Society
runs on the construct of getting something for something.
We can
hear this echoed in everyday speech.
'An
honest days pay for an honest days work.'
'You
don't get something for nothing.'
The so
called entitlement society is currently lambasted at every turn and
in that itself is just the latter 'you don't get something for
nothing' phrase oft repeated with a jumble of different words.
People
can rush forward to claim that I am wrong and provide examples of
people they know who often do selfless acts for others, and at an
initial glance it is easy to accept that, but dig deeper and it is
rarely true.
What
these people can get is a sense of satisfaction, a boost to their
self worth, a goodwill favour in the bank to be collected at a future
date, the respect of their community and more.
Not that
I am criticizing these people.
In fact I
find their actions often worthy of praise, and the goodwill they
receive for helping others is well deserved and should never be
withheld from them.
They
deserve our gratitude.
It still
remains that when one individual is helped then the person providing
the help benefits by giving themselves a positive boost to their
psych though.
There is
still a quid pro quo process at work.
This
something for something attitude works fine in the main, but it also
lends itself to being exploited.
This
exploitation comes into the equation when the balance is off.
It
happens when one party takes a large slice of the cake, and then
leaves a minuscule amount for the other who participates in the
transaction.
If you
want an example consider one individual who ask another to build a
garden shed for them as a semi-favour.
Let's
just say they know each other from the pub.
The first
pays for the material and that comes to £100 and then they excuse
themselves and leave the second individual to spend three days
constructing the shed.
The
second individual also provides all the tools required for the job to
be done.
Once
finished the person is paid £30 for their efforts.
It's a
mate and it's a semi-favour so that's fine.
The first
then sells the shed for £600.
It's no
longer fine is it?
The
balance has shifted drastically.
This is
something that can be described as being unethical, but then again
others would be quick to say that 'it's just business'.
Those who
say that it is just business are unsurprisingly in the main the ones
who are sitting with a cupboard full of cake though.
So now I
will get to my point after laying that groundwork, and it is a word
of warning to musicians.
Only ever
pay to have your material used when you have weighed up all the
benefits to yourself and there is a balance there.
When you
enter into an agreement that allows one participant to profit through
your providing of your artistic labour then you must think very
clearly about it all.
You may
be participating in your own exploitation by jumping into bed with
them.
A
sensible approach would be to ask yourself right from the get go what
is in it for them, and what you will get in return.
Weigh it
up, and then decide what you want to do.
Take a
week to do it.
Consider
if the offer is mutually beneficial, and if so then go for it.
If you
can live with the losing out a little on the deal, but still think it
is advantageous then that's fine.
If you
are however looking at a very slim slice of the cake then please do
yourself a favour and refuse to pull a chair up to the table.
Of course
there will be enticements added to the deal to make it appear more
attractive.
There
always are.
Beware of
them.
A good
deal doesn't need enticements.
Basically
just never casually jump into an agreement.
If for
instance you want your material aired on a radio station then why pay
for that when there are so many who are passionate supporters of
music and will gladly offer airtime at no cost to you.
What they
are looking for is an audience and then sponsorship and advertising
to create a solid financial foundation to their project.
To get
that they need to accrue quality material to play and find a niche
market to promote it to.
You are
helping them reach their goals by providing them with your material,
and in return they are helping you by promoting your music to a
(hopefully) ever growing audience.
There's
that mutually beneficial deal right there.
If they
were to ask you to financially contribute something to ensure
airplay, or increased airplay, then what has happened is that they
have just asked you to build a shed for them.
Think
about it.
Be part
of the solution and not the problem by refusing to be exploited.
No comments:
Post a Comment