Thank you to all the songwriters and artists who participated in our first public survey. Our intention was to better understand what lights you up as a creator, what supports you to thrive, what your biggest challenges are, and what you think the biggest problems with the music industry are right now.

We have summarised your responses and also shed a little bit of light on the biggest music industry issues that you’re faced with. We highlight systemic challenges that not only limit artists’ earning potential but also stifles cultural appreciation for original music, and do all this with the intention of sharing knowledge so that we can understand our industry climate, and feel empowered to make change.

To disclose, 33% of our survey respondents are earning money from their songs, 65% are I Heart Songwriting Club members, and 70% are Australian.

What Songwriters Treasure and Need to Thrive

What helps creativity flourish

Many respondents shared that writing songs is a form of self expression and creative expression that brings them a great sense of fulfilment. Most also mentioned that having a regular writing practice, like I Heart Songwriting Club, supports their songwriting the most.

Those who play their songs live commented that performing helps their songwriting to flourish, whether this be a gig, tour or even open mic. And many people felt supported by having others to collaborate with.

Songwriters’ biggest struggles

Many respondents struggled with the lack of a clear pathway to get their best songs ‘out there’ and ‘heard’. Some specifically mentioned the overwhelming amount of marketing and promotional activities that are required to reach audiences.

Resources were another big struggle for many artists and songwriters with money mentioned a lot – the lack of financial resources to complete projects (recording, releasing, promoting), the lack of time and capacity to focus in amongst all the promotional activities, and the lack of networks and collaborators.

We sensed a deep despair for those who observe a cultural lack of appreciation for original music. This is having a direct effect on songwriters’ earning capacity and audience-building capacity as they struggle to find venues that support original music. All of these struggles heightened for songwriters who live outside of metropolitan areas.

Biggest Issues Songwriters Face in the Industry Right Now

Biggest Issues Songwriters Face in the Industry Right Now

There were vastly different responses to our open question asking songwriters what they think the biggest issues in the industry are right now. We took great liberty to summarise the responses in one sentence: music has become culturally and economically devalued.

Core Issues:

• Revenue Inequity: Songwriters and artists lack access to fair revenue streams
• Live Music Decline: Fewer venues and opportunities are available
• Media Representation: Australian music is underrepresented on commercial radio and TV
• Career Longevity: There is limited structure to support long-term careers
• AI Disruption: Concerns about AI’s impact on rights and earnings are growing
• Rising Costs: Touring and other expenses are increasingly unaffordable
• Low Fees: Lack of minimum legislated payments for artists
• Youth-Oriented Media: Social media platforms prioritise content over artistry, creating barriers for artists seeking meaningful connections

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. We wanted to shed a little more information and knowledge on some of the above points. We acknowledge we aren’t addressing all these issues in this blog, but here are a few pressure points that are building in our industry that may support your understanding.

Economic Value of Artists

A 2024 published economic survey of practising professional artists by Throsby & Petetskaya, revealed that the average music income of an Australian artist who received royalties in 2022 was A$24,400. The average total income of an Australian artist who received royalties in that same year was A$59,800, which was considered ‘low income’ in that same year.

In 2023 a Triple J report revealed that 83% of artists have multiple jobs that nearly 50% of music artists had recently considered leaving the industry, key reasons include financial pressures, mental health and burnout, lack of opportunities, and lack of support. Despite global recorded music revenues exceeding US$28.6 billion (A$44.2 billion) in 2023, songwriters and artists continue to face diminishing economic value in their craft.

Revenue Inequity

Neighbouring Rights

Let’s start with some good news. Just last week, the UK introduced a key amendment to its copyright law, expanding neighbouring rights royalties to certain artists and performers. These royalties, managed in the UK by PPL, are linked to the public performance and broadcast of sound recordings, and typically split equally between copyright owners (typically record labels) and performers (including feature artists, non-feature artists and session musicians). The performer’s share is commonly referred to as equitable remuneration or ER.

Up until now, any Australian songs broadcast in the UK, including massive hits like Dance Monkey by Tones and I, have not earned any UK broadcast royalties for the performers whose intellectual property is on that sound recording, equating to losses between $500,000 to $1million for performers.

A brief overview of rights and royalties 

When a song is performed in public or broadcast, all copyright holders on both sides – the composition side (the rights pertaining to the music and lyrics which are controlled by songwriters and publishers) and neighbouring rights (the rights pertaining to the sound recording which are controlled by artists, performers, and record labels) are entitled to royalties.

Royalties are the responsibility of CMOs or collective management organisations that collect licence fees in their country and distribute that to their members. CMOs are governed by the rules collectively agreed upon by its members and according to their country’s copyright law and other regulations.

In Australia, APRA collects licence fees for use of compositions and distributes that to songwriter and publisher members. PPCA is the CMO responsible for collecting and distributing neighbouring rights in Australia. In the UK, PRS protects the rights of songwriters and publishers and PPL collects neighbouring rights royalties. For a CMO to collect royalties for their members when their music is played overseas, they need a reciprocal agreement with similar entities in other countries. However, not all countries have these agreements in place.

Australia’s Stance on Neighbouring Rights

When Australia and the UK signed the Rome Convention in 1961, it meant that anytime anyone played a sound recording in Australia or UK it was protected and they had to pay for the use of it. But one of the boxes Australia didn’t tick at that time was to acknowledge ER payments for performers. The impact of this meant that performers would not be legally required to be remunerated for the broadcast of their intellectual property via their performance in the sound recording.

Because Australia lacks the statutory framework for the performer share (ER) of neighbouring rights royalties, since 2014, PPCA has had no reciprocal agreement with PPL. This has prevented Australian performers from receiving ER payments from the UK. It also means that UK artists and performers are not receiving their fair share of ER payments for the exploitation of their sound recordings in Australia.

The Impact of UK’s Legislative Change on Neighbouring Rights 

Since 2014, ER payments that should have been paid to Australian performers have sat with UK record labels, and ER payments that belonged to UK performers have sat with Australian record labels. The new changes in UK legislation means that UK record labels will have to pass along the ER payments to PPCA in Australia for distribution to members.

This UK amendment does not imply an agreement between PPCA and PPL, and thus UK artists, like Ed Sheeran and Adele, will still not receive ER payment from the exploitation of their sound recordings in Australia. Instead, those payments will remain with Australian record labels.

How Australian Artists Can Receive Some Neighbouring Rights Royalties

Australia’s sound recording collection society, PPCA, was founded in 1969 by the major record companies, to protect the interests of record companies and Australian recording artists. Its current shareholders are Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music and Warner Music. PPCA collects the money that Australian radio stations have to pay for the use of sound recordings and they pay it to their Australian members. PPCA are not required to pay the 50% of ER to performers due Australian law not acknowledging neighbouring rights, but do so on an ex-gratia basis (a moral obligation) and only to the featured artist, and only within Australia, and only for registered members.

If you’re an independent Australian artist and you own your own sound recordings, you can join PPCA as a record label to ensure you’re getting paid for your sound recording record label share in Australia. If you’re an Australian artist getting airplay overseas, PPCA will not be collecting for you, so you might consider signing on with a global neighbouring rights agency like Good Neighbour (Australia based), Sound Exchange (US based), or signing a worldwide agreement with another CMO in another country, like PPL, for global collection of your ER payments. If you’re a session musician, sadly, there are currently no legal rights that you have in Australia to collect royalties on your performance on sound recordings.

USA’s Stance on Neighbouring Rights 

The USA opted out of signing the Rome Convention so sound recordings from USA artists and labels are not protected. In short, this means radio stations in the USA do not pay for the use of the US sound recordings, nor do other countries, and therefore US performers do not receive these royalties.

Historically, record labels used to pay radio stations to play the music being promoted by labels. When this practice became illegal, labels found other ways to grease the palm of radio DJs. In 1961, radio industry and unions pushed back on the US signing the convention because of this long history of payola.

Unfortunately, the UK’s recent legislative change will not benefit US performers. Only countries that have ratified the Rome Convention are eligible to receive equitable remuneration (ER) payments from UK licensing fees. UK record labels successfully argued to their government that extending payments to non-signatory countries, such as the US, would result in significant revenue losses, potentially reducing their ability to invest in local talent and the UK music industry.

Media Representation

Implications of Neighbouring Rights on the Australian Radio Industry 

Australia’s position on neighbouring rights has a profound impact on both the Australian radio industry and the earning potential of local artists. Similarly, the absence of neighbouring rights protections in the United States further compounds these challenges.

The facts: 

• Australian Radio has to pay licence fees to PPCA to play Australian sound recordings – which is distributed to record labels, and out of moral (not legal) obligation to feature artists in Australia only.
• Australian Radio has to pay licence fees to PPCA to play UK and EU sound recordings because of the Rome Convention agreement – but that money is not passed onto UK artists, and stops at Australian record labels.
• Australian Radio does not pay to play US sound recordings because US sound recordings are not protected.
• In 2023 there were no local artists in the top 10 ARIA charts (Australian national charts).

The implications:
The Australian radio industry is not incentivized to play Australian music, and by contrast are financially incentivised to play US music.

Interestingly, there is no financial benefit for Australian radio to play UK artists over Australian artists as they pay the same licensing fees. But doing so does benefit Australian record labels financially. If radio stations wanted to support the Australian music industry, they could simply play less UK artists and play more Australian artists, and it wouldn’t affect their finances. But it would affect the record labels.

Australian artists know they’re being locked out of Australian radio. Playing US music on radio is a better deal financially for the Australian radio industry, whereas playing UK music on radio is a better deal financially for Australian record labels. And no one is talking about that.

What they are talking about is removing the 1% radio cap, and we believe that’s halfway towards a better deal for artists.

1% Radio Cap in Australia

There has been a lot of noise in Australia in the past year about removing the current 1% radio cap and the potential impact of this on Australian artist incomes and more.

An insightful report commissioned by PPCA, states “The Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) limits the amount that radio broadcasters pay in royalties for sound recording copyright (radio caps). This cap was set (in 1968) at 1% of broadcast revenue for commercial radio broadcasters and $0.005 per head of the population for the ABC…”. It goes on to state that “the actual royalty rate paid by commercial radio stations Australia is 0.4% of broadcast revenue”.

Raising the 1% radio cap to align with the 3.6% royalty rate applied to compositions could significantly boost licensing fees for sound recordings. These increased fees, distributed through PPCA to its members, have the potential to raise music income for Australian artists by an impressive 78%. Keep in mind that PPCA have no legal obligation to pass that onto Australian artists, and still have no agreements with other CMOs to pass on payments to artists.

Does the Australian Radio Industry care about Australian Artists? 

The Australian radio industry is dominated by a small number of large players and five organisations account for 85% of industry revenue, with over $1.3 billion in revenue between them. Keeping it in perspective, the proposed increase of royalty rates by 2.6% would mean that the radio industry would maintain a very healthy 15% profit margin.

The radio industry is fighting pretty hard to keep things the way they are, “Removal of the 1% cap will have a devastating impact on the commercial viability of local radio stations and will erode the vital local services provided by local radio”.

Commercial radio doesn’t care about playing Australian music, they care about money and if they have to pay higher licence fees to play Australian music, they are simply going to play more US sound recordings, because they don’t have to. Unfortunately, they fail to recognise how this undermines cultural appreciation for Australian music — nor does it appear to be a priority or concern for them.

The Effect on Audiences and the Live Music Industry

The lack of Australian music being broadcast has a significant impact on Australian audiences, as it affects audiences’ appetite for what music they want to consume. APRA’s 2024 Annual Report states there is “a year-on-year decline in the percentage of local content consumed across streaming services, highlighting the continued need for local content obligations for local music to be seen and heard across all platforms”.

Audiences want to listen to music that is familiar to them. If Australian audiences are exposed to more US music on radio stations, they are more likely to want to hear that music at venues, and are more likely to choose that music on streaming services.  Live gigs make up 58% of an Australian artist’s income, and when audiences are not actively encouraged to listen to Australian music, or regularly exposed to it, this is going to have a flow on effect on an artist’s income earning capacity.

How This Affects Songwriters

Whilst sound recording rights affect performers and record labels, radio caps and neighbouring rights issues also affect songwriters. A broadcaster’s choice of what song to play affects more than just the sound recording rights holders. It also affects the songwriter and publisher who control the rights of the composition, that is part of the same song.  If it’s cheaper to choose a US sound recording, Australian radio stations are going to do that. Not only do Australian artists lose, but so do Australian songwriters.

Who is Responsible? 

Whilst our industry peak bodies in Australia are advocating to remove radio caps, the biggest collective beneficiaries of this change are record labels. Money would funnel directly from radio licence fees to PPCA and then to the copyright holders of the sound recordings – record labels. Again, there is no legal obligation in Australia for the copyright holder to pass along that money to the performer.

What is needed is for major record labels and ARIA, their national industry body, to actively champion the artists they represent by advocating for changes to Australian legislation, ensuring performers have a statutory right to equitable remuneration (ER) under the Copyright Act

However, these organisations have yet to take this step, likely because it would impose a significant financial burden on record labels — similar to how removing the radio cap would impact the radio industry.

So, the question remains: who is responsible for safeguarding and nurturing Australian music culture?

The Changes We Want to See

• Corporate responsibility of the record and radio industries: Operate in ways that enhance Australian culture, rather than degrade it.
• Record industry responsibility: Act ethically by ensuring equitable remuneration (ER) payments are passed along to performers.
• PPCA’s role: Set up reciprocal agreements with other CMOs to ensure ER payments reach artists and performers.
• Amendments to the Australian Copyright Act: Include the protection of neighbouring rights for artists and session musicians through ER payments.
• Radio cap removal: The 1% radio cap in Australia should be lifted to match the composition royalty rate, ensuring more licence fees are distributed to the PPCA.
• Australian legislative changes: Require commercial radio stations to play at least 50% Australian music during peak hours.
• Advocacy from CMOs: Songwriter and publisher CMOs (like APRA AMCOS, PRS) and other music industry associations should also advocate for fair and equitable neighbouring rights, without shifting responsibility to other bodies.
• Musicians’ role: Join a national industry association or union, such as MEAA in Australia, to strengthen collective bargaining and advocacy.
• Equitable representation: Ensure a minimum quota of artists and songwriters are represented on all music industry peak body boards to guarantee fair representation.

Summary

In summary, the music industry is a complex and highly lucrative system, with a small number of powerful corporate entities controlling much of the revenue and decision-making. These companies often prioritise maintaining the current power structures, making it challenging for independent artists to gain traction or receive fair compensation.

Despite this, the rise of digital platforms and a growing push for transparency and equity are slowly shifting the landscape, offering hope for change. Navigating this system still requires strategy, resilience, and a strong understanding of its inner workings.

We hope we’ve helped a little with that in this blog.