Conflicts of Interest: Payola

Ellie Roberto 
ecroberto22@gmail.com style="text-align: left;">

 

Conflicts of Interest: Payola  

 

The radio industry in the 1960s and 70s was booming with the sounds of rock 'n roll. Record labels wanted their songs on the radios in people's homes and cars, and they could do so with an extra push and some cash. This is called a payola. 

If a record company wanted a client's song on the radio, it could pay the DJ to play it on the station rotation. The DJs happily took the extra money in their pockets just to play a song, but it gave pay-for-play songs an unfair advantage in the music industry. This was the norm until these payola deals were exposed and people started to question the ethics and morals of the music industry. 

Picture source: Slate.com

A Turning Point

In 1959, Alan Freed and Dick Clark with hundreds of other DJs admitted to having accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes, which were framed as "consulting fees."  The American public now knew the secret of payola. 

Payola was outlawed in 1960 by Congress, but there were loopholes. The problem was never completely solved. Today, payola looks different but is essentially the same unethical issue. Independent promoters pay radio stations and music journalists in party invitations, prizes, concert tickets, swag, and more perks; AKA gifts for airplay.

How is pay-for-play a conflict of interest? 

You now know the history of payola, but what are its ethical issues?  

Let me ask a question? Judging from what we discussed about the history of payola, which journalist would you trust more to give you a fair and honest album review? A journalist who had just attended the album's release party via an invite from the artist's label or a journalist who has not had any contact with the artist or label and only listened to the album in his/her home. 

If you choose the first journalist, you could be right. He/she could have given an honest review after the listening party, but let me point out some conflicts of interest that could change your opinion. 

Accepting gifts from clients or subjects is extremely questionable and unacceptable in most codes of ethics. PRSSA's code of ethics says, "Avoid actions and circumstances that may appear to compromise good business judgment or create a conflict between personal and professional interests." By failing to remain independent from the subject or client, journalists and PR professionals are risking their credibility. 

The first journalist in our scenario is more liekly to give the artist or record a glowing review because he was treated to a fun party beforehand. In this case, we should most likely trust the second journalist. 

It's very debated as to whether or not expecting gifts is wrong for music writers. It certainly calls into question many ethical codes; however many journalists argue that some payola is necessary to perform their jobs. 

Freelance writer Gina Arnald says, "\"Much as it would probably be a beautiful thing if we didn't get those for free," she says, "I don't think it would be very practical. I don't really think we could be informed critics without those."

Many music journalists struggle over this question of morality when it comes to their livelihoods. Is a conflict of interest totally unacceptable in the music world?