A recent piece of research by VideoInk and video analytics firm Tubular Labs claimed that music videos account for 38.4% of all views on YouTube, reinforcing the Google subsidiary’s position as the world’s biggest streaming music service.
“We’ve paid out to the music industry over the last several years over a billion dollars,” said vice president of YouTube content Tom Pickett during a panel session at the Midem music industry show in Cannes this week, during which he also stressed that “we are all-in on music”.
Not everyone is convinced. A key theme of this year’s Midem has been continued resentment towards YouTube and its parent company from musicians, independent labels and industry bodies alike. Pickett was heckled during his panel session, and the conference also saw regular anti-Google outbursts from speakers.
“Google are not music people, and that scares me,” said Colin Daniels of Australian independent music firm Inertia, which helped solo artist Passenger break big last year.
“I am concerned with YouTube entering the market because for YouTube everything is about dominance, and dominance is connected to destruction,” said Horst Weidenmueller of well-respected indie firm !K7. “I would rather prefer perhaps Google not being in music.”
Friction between Google/YouTube and the music industry is not a new trend, and there are many ways the two sides are working together, from YouTube helping labels to identify user-generated videos using their tracks and make money from them, through to the Google Play music subscription service.
Even British industry body the BPI, which has been a regular critic of Google over the high rankings for piracy sites on its search engine, has launched its own YouTube channel called Transmitter to promote British artists’ music – illustrating the perception of Google as both copyright foe and distribution friend for music companies.
Still, the foe camp have been increasingly prominent at the Midem conference this week, questioning Google and YouTube’s commitment to music, and wondering why the money it pays out to labels and publishers (who then pass it on to artists) isn’t even higher.
BPI chief executive Geoff Taylor drew attention to this while on-stage with YouTube’s Pickett, comparing YouTube unflatteringly to streaming music services like Spotify and Deezer, which mix advertising-funded free streaming with premium subscription tiers.
“I think YouTube has lacked that, and that has been a problem for the industry,” said Taylor. “When I looked at the billions of streams there were in music videos, and the pounds and pence coming in to the industry from that, it was a very small number.”
The streaming rivals are fuelling this debate. Deezer’s chief executive Axel Dauchez called YouTube “the most important legal pirate” during another Midem panel session, while Spotify recently contrasted its own average payout of $6,000 – $8,400 per million streams to the $3,000 per million streams paid out on average by a “video streaming service”. While unnamed, the reference to YouTube was clear.
YouTube has its defenders in the music industry too, some of whom spoke out at Midem. “It’s a top-five revenue source now at most of the labels, and it’s going up. It’s not perfect, but they’re moving in the right direction,” said Tom Silverman from independent label Tommy Boy.
Meanwhile, some of the multi-channel networks (MCNs) helping musicians make more money from YouTube suggested that increasing payouts requires making cleverer use of Google’s service, rather than simply demanding higher per-stream rates.
“It’s no longer an album cycle, it’s a 12-month content cycle. For every piece of content you release, there should be 6-8 other pieces of content to support that,” said Brandon Martinez, chief executive of music MCN INDMusic, which helped indie label Mad Decent capitalise on last year’s viral YouTube success of Baauer’s Harlem Shake track.
Jordan Berliant, of The Collective Music Group, was more blunt in his appraisal of why some labels complain about YouTube. “It’s not a place to make money right now, but it’s not primarily because of YouTube or Google in my mind, it’s because the people representing the content primarily don’t understand the marketplace.”
Some of those people’s concerns about YouTube tie in to their wider arguments with Google over its copyright policies, though. During Pickett’s panel session, one audience member demanded to know what YouTube is doing about ‘stream-ripping’ services that enable people to convert videos into MP3 downloads. He was backed up by BPI boss Taylor.
“We’ve been asking YouTube to deal with these stream-ripping applications for many years. YouTube is supposed to be an ad-funded streaming service, not a free download service,” said Taylor, comparing these talks with the BPI’s separate efforts to persuade Google to downgrade piracy sites in its search engine. “We can’t understand why it’s taken so long for Google and YouTube to do something about this.”