Every artist should have a website, right?
Well, not exactly. At the Bandwidth Music & Technology Conference in San Francisco on Friday, this was actually one of several debates. According to a number of smaller artists, managers, and indie label heads, sometimes building a site is simply too time-consuming and expensive.
Especially when the real action is happening on Facebook, Twitter, and other platforms. “I just go to Facebook to find an artist,” relayed one 21-year-old attendee during a session headed by Lee Hammond of Interscope Geffen A&M. Another noted that “even some good indie bands” lack a dedicated site, and Hammond admitted that many major label artists are simply disconnected from their digital landing pads.
Surprise: there are no rules in this emerging industry, so lose your religion fast. But the advantages of well-developed, well-trafficked sites are easy to list. For starters, the site allows the artist to control ecommerce, and offer sophisticated bundling packages. That also means capturing a much larger cut, as well as fan emails, location stats, feedback, and other critical information bits. And, perhaps the guru-level approach positions the site as a highly-connected hub, one that breathes within an ecosystem that includes MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, Ustream, and even virtual worlds.
The site also lessens the reliance on third-party providers and platforms, and their finicky audiences, rules, and business models. That means control and greater stability in a topsy-turvy terrain, though it also involves lots of care and maintenance.
Report by publisher Paul Resnikoff in San Francisco.