Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

The acceleration of the digital transformation of our societies is causing imbalances in traditional social interrelations, and the speed of the change makes it difficult at times to reset or adjust them. All markets have been affected by imbalances, with some more pronounced than others. The cultural sector is no different. The value chain has seen a readjustment of the actors involved – including the emergence of new actors and practical disappearance of others – brought about by a number of factors: the phenomenon of online consumption (and the corresponding scourge of digital piracy), the huge upsurge in the amount of content available globally and the resulting increase in consumption and competition, the use of new tools in the creative process, the explosion of artificial intelligence, and the emergence of ‘virtual worlds’ or metaverses. Given that the cultural ecosystem is fragile and insecure by nature, and because these changes have taken place with such speed and in the absence of a timely or adequate legal response, this sector has probably suffered and continues to suffer more than others in adapting to the new reality, in terms of the conditions for artists and creators, primarily, but also the entire value chain.

There is no doubt that music is one of the cultural sub-systems that has undergone the most dramatic change. In just a few years we have moved from vinyl records and CDs to mass online consumption. Today, the public streams music via online platforms that operate globally and offer access to millions of musical tracks (up to 300 million). Even the music radio model is now in decline. Never before has so much music been listened to in the world and never before has there been so much access to an infinite variety of artists, styles and forms. Never before has music’s financial ‘pie’ been so large. This situation is in itself paradoxical, however: never before has the situation of creators and performers been so insecure – with the exception of a handful of highly successful artists – and never before has the most popular music encompassed so few styles.

Indeed, we are witnessing an extreme commodification of the musical experience in which the less popular styles are heard less frequently, as are the less common languages, even in their home countries. The creation of a large online global music market has resulted in an increasingly uniform playlist, carved out of lists of recommendations and algorithms that increasingly encapsulate listeners’ tastes.

It is difficult for composers or performers of minority or experimental styles to get exposure on platforms offering a vast selection of music. If artists do not appear on the main lists of recommendations or home screens of these platforms, they are left out in the cold. Radio stations no longer have much sway in terms of getting new names onto the market; the only alternatives are other social networks, which undermine the artistic experience to an even greater extent.

The need to be included in recommendation systems has led to practices such as so-called payola schemes, which force artists to accept lower revenues in exchange for greater visibility. This is clearly a terrible practice, bearing in mind, too, that the royalties that streaming services pay creators and performers for their work are pitiful. Artists whose tracks are listened to hundreds of thousands of times every year cannot make a living and have to seek additional income from live performances, classes or other activities. This is simply unsustainable.

It is vital to carry out a thorough analysis of the music sector’s value chain in order to identify the imbalances and put in place corrective measures through legal tools and/or codes of good practice. We must not allow our analysis to be influenced by prejudices, myths or the demonisation of certain actors in the music market. All actors play an essential role and they all need to see a readjustment to ensure the sustainability and emergence of new artists and musical works.

‘United in diversity’ is the motto of the European Union. This phrase, which appears in the preamble to our founding Treaty, is to be interpreted in two fundamental ways, both as an observation and as a duty:

– It is through culture that we are founded as a project of civilisation; the European Union without the culture inherent in all its human communities is merely an empty shell, lacking any soul.

– It is the EU’s duty to ensure diversity: the project is meaningless without it. That diversity is reflected not only in the linguistic and ethnographic aspects, but also in the protection of the very creative magma of our societies.

In line with this dual interpretation of our declaration, the European Union has on several occasions introduced rules to protect cultural activity and the rights of artists and creators, both physically and digitally. Now we need to take steps that ensure the sustainability of the music sector and allow us to generate wealth, both spiritual and financial. This report serves as a recommendation that we have drawn up in the EP’s Committee on Culture and Education to fulfil our own responsibility in this regard. The text – discussed in detail with the sector – aims to identify the shortcomings in the market and propose solutions.

‘Without music, life would be but a mistake, exhaustion, exile’, said Nietzsche. Music is probably the most metaphysical, inexplicable and unfathomable artistic experience that humans can enjoy; it is that ‘spell’ that Nietzsche also talked about. We must do everything in our power to keep that magic alive in Europe.