"The [Music] business no
longer revolves around record labels as much as it once did."
-Tamara
Conniff, Billboard executive editor.
Interesting to see a music industry related company adapting to new realities: "More may follow as music’s borders become increasingly porous."
Here’s an excerpt:
"Billboard, the bible of the ever-changing music industry, has made some big changes of its own, for the first time since 1963. The weekly magazine has undergone a redesign, with a less cluttered cover and expanded coverage of topics like marketing and unsigned bands.
Billboard, published by the VNU Business Media division of VNU, wanted to adapt to the times. Forty years ago, music moguls had no inkling that songs would be bought online or used as cellphone ring tones, or that new bands could get a big break in television commercials.
"We see a lot of opportunity in this industry, which for the last several years was an industry in distress," said John Kilcullen, president and publisher at the magazine. "Billboard should take a leadership position to showcase the innovators."
Old and new versions:
More from exec editor Tamara Conniff: The music industry "encompasses technology companies, brand managers, ad agencies, film companies and television companies. "You’ve got all these different companies, but they still don’t speak the same language. In order for the music industry to grow and for these other areas, like technology and brand marketing, to get what they need from the music business, they need to understand each other."
If a dead-tree publication can adapt to the digital age, perhaps the recording industry can also. (Just kidding!)
Source:
As Technology Transforms Music, Billboard Magazine Changes, Too
Nat Ives
NYT, April 25, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/25/business/media/25billboard.html
Insane. I saw “Music Week” in the UK go down this route on its way to irrelevance. When a trade magazine decides to make itself over as a consumer title, it’s an obvious sign of trouble and lost direction.