM could very well attract new fans to the industry, and that is naturally everyone's greatest hope for this proposal.
My second greatest hope for AGM was that it might offer a way to cure what has been the Achilles Heel of this industry for decades...horrible SG radio programming. This sure doesn't seem like a plan that will work in that regard. Southern Gospel radio is in the mire both financially and in terms of programming quality. SG radio needs to be saved from itself, not asked to pay a portion of the price for getting AGM up and running.
I guess I could sum up my reaction to the proposal by saying I think AGM will probably land somewhere around 70% on the more good than harm meter. Seriously, my total reaction to the overall proposal is favorable. Obviously I'm somewhere in the neighborhood of 100% annoyed that the biggest problem in the entire genre was addressed in such unrealistic terms, though.
If they flip that junk around, this thing might really fly.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Comments
Page 1 of 1 Comment Pages
Page 1 of 1 Comment Pages
|
Categories
Archives
- February, 2007
- November, 2006
- September, 2006
- August, 2006
- July, 2006
- June, 2006
- May, 2006
- April, 2006
- March, 2006
- February, 2006
- January, 2006
Syndicate
Southern Gospel News
Southern Gospel Blogs
Links
Member Login
|
I disagree with that point. I think defining the very best groups the industry has to offer would give up-and-coming groups a clearer goal than they currently have.
One area of concern is the gulf that would be created between the AGM artists and those local groups who are working their butts off to be the best. Although they may be improving by leaps and bounds, yet they don't have the financial wherewithal or the industry exposure to even come close to attaining the CMP requirements to become an AGM artist. The need to be able to cultivate new talent is paramount. We have some great "upper eschelon" groups in SGM right now to get the process going, but many of them have been out there for 15 years or more! Don't get me wrong, there are groups out there on their way, but the gap between them and the afore mentioned "upper eschelon" groups may create a lapse in the desired proliferation of the industry. Just my initial thought.