Along with JFK, one of the greatest murder mysteries in modern American history is death of Tupac and Biggie (not to mention Jam Master Jay).  Like the JFK assassination, theories fly around but there’s still no definitive answer (unless you believe the Warren Commission and/or the LAPD).  One reporter who’s been tireless tracking the story of Tupac’s demise and circumstance surrounding it is Los Angeles Times writer Chuck Philips.  Initially, the big story was Philips’ recent revelation of P. Diddy’s involvement in a savage attack on Tupac but now that’s turned into an embarrassed retraction.  This ain’t an easy story to untangle but it’s worth wading through some of the history here.

Though it was reported there when it happened in the mid-90’s, the deepening story of Tupac’s undoing and the L.A. Times goes back to the 2002 when Philips started to dive into this mystery.  Who Killed Tupac Shukar a headline asked that year.  The article included a number of bombshells, including linking the murder to an L.A. gang and the murder weapon to Biggie himself (which Smalls’ family denied).  Because the circumstances were such a complex web and because not enough people were coming forward with information and the ones that did were suspect, the article was far from the final word about the story.

(continue...)

—Jason Gross

Brilliant it ain’t… Just another example of the short-sighted attitude that the industry keeps employing to destroy itself.  Why would they want their music available to the public in Canadian libraries and have another chance to experience and appreciate it?  They’re too busy firing their staffs, suing downloaders, etc..  This MacLeans’ article documents their latest round of stupidity.  Bet on this- history ain’t gonna judge them kindly.

—Jason Gross

Satellite radio services XM and Sirius just got a nice present from the weak-kneed Dept. of Justice in the form of a stamp of approval for their merger.  As the NY Times reports, it’s great news for the two companies and their stock holders but will not be great for consumers who will now have to deal with one mega-company for all their satellite radio needs.  As some saner voices point out near the end of the article, the DOJ are pathetically shrugging off their duty as public watchdog- also see this Broadcast and Cable article about doubts raised about the merger.

All that’s standing in its way is the dreaded FCC, which isn’t exactly known as a bastion of public service.  Indeed, Congress is now demanding that head-schmuck Kevin Martin turn over piles of internal documents about his controversial decisions over the last few years over big issues like ‘a la carte’ cable offerings but this will also likely shine some much needed light on his unsavory decisions about media consolidation also.  His masters in the media conglomerate world must be crapping their pants right now and it’s about time.  But in the meantime, look for him to squeeze through a thumbs-up for the satellite deal.  He now says that he hasn’t made up his mind but he lied about that before, and to Congress no less (which I could have sworn was a crime...).

The Satellite companies are arguing that they should be able to create a monopoly because there’s so much competition from other music services.  This is the same lame argument that media conglomerates are using to consolidate their power and get the green light to buy up more and more radio and TV stations and newspapers. 

Not that I buy their argument but they do have reason to be worried- as the Washington Post reports, companies like LastFM and Pandora offer DIY music services for people to customize to their tastes and these companies are getting more and more traction, with lots of subscribers and lots of music offered. 

But does that justify creating monopolies to compete with them?  And besides, if these greedy companies were running their business better and offering more of what the public wanted, they wouldn’t have to beg the govt to get permission to grab up competitors.  Also, if they screwed up their own companies, what’s to say that they’ll do any better to leverage more companies for their bottom line?  Most likely, they’ll screw up the other companies they swallow up too.

And again, how is all of this in the public interest?  It ain’t and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

—Jason Gross

After the Saul Williams album he produced didn’t tear the charts, a frustrated Trent Reznor got pissy, saying that fans didn’t want to support artists at all, even when they provided a quick, direct, cheap way to get the music online.  Williams took a much more mature view, saying that offering music to fans online for what they wanna pay is a new experiment and that it will pay off long term.  As such, I didn’t have much hope when Raznor offered the new Nine Inch Nails album, Ghosts I-IV, online the same way from his own site, especially as it was an instrumental set.  Boy was I wrong… and I’m glad too.

(continue...)

—Jason Gross

Obviously the publishing companies are getting jealous of the major labels as they’re pushing their own scheme to destroy the industry.  The issue is royalties for webcasts and this has been haunting Internet radio stations for the past few years as the rate is set to sky-rocket.  The end result has been a disaster- Internet radio firms say royalties limiting choices.  Many stations have already shut down and many more will be gone soon too, even some of the bigger ones (Pandora, Live365).  The royalty costs are just too much for them to stay in business.  So then, web users will have one less legally-sanctioned way to experience music online and where do you think they’ll probably flock to then?  Songwriters and publishers should get fair money for their work but when the end result is that the groups representing them (SoundExchange) destroy an industry that would ideally support and promote their work, who wins in that deal?  It’s monumental stupidity and yet another example of the music industry killing itself.  Publishing houses and songwriters should pressure SoundExchange to come up with a fairer scheme so that these stations can stay in business and the writers get paid fairly.

—Jason Gross

This has already been quite a year for quick releases. A few weeks ago, it was Nine Inch Nails’ Ghosts I-IV and then soon after, it was the Raconteurs and Gnarls Barkley who decided to rush their latest albums on to the market. What’s significant isn’t just the speed that these are coming out (no doubt to try to thwart downloads) but also that they were sprung on the marketplace without giving reviewers an early start. Bad movies are usually released without any critic previews because they already know that they’re gonna get panned with what’s with these albums? Rest assured, it’s not because the artists think they’re gonna get panned.

(continue...)

—Jason Gross