[Fmpro] ASCAP

[Mark Northam]

Hi Doug -

Thanks for your note - since it was my "math" post that you took exception
to, I'll reply in a few areas...

On 7/19/07 8:27 AM, "Doug Wood" <daw at procomposers.org> wrote:

> HI friends,
> 
> I agree with many of the sentiments expressed here, but some misinformation
> has been posted (there's a surprise!) and rumors have been posited as fact.

That's a nasty jab at this list as a whole, Doug. Please post the specific
"misinformation and rumors" you refer to or retract your accusation.

> First I would remind readers that the ASCAP Board is made up of twenty-four
> individuals who may not all agree on the current distribution rules. Many
> have never voted on the rules. So be wary of inflammatory posts which lump
> all Board members together as "cowards" or some sort of evil clan. These
> posters know better, or should.

Until you ASCAP Board Members start observing ASCAP's promises of
"transparency" rather than keeping virtually all details of Board Meetings
secret from the membership, we have no choice but to lump you all together.
You go out of your way, through your actions, to avoid any individual
accountability for your votes, motions, or any other aspect of your official
actions as board members. You can't have it both ways.... If you want to be
held individually accountable, you can't hide your individual actions on the
Board from the membership.

> Second, broadcasters do not pay $123 for a minute of music.

As you know, I never said that. Here's the actual post:

> Suppose a broadcaster pays $123.60 and airs three minutes of music - one
> minute of song, another minute of score (all within TV programs) and one
> minute of music in a commercial (not a pop song, etc).

It obviously was a hypothetical example of a blanket license fee used to
vividly show how unfair the weightings are, and how much money could
potentially be funneled to the songwriters. Once again, ASCAP, while
promising "our books are open to all" hides ALL relevant details of the
distribution when it comes to any breakdowns by genre or performance type,
so we can only guess at what the true damage is to composers whose
per-minute rate is so heavily penalized by the weighting formulas you and
your Board member pals are responsible for maintaining.

But since you brought it up, would you mind sharing what the per-minute cost
is for any of ASCAP's larger broadcast clients (license fee divided by total
number of music tracked and paid during the period the license fee paid
for)? 

> I can't and won't defend the current ASCAP distribution formula - indeed,
> the reform of this formula was the reason I originally ran for the Board and
> has been the primary item on my campaign platform every election since. But
> change will require time, energy, focus, determination, and the support of
> 13 Board members and the members of ASCAP.

That's a sad statement, Doug. You've had enough time for some real reform.
But you have on so many occasions chosen to side with your pals on the Board
rather than speak and work publicly for reform. Granted, you're in a tough
spot, but in my opinion you've been far too loyal to the political apparatus
at ASCAP whose priority seems to be keeping the discrimination against
instrumental music in place at any cost, and have missed many opportunities
to publicly speak for reform. May I humbly say that your "work from within"
policy of making trying to make pals out of the same people responsible for
the decades of discrimination isn't working very well, at least when it
comes to concrete results. But I appreciate your efforts.

Instead, we've seen tens of millions of dollars dumped into MediaGuide which
primarily benefits radio writers, independent candidates shut out of the
elections, a small change in the weightings, and more secrecy than ever at
ASCAP. Transparency is a joke today at ASCAP, and you know it. Instead, we
have a regime that will say and do anything to remain in power, including
destroying any realistic opportunity for independent candidates to get on
the ballot. I find it amazing that you say (and do?) so little about what is
nothing less than an assault on the ASCAP democratic election system -
especially considering you got on the board in the first place as an
independent candidate!
 
> I can help supply the first four of those, and I will do everything to
> garner support of other Board members. However, the civil but vocal support
> of ASCAP members is critical. If you can avoid the name calling, the rumor
> mongering, the half-truths, the distortions, and the temptation to jump to
> other subjects, we can get this done.

So now you're saying that we as composers should SUPPORT all the
discrimination aimed towards us? Let's be glad we're getting 20 cents on the
dollar for a one minute cue compared to a minute of song because gee, maybe
we might be getting less if the songwriters' greed was even more? That's
exactly the attitude of failure and retreat that has gotten composers into
the boat we're in now. Lousy royalty rates, no union, etc.

You show me some pro-composer policies that the ASCAP Board has passed and
I'll be the FIRST to support them. And frankly, I take no joy in publicly
exposing ASCAP's discriminatory policies, especially given the ASCAP
retribution I've been on the receiving end of. But I'm sick and tired of
waiting for ASCAP to reform from within, and the Board obviously isn't ready
to do the right thing on their own, so pressure is all that's left, as with
any democratic system. Each of us have to do what we believe is right to
instigate change in the system. Some from within, others externally.

> And yes, I still fly in the back of the plane and use my miles to reduce
> ticket costs. After all, it's members' money.

So are you ready to disclose to this list your knowledge about whether the
other Board members fly coach or not, especially since, as you said, it's
our money they're spending?

Will you, for once, choose individual accountability to the members who foot
the bills over loyalty and secrecy to your pals on the board? I don't know
of any ASCAP regulation that prohibits you from disclosing the travel
policies of your fellow board members, so the ball's in your court.

And if you do dare disclose it, I promise it won't show up as a headline in
Film Music Magazine :-)


Best,

Mark Northam