This article examines a striking but under-analysed feature of culture under capitalism, using the example of music: that the main ways in which people gain access to cultural experiences are subject to frequent, radical and disorienting shifts. It has two main aims. The first is to provide a macro-historical, multi-causal explanation of changes in technologies of musical consumption, emphasising the mutual imbrication of the economic interests of corporations with sociocultural transformations. We identify a shift over the last twenty years from consumer electronics (CE) to information technology (IT) as the most powerful sectoral force shaping how music and culture are mediated and experienced, and argue that this shift from CE to IT drew upon, and in turn quickened, a shift from domestic consumption to personalised, mobile and connected consumption, and from dynamics of what Raymond Williams called 'mobile privatisation' to what we call 'networked mobile personalisation'. The second aim is to assess change and continuity in the main means by which recorded music is consumed, in long-term perspective. We argue that disruptions caused by recent 'digitalisation' of music are consistent with longer term processes, whereby music has been something of a testing ground for the introduction of new cultural technologies. But we also recognise particularly high levels of disruption in recent times and relate these to the new dominance of the IT industries, and the particular dynamism or instability of that sector. We close by discussing the degree to which constant changes in how people access musical experiences might be read as instances of capitalism's tendency to prioritise limiting notions of consumer preference over meaningful needs.

This article examines the roles of platform-based distribution and user data in the digital music economy. Drawing on trade press, newspaper coverage, and a consumer privacy complaint, we offer a critical analysis of tech-music partnerships forged between Samsung and Jay-Z (2013), Apple iTunes Store and U2 (2014), Tidal and Kanye West (2016), and Apple Music and Drake (2017). In these cases, information technology (IT) companies supported album releases, and music was used to generate user data and attention: logics of data and attention capture were interwoven. The IT and music industries have adapted their business strategies to what we conceptualize as platform-based capital accumulation or ‘platform accumulation’, and models centred on controlling access and extracting rent have enabled the emergence of new monopolies and IT gatekeepers.

Charges of "selling out" and debates about the boundaries of cultural autonomy have played a pivotal role in the development of popular music as a legitimate and "serious" art form. With promotional strategies and commercial business practices now practically inseparable from the core activities previously associated with music making, the relevance of such concepts and the values that underpin them are questioned by industry experts, musicians, and fans. In this article, we explore how popular music making and perspectives on selling out have been shaped by digitalization, promotionalism, and globalization.

The devaluation of the recorded music commodity under digitalization has destabilized the recording industry. One primary record industry response is the new “360 deal” form of the recording contract. By securing rights to individual acts’ live performance, music publishing and licensing, and merchandizing activities, this new deal expands record companies’ access to more profitable fields of music industry activity (if in piecemeal fashion). We examine the context, evolution, and varieties of the 360 deal, and argue that it re-secures record industry profitability and further stratifies the population of recording artists by shifting risk onto performers.La dévaluation marchande de la musique qui accompagne la numérisation a déstabilisé l’industrie de l’enregistrement sonore en Amérique du nord. Cet article en explore l’une des principales réponses: le nouveau contrat “360 degrés.” En leur assurant des droits sur le spectacle vivant, l’édition musicale et les activités reliées aux produits dérivés d’artistes individuels, ce nouveau contrat élargit l’accès des maisons de disques à des champs d’activité industrielle plus rentables (même de façon fragmentaire). Nous proposons de rendre compte du contexte, de l’évolution et de la diversité des contrats 360 degrés, arguant qu’en reléguant la responsabilité des risques et des investissements aux artistes, l’industrie de l’enregistrement sonore ré-assure sa rentabilité et polarise davantage la population entre artistes établis et de la relève, fortifiant la position des premiers et intensifiant la vulnérabilité des seconds.

No abstract