The fall and rise of the music video
音樂視頻復(fù)興史
EVERY two months the British Film Institute hosts a celebration of new music videos. “Bug” draws a keen, arty crowd—demand for tickets greatly exceeds supply. Competition for screen time is fierce, too: David Knight, who picks the videos, receives 150-200 submissions for each show. A once tawdry media product has become fashionable.
每兩個月，英國電影協(xié)會都會舉行一場音樂視頻的慶典活動。各路明星吸引了許多熱情的藝術(shù)愛好者——演出門票遠遠供不應(yīng)求。而上場機會的爭奪也非常激烈：大衛(wèi)·奈特負(fù)責(zé)為演出挑選視頻，每場演出他都能收到150至200封推薦信。曾經(jīng)華而不實的媒體產(chǎn)品如今變得走俏起來。
At its commercial peak, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the music video simply gushed cash. It was essentially an advertisement for recorded music, supplied free by a record company to a channel—MTV—for which viewers paid, and which also showed actual advertisements.
二十世紀(jì)八十年代末、九十年代初是音樂視頻的商業(yè)巔峰期，總能帶來不斷的財源。當(dāng)時，它是音樂唱片的必要宣傳手段，由唱片公司免費提供給電視臺——音樂電視臺。觀眾付費給電視臺，而電視臺則播放真實的廣告。
But then CD sales collapsed. Record companies slashed budgets and stopped giving away videos. MTV found a sideline in reality television, which has gradually taken over its schedule, particularly in America. Its flagship channel has all but abandoned music videos.
但隨后，音樂唱片的銷量急劇下降。唱片公司大大削減預(yù)算，并停止了音樂視頻的拍攝。而音樂電視臺開發(fā)的副業(yè)，真人秀節(jié)目，也逐步取代了音樂視頻，尤其是在美國。音樂電視臺的旗艦頻道什么都有，就是沒有音樂視頻。
They found a home on YouTube, among clips of rambling teenagers and off-message politicians. That was fine for consumers, who could call up videos whenever they liked. It was not so good for media firms, which watched a torrent of revenue turn into a trickle. YouTube runs few ads, for not much money. Google, which bought the outfit in 2006, has yet to announce that YouTube has turned a profit. Yet the music video is quietly reviving.
不過，音樂視頻在YouTube視頻網(wǎng)站上找到了新家。這個網(wǎng)站上有眾多悠閑的青少年和別具一格的政客。對于消費者來說，這是一種不錯的形式，因為可以隨時打開視頻觀看。但對于傳媒公司來說就不如人意了，眼看著滾滾財源化為涓涓細(xì)流。YouTube網(wǎng)站上也投放少量廣告，但收益不多。不過據(jù)2006年收購了該網(wǎng)站的谷歌透露，YouTube網(wǎng)站已經(jīng)開始盈利。音樂視頻正在悄然復(fù)蘇。
One reason is that production costs have fallen even faster than budgets. High-definition cameras, editing software and computer-processing power are all much cheaper. Jill Capone, head of marketing for Universal Motown Records, says she might spend a mere $3,000-5,000 on a video to promote a new artist, or $75,000 for an established act. “Gone are the days of the $600,000 video,” she smiles.
其原因之一是生產(chǎn)成本的降低大于預(yù)算的降低。高清攝像機，視頻編輯軟件和計算機處理設(shè)備都便宜了不少。吉爾·卡班恩是環(huán)球唱片公司市場部負(fù)責(zé)人，她稱花費3000至5000美元就可以做一個視頻推廣新人，或者75000美元就可以做一個短片。“那種動輒六十萬做視頻的時代已經(jīng)過去了，”她微笑著說。
Another reason is that music videos have found more lavish digital homes. MTV’s popular website plays music videos as well as television clips. Sony Music and Universal Music have invested in
另一個原因，是音樂視頻找到了豐富多彩的數(shù)字家園。音樂電視臺的流行網(wǎng)站上可以播放音樂視頻以及電視節(jié)目。例如索尼音樂公司和環(huán)球音樂公司投資的Vevo網(wǎng)站。
What does a lady have to do to get a little attention these days?
如今為了吸引眼球，一位淑女該怎么做呢？
About The Economist online About The Economist Media directory Staff books Career opportunities Contact us Subscribe [+] Site feedback
Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2010. All rights reserved. Advertising info Legal disclaimer Accessibility Privacy policy Terms of use Vevo, a website that showed 261m music videos to 50m viewers in America and Canada in November, according to comScore. Selectivity is key to its success. On YouTube, says Rio Caraeff, Vevo’s chief executive, a viewer might proceed from a slick Lady Gaga video (see above) to a grainy home movie of cats dancing to a Lady Gaga soundtrack. On Vevo viewers swim in a pool of professional content. That consistency appeals to advertisers. Mr Caraeff says advertising rates are comparable to those of broadcast television (that is, roughly $20-30 per 1,000 viewers), though Vevo runs far fewer ads than a television network.
據(jù)康姆思科公司透露，11月該網(wǎng)站為美國和加拿大的5000萬觀看者提供了2億6100萬個音樂視頻。可選擇性是該網(wǎng)站取得成功的關(guān)鍵。Vevo的執(zhí)行總監(jiān)里歐·卡拉夫表示，YouTube網(wǎng)站上的網(wǎng)民既能欣賞Lady Gaga的華麗音樂視頻，也能看到模糊的貓咪隨著Lady Gaga音樂起舞的家庭自制視頻。但在Vevo網(wǎng)站上，網(wǎng)民享受到的都是專業(yè)視頻。這種質(zhì)量的統(tǒng)一性吸引了眾多廣告商?？ɡ蛳壬€表示，盡管Vevo網(wǎng)站投放的廣告數(shù)量比電視網(wǎng)少，其廣告費率已堪比廣播電視的廣告費率（每千人收看20至30美元）。
The average visit to Vevo lasts 15 minutes. In a bid to drive that figure up, the website is pushing “channels”, which play music videos organised by genre and mood. In short, the website is coming to resemble television. It is also moving to the television set. Many Americans who buy high-end TVs this year will be able to play music videos from Vevo or YouTube. They may tolerate more ads on the big screen than they do online.
Vevo視頻網(wǎng)站的平均停留時間為15分鐘。為了延長這個時間，該網(wǎng)站將推出“音樂頻道”模式，根據(jù)音樂流派和風(fēng)格將音樂視頻歸類。簡而言之，視頻網(wǎng)站的形式正在向電視靠攏，網(wǎng)站自身也在慢慢進入電視市場。許多今年購買了高端電視節(jié)目的美國人將可以觀賞來自Vevo網(wǎng)站和YouTube網(wǎng)站的音樂視頻。比起在網(wǎng)上看視頻，人們在電視上收看視頻的時候能夠接受的廣告更多。
Although the economics of the music video are improving, the fast-money days are over. But, oddly, that is a lure for some. When music videos became economically marginal, they acquired artistic credibility. Up-and-coming directors are often keen to make music videos. It raises their cachet and helps them move into TV ads, where the real money is.
然而，盡管音樂視頻的經(jīng)濟狀況在復(fù)蘇，暴利的時代已然過去。但奇怪的是，不掙錢的音樂視頻對某些人反倒成為一種誘惑。因為音樂視頻雖然在經(jīng)濟上處于邊緣地位，卻贏得了藝術(shù)上的美譽。那些積極進取的導(dǎo)演們總是熱衷于制作音樂視頻。它象征了導(dǎo)演們的實力，幫助導(dǎo)演們進軍電視廣告業(yè)。而那，才是真金白銀的來源。
