Who Is Right: Consumer Or Industry?

One thing I don't understand is why there is so much controversy over what is deemed suitable for airplay. There's so much argument over what is considered 'commercial' or 'mainstream' - but let's face it, that's what your music needs to be to even have a chance at getting airplay!

Some people describe commercial music as 'music that is designed for public consumption, usually not brilliant music'. But here's my take on "commercial" music: I think it's music that would be popular to the wider audience. Yes it could be construed as anything from pop to soft rock, but even go as far as hard rock. As long as it remains melodic with strong hooks and appealing to the masses - I think you could be considered commercial. So, when I describe something as "commercial", please understand that this is what I mean.

One would think that any music with a following and a tonne of feedback, including great reviews/comments and inquiries as to tours etc could be deemed as 'commercial' music and suitable for airplay?

The band I manage are considered 'Arena Rock' and could be described as brilliant music designed with a soul that people have latched on to en mass - hence, they more than deserve airplay as that will only broaden their fan base. Yet, when approaching radio programmers, I'm told that it's "cheesy". Trust me, you can't get any more "cheesy" than some of what's on the radio these days! I have stopped short of saying that to them. haha

I guess my point here is that - I gotta wonder why radio programmers think the way they do. If you run a radio station - don't you want to appeal to the majority? Therefore, when a band comes along that shows that they have the whole package - including a fan base and great songs that are loved by those that have heard them, then why don't they get really excited about that?

I know, I know, it all comes down to the politics games. But at the end of the day - what kind of business are you running when you don't stay true to the music?!