Clyde McKenzie, Contributor
THERE are many who wish to be numbered among our artistes and songwriters who believe that once a musical work has the phrase 'Jah Rastafari' within its structure it should be automatically certified as a gem of human creativity worthy of guiding the benighted masses.
It is from these aspiring artistes and entertainers that we hear the loudest cries bemoaning the absence of any opportunities for "conscious musicians" on local radio. What these individuals need to realise is that in the realm of music "many are called but few are chosen."
What they also need to understand is it makes no sense trying to blame society for not accepting their creative output. They should understand that it is likely not the society which is at fault for not accepting their output but that the blame sometimes lie in the quality of the product they offer the public.
No one is telling these people to change. Nothing is wrong with sticking to what one believes, but one should live with the consequences.
True, there might be some genius among these victims who are crying out against discrimination, but the odds are slim. Gifted roots rock artistes get a fair amount of airplay once they produce music which strikes a chord.
We know of Luciano, Morgan's Heritage, Garnet Silk, Tony Rebel and Sizzla as artistes who came on the scene making uplifting statements and who were embraced by the public because they managed to be musically relevant while making serious social and religious pronouncements.
An artiste must be aware that if he intends to have a popular following, his music must speak to issues in a manner that will be palatable to a wide audience. Based on the popularity of the above-mentioned artistes -- and the list is by no means an exhaustive one -- it is clear that the public will embrace any content, once it has the basic elements of packaging is addresses.
All those who wish to go the route of providing 'message' music in the popular context might be advised to remember the advice from Mary Poppins... "Just a spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down."
Equally those who think they have a lock on the public imagination simply by addressing amorous matters should note that while most people are receptive to the idea of sex there are different strokes for different folks.
Which brings me to some of the deliberations which took place at the recent CME Conference in Ocho Rios. One of the most contentious debates was on payola. To be kind, the debate generated more heat than light.
According to Murray Elias of VP Records, there is a jockeying for prominence among artistes and producers and those with the most resources usually get the most attention.
There are those who argue that a more active role on the part of the programmers in the stations could reduce the influence of payola. This, however, could mean that instead of the announcers being the objects of monetary favours it would be the programmes managers.
Milton Wray pointed out that it is the view of many practitioners in the entertainment media that they should be better paid and that made the lure of payola very strong. The temptation is indeed powerful for an individual to be attracted to payola, particularly if he is someone who has a high- profile position as an announcer or presenter. Media houses would be in a stronger moral position to discipline those who take money under the table once they decide to provide better wages for these workers.
On the other hand, it is my position that the ability of an announcer to break a song which does not have some hit potential is marginal at best. Determining what is a smash is a hit and miss process. Two songs can be given the same level of airplay and one becomes a dud and the other, a major hit. Airplay gives the product a chance to be heard, the rest depends on the personal tastes of the audience.
In fact, announcers are often guided, informal focus groups, for example, the responses in dancehalls or the number of requests they get are able to give them a sense of a song's hit-making potential. In many instances they are followers rather than leaders. But many announcers would never admit to this as they beat their chests and point to the hits they have made. And they would never point to the failures because, like bad surgeons, they bury their mistakes. Neither will they point out the vast number of songs behind which they throw their support but are never hits.
The Jamaican music industry is clouded with too many myths and misrepresentations; clear thinking needs to prevail.
