The digitalization of creative industries has undermined the business models of legacy media outlets as well as the music industries. This article discusses the two primary ways that legacy media has functioned in the context of the music industries—as a producer of symbolic value and as an engine of music promotion. However, the central aim of this study is to analyze the development of these functions in the new media sphere by identifying music promotion practices on Facebook. Based on in-depth interviews conducted with local music industry professionals in Estonia, two sets of promotional approaches have been identified: brand-centered approaches and community-oriented approaches. The findings indicate a continuing convergence of autonomous music criticism and music promotion across many dimensions and the presence of “promotional gatekeeping” as a form of business activity in small creative industries.
AndersonC (2006) The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More. New York, NY: Hyperion Books.
2.
AttonC (2009) Writing about listening: Alternative discourses in rock journalism. Popular Music28(1): 53–67.
3.
BaymN (2011) The Swedish model: balancing markets and gifts in the music industry. Popular Communication9(1): 22–38.
4.
BoniniTGandiniA (2019) First week is editorial, second week is algorithmic: platform gatekeepers and the platformization of music curation. Social Media + Society5(4). DOI: 10.1177/2056305119880006
5.
BourdieuP (1993) The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. Cambridge: Polity Press.
6.
boydd (2011) Social network sites and networked publics: affordances, dynamics and implications. In: ZPapacharissi (ed) A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge, 39–58.
7.
BucherTHelmondA (2018) The affordances of social media platforms. In: JBurgessAMarwickTPoell (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media. London: SAGE, 233–253.
8.
CarrollN (2009) On Criticism. London: Routledge.
9.
CharmazK (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE.
10.
ConnerTJonesS (2014) Art to commerce: the trajectory of popular music criticism. IASPM@Journal4(2): 7–23.
11.
DavisJLChouinardJB (2016) Theorizing affordances: from request to refuse. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society36(4): 241–248.
12.
DebenedettiS (2006) The role of media critics in the cultural industries. International Journal of Arts Management8(3): 30–42.
13.
EllisonNBVitakJ (2015) Social network site affordances and their relationship to social capital processes. In: SSSundar (ed) The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 205–228.
14.
ErikssonMFleischerRJohanssonA, et al. (2019) Spotify Teardown: Inside the Black Box of Streaming Music. Cambridge: MIT Press.
EvansSKPearceKEVitakJ, et al. (2017) Explicating affordances: a conceptual framework for understanding affordances in communication research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication22(1): 35–52.
17.
FensterM (2002) Consumers’ guides. In: SJones (ed) Pop Music and the Press. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 81–92.
18.
FlewT (2018) Social media and the cultural and creative industries. In: JBurgessAMarwickTPoell (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media.London: SAGE, 512–526.
19.
FordeE (2001) Music journalists, music press officers & the consumer music press in the UK. PhD thesis, University of Westminster, UK.
20.
FrithS (1981) Sound Effects: Youth, Leisure and the Politics of Rock ‘n’ Roll. London: Constable.
21.
FrithS (2019) Writing about popular music. In: CDingle (ed) The Cambridge History of Music Criticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 502–526.
22.
GerlitzCHelmondA (2013) The like economy: social buttons and the data-intensive web. New Media & Society15(8): 1348–1365.
23.
GibsonJJ (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
24.
GillespieR (2012) The art of criticism in the age of interactive technology: critics, participatory culture, and the avant-garde. International Journal of Communication6(20): 56–75.
25.
HagenAN (2015) Using music streaming services: practices, experiences and the lifeworld of musicking. PhD Thesis, University of Oslo, Norway.
26.
HesmondhalghDMeierL (2015) Popular music, independence and the concept of the alternative in contemporary capitalism. In: JBennettNStrange (eds) Media Independence: Working with Freedom or Working for Free?New York, NY: Routledge, 94–116.
27.
HesmondhalghD(2020) Is music streaming bad for musicians? Problems of evidence and argument. New Media & Society. doi: 10.1177/1461444820953541.
28.
HirschP (1972) Processing fads and fashions: an organization-set analysis of cultural industry systems. American Journal of Sociology77(4): 639–659.
29.
IbrusIRohnUNanìA (2019) Searching for public value in innovation coordination: how the Eurovision Song Contest was used to innovate the public service media model in Estonia. International Journal of Cultural Studies22(3): 367–382.
30.
JärvekülgM (2020) From institutionally embedded ‘serious’ to individualized ‘popular’: a report on values and attitudes in Estonian music criticism. Journal of Baltic Studies51(2): 223–241. doi: 10.1080/01629778.2020.1749094.
JonesE (2020) What does Facebook ‘afford’ do-it-yourself musicians? Considering social media affordances as sites of contestation. Media, Culture & Society42(2): 277–292.
33.
KjusY (2016) Musical exploration via streaming services: the Norwegian experience. Popular Communication14(3): 127–136.
34.
KleinBMeierLPowersD (2017) Selling out: musicians, autonomy, and compromise in the digital age. Popular Music and Society40(2): 222–238.
35.
KristensenNHaastrupHHoldgaardN (2018) Cultural critique: re-negotiating cultural authority in digital media culture. MedieKultur34(65): 3–9.
36.
KruseH (2010) Local identity and independent music scenes, online and off. Popular Music and Society33(5): 625–639.
37.
LarceneuxF (2001) Critical opinion as a tool in the marketing of cultural products: The experiential label. International Journal of Arts Management3(2): 60–70.
38.
LindbergUGudmundssonGMichelsenM, et al. (2005) Rock Criticism from the Beginning: Amusers, Bruisers, and Cool-Headed Cruisers. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
39.
LiuH (2007) Social network profiles as taste performances. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication13(1): 252–275.
40.
MarshallL (2019) Do people value recorded music?Cultural Sociology13(2): 141–158.
41.
McLeodK (2001) One and a half stars: a critique of rock criticism in North America. Popular Music20(1): 47–60.
42.
MeierL (2019) Popular music, streaming, and promotional media: enduring and emerging industrial logics. In: MDeuzeMPrenger (eds) Making Media: Production, Practices, and Professions. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 321–334.
43.
MeierL (2017) Popular Music as Promotion: Music and Branding in the Digital Age. Cambridge: Polity.
44.
MeierL (2015) Popular music making and promotional work inside the ‘new’ music industry. In: KOakleyJO’Connor (eds) The Routledge Companion to the Cultural Industries. London: Routledge, 402–412.
45.
MeierLManzerolleV (2019) Rising tides? Data capture, platform accumulation, and new monopolies in the digital music economy. New Media & Society21(3): 543–561.
46.
MerazSPapacharissiZ (2013) Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. The International Journal of Press/Politics18(2): 138–166.
47.
MorrisJW (2015) Curation by code: infomediaries and the data mining of taste. European Journal of Cultural Studies18(4–5): 446–463.
NegusK (2019) From creator to data: the post-record music industry and the digital conglomerates. Media, Culture & Society41(3): 367–384.
50.
NeheliNB (2018) News by numbers. Digital Journalism6(8): 1041–1051.
51.
NegusK (1992) Producing Pop: Culture & Conflict in the Popular Music Industry. London: Edward Arnold.
52.
PowersD (2013) Now hear this: the state of promotion and popular music. In: MPMcAllisterEWest (eds) The Routledge Companion to Advertising and Promotional Culture. Abingdon: Routledge, 313–325.
53.
RegevM (1994) Producing artistic value: the case of rock music. The Sociological Quarterly35(1): 85–102.
54.
SchaapJ (2015) Just like Hendrix: whiteness and the online critical and consumer reception of rock music in the United States, 2003–2013. Popular Communication13(4): 272–287.
55.
SchmutzV (2009) Social and symbolic boundaries in newspaper coverage of music, 1955–2005: gender and genre in the US, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. Poetics37(4): 298–314.
56.
SchmutzV (2016) Commercialization and consecration: media attention to popular music in the US and the Netherlands, 1975–2005. Poetics59: 82–95.
57.
SchmutzVVan VenrooijAJanssenS, et al. (2010) Change and continuity in newspaper coverage of popular music since 1955: evidence from the United States, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. Popular Music and Society33(4): 501–515.
SmockADEllisonNBLampeC, et al. (2011) Facebook as a toolkit: a uses and gratification approach to unbundling feature use. Computers in Human Behavior27: 2322–2329.
60.
StrahanL (2011) Sources of arts journalism. Who’s writing the arts pages? In: BFranklinMCarlson (eds) Journalists, Sources, and Credibility: New Perspectives. London: Routledge, 127–138.
61.
StrattonJ (1982) Between two worlds: art and commercialism in the record industry. Sociological Review30: 267–285.
62.
TschmuckP (2016) From record selling to cultural entrepreneurship: the music economy in the digital paradigm shift. In: PWikströmRDeFillippi (eds) Business Innovation and Disruption in the Music Industry. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 13–32.
63.
TufekciZ (2015) Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: emergent challenges of computational agency. Journal on Telecommunication and High Technology Law13: 203–218.
