Why is Payola Illegal? 

I haven't done this sort of post in a while... where I ask why something is actually illegal (see here and here). I was reading on Slashdot yesterday about how the Attorney General of New York is going to start investigating media companies for violating the federal Payola laws. Now of course, the Slashdotter's are very happy about this as they see it as well deserved for what the RIAA has done to file sharers. While karma may provide pay back... one has to ask - why exactly is Payola illegal? Actually, I first had to ask - what exactly is Payola? After all, these laws were passed before I was born... back when Dick Clark was actually on the radio. He actually used to be on the radio you know, before American Band Stand (which I do remember watching God help me.) Most recently of course they just unfreeze him every year for New Years Eve.

So what is Payola? Well, you can go here for a little history behind it. Basically, payola is when a record company (or some third party) pays a DJ to play a song, and the fact that they did this is not disclosed. What seems interesting is what happens when you look up Payola on Wikipedia. It automatically forwards you to a page on bribery. But is payola bribery? Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia, so the fact that they're linked together there isn't indicative of the truth. Rather it's indicative of what people perceive to be the truth. Personally I see payola as paid advertisement. After all, the goal is really to sell records (or now CD's actually). So what is wrong with a record company paying to get their songs on the air so that people might buy records in the store? Is it the fact that they don't say they're paying for the air time? Why does that matter?

If you're listening to a song on the radio, and you like that song, will you suddenly hate it if you find out that the reason it was on the air was because it was paid for? Personally I say no. The way it got on the air doesn't change the notes or the lyrics. Now then, if I'm hearing that song for the 50th time, then I get pretty sick of that song. But guess what I do... I change stations. If enough people do the same thing, than advertising revenues go down and stations will change their practices. If paid air time becomes an issue for a stations profitability, than stations will do what other companies already do, and make kick backs against station policy and fire someone for breaking that rule.

So why is it against the law? What is the greater public interest that made this into a law? If you look into the origins of this law, it developed about the time Rock and Roll was becoming popular. There were people out there that actually couldn't believe that it was popular, and that the only reason it was on the air was because it was paid for. More over, people feared that the music industry was therefore brainwashing people into liking Rock and Roll. Well, even if that's true... how is that any different than any other form of advertising? Some would argue that because of payola, smaller unknown groups and alternative music would never get air play. I don't accept that for two reasons. First of all you have to convince me that DJ's have some sort of public ethical obligation to play music from smaller groups, which I don't see. They're DJ's, and music taste and choices are pretty subjective. Second, there are plenty of smaller private stations, and college stations that give plenty of air play to those groups for people who like that music.

So what am I missing here? Why should payola be illegal?