Leaderboard

Since I have a small record label I will say this, all of the music on YouTube is protected in some way. Some channels have it up and it hasn't been removed, but the "owner" of the video does not get paid, the person who owns the publishing gets paid. YouTube doesn't pay much at all as far as streaming goes. I can give you hard examples for streaming on all streaming services. Just ask me to give it to you. If a successful artists controls their YouTube they can do very well with YT streaming. I think YT is not bad at all. Troy you talk as if you didn't put Maxell tapes in and record the Quiet Storm off of the radio. Music has always been accessible in some format. The problem now is that like Mel said the Digital Laws are flimsy and the studios are taking advantage of the loopholes. That takes us back to controlling our own platforms. At least an artist can become a YT millionaire with enough followers. There is real opportunity there and while it isn't a level playing field, a person with dedication and consistency can earn subscribers and convert those subscribers especially in music which is a more social medium than books or business info. (Which is why you and I have a hard to getting subscribers and followers on any social platform.) I guess we live in a time that is great, but difficult. There is amazing opportunity, but serious consumer ignorance. Thankfully millennials are a lot more aware of how they consume and they are becoming more responsible which is what has allowed music artists to create Patreon and which also allows Bandcamp to flourish in an environment where streaming dominates. As always thanks for all of your work on the site. As you know all of that work is about search because people will barely visit it direct and that's what we are all relying on is being discoverable.

Cambridge Analytica (CA) is a privately held company that combinesdata mining and data analysis with strategic communication for the electoral process. It was created in 2013 as an offshoot of its British parent company SCL Group to participate in American politics.[3] In 2014, CA was involved in 44 U.S. political races.[4] The company is heavily funded by the family of Robert Mercer, an American hedge-fund billionaire.[3][5] In 2015 it became known as the data analysis company working initially for Ted Cruz's presidential campaign.[5] In 2016, after Cruz's campaign had faltered, Cambridge Analytica started to work for Donald Trump's presidential campaign.[6] The firm maintains offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., and London

I go on YouTube all the time and have no problem downloading my favorite songs into my computer, including ones by Prince. Some of my old favorites have even been posted by just ordinary people who apparently haven't been prevented from doing this. I think it's a win-win situation for everybody. For me, for the artists(most of whom, in my case, are dead - but kept alive in people's memories through their music), and for YouTube whose traffic I contribute to. (I previously posted these comments on the wrong thread)

That 22 million suit was just this week. Facebook just lost 500 million lawsuit on occulus. I mentioned the lexis nexis service Law 360 , if you wanted to keep a running tab on how individuals are checking google It's a big target and hard to miss. As long as our laws are still open to the people, google is not above the law. You're correct Youtube can benefit from the audience that sees ads when visits youtube for music and,Digital Millennium Copyright Act states they cannot be held liable for pirated music uploaded to the youtube site. They can only be diligent in its removal. (link: "How Google Fights Piracy") Google pays licensing fees for the artists and record companies who own copyright. Prince was an interesting random choice. According to his former lawyer and our BTHS Alum Londell McMIllian Prince's music only streamed on tidal until February 12, 2017- when the estate released it. "Feb. 12, is the focus of a major marketing campaign set up by the music companies that have rights to release Prince’s songs, and by the streaming services that have been hungry to carry the music but were blocked from doing so by Prince himself before he died last year at 57. (Currently, Prince's albums are only available on Tidal.)" New York Times McMillian represented both Prince and Michael until their death. (I think I read he still represents Michael Jackson's estate and he's on tap to represent Prince's estate once its turned over to the heirs) When I searched youtube in the past for Prince music, it wasn't there. I didn't keep a record so only google has a record of my searches. Again all the artists you've mention have all blocked their music from time to time...Beyonce's vevo channel was even off youtube for a few weeks. Still Youtube is a media site much like television and radio so when artists music is played or watch they get paid just like they would when their music is aired on any other medium. In fact, youtube (unless they manipulate the count) is a better source than radio and television because its end-user driven the more popular the more money. This is from a fortune article - Artist are NOT throwing up their hands ... they want more licensing money and even better technologies as to who is uploading pirated music. And Most important, they are fighting to have the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, revised. This is the law that is allowing piracy from smaller companies that don't have as large a bullseye as google. AALBC is an important website that is filled with copyright holders and even those new to the game - I believe you are correct to warn those with intellectual property how easy it is to lose licensing rights if they are not diligent in keeping watch. But to say there's is nothing we can do about it ... that's not true.

On Saturday, March 4 at at 2 p.m., we'll have a reading and signing with five of the authors from Sycorax's Daughters -- a collection of short stories and poems by black women that delve into the world of imagined demons and shape-shifters, ghosts and mermaids. These women do a thrilling job of exploring real-life fear and alternate realities, from a slavery past to a science-fiction future.This collection challenges the notion in this country that blackness, and therefore black people, are the ultimate horror. By engaging black women as both the authors of these stories as well as the majority of main protagonists, we finally hear the so-called "demons" speak. The authors that will be attending are Joy Copeland, Teri Clarke, Lawana Holland Moore, Dana McKnight and K. Ceres Wright.We hope to see you there! Sankofa.com IG: @sankofabkscafe Twitter: @SankofaVideoBks Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sankofa.bks

Interesting analogy. Mel I simply lack the power to battle Google on any level. Unlike the streets where you can get some of your boys or hired muscle to retaliate. I have no one who will support me on this level. Think of it as everyone being on the the take, the government, the media, and all of your friend and family. Google can bitch-slap (continuing the analogy) AALBC.com at will. Indeed they have already done this. Consider the graph below: Basically, this publically available chart shows how my organic reach was removed by Google overnight. In other words, in January 2011 my websites traffic dropped 75% in a day! Let that sink in a minute... By the way, Google won't even give you the respect explain why they slammed so many businesses. They are not accessible via phone or even email. They rule with an iron fist and are untouchable. So while I rank high on many Google searches today. I also know Google still make my site disappear, in a fraction of a second. I have also considered that my ongoing critique of Google opens me up for retaliation from them--that is the power they have. Now my site's traffic has recovered, but it took five years! But it was not just my website -- every website whose data I had access to suffered too--some even more. Black book websites, in particular, were annihilated on a grand scale. While I wrote about this until my finger were numb, Black media were largely oblivious to what was happening or simply ignored it to cover the Kardashians. Not enough people knew or if they knew they did not care. As a result, we have far fewer strong Black websites. The lost revenue and enrichment provided to Black folks is incalculable. But Black folks don't demand very much and are easily placated. If Facebook, Twitter, and Wikipedia were the entire internet (no other websites). I do not think most Black folks would be disappointed. Nothing in our collective behavior suggests otherwise... During this same period, we witnessed the rapid rise of social media. This was fueled, in part, by desperate webmasters frantically trying to regain lost visitors. New webmaster, ignorant of the web and how it actually worked, touted social media as if it were the only way one could attract new visitors get them to visit their websites. While websites spent time amping up their followers on Facebook, at the expense of own websites, Facebook patiently waited. Once webmasters and their social media strategists increased engagement on Facebook, Facebook announced that organic reach on their platform would end. Today if you want to reach the followers, you worked so hard to attract, you would now need to PAY Facebook! My data show that Facebook has indeed made good on this promise. You can read some of Facebook's propaganda on the subject. Now we can do something about this--if we wanted. We could boycott Facebook and put them out of business tomorrow. We could also boycott Google search engine and use others that don't hijack and mine search result for profit. The 2nd most popular US search engine, Bing, returns results on African American Children's Books differently. Now AALBC.com comes in at #6 on the Bing search engine for the same query, but I suspect a higher percentage of visitors actually visit the websites returned in these search results, because Bing is not hijacking search result with their content. The ads shown are clearly presented as ads. Google use to return search results this fashion. But of course, I'm sure front running search results is more profitable. Ignoring the Google images at the top of their SERP (search engine results page), their results are superior to Bing's. I say because if you compare the websites on both SRPs and their treatment of the subject Google's result are superior. For example, Google returns the Brown Bookshelf as #8, while the site does not make the top ten on Bing. The Brown Book Shelf is one of the best sites for Black children's book on the web. While the Brown Bookshelf has SEO problems, Google search engine was still able to more appropriately place them on the SERP. But I digress... This is worth mentioning because the issues with Google are not simple. Google provides a great deal of value to the web--far more than Facebook if you ask me. But there has to be a better way to ensure that creatively flourishes on the web, that indie business are not wiped out on the whim of a single company, and that more than the ultra wealthy can profit from the web. Mel creating that Amazon affiliate link was smart! I created one myself: http://bit.ly/amazontop100kidsbooks I'm also using it on my site: https://aalbc.com/books/children.php#amazon

Mel I did not write, nor do I believe there is "nothing we can do about it." I did ask, however, "who" will stop them? Let me try another approach... Over the past 12 months, I've spent a great deal of time enhancing my coverage of children's books. It is an area of great interest but largely neglected by the mainstream media. Much of the coverage on the subject covers how few Black children's book are published. One of the most popular pages on my website is my Top 120+ Recommended African-American Children's Books. I started the page by asking industry insider and other experts which books they felt should be on a list like this. I have continued to expand and curate this list. In the process, I have added information on hundreds of authors and illustrators of children's books. Now if you run a google search on African American Children's books, my site is likely to come up first. I'd argue it deserves to be. But let's take a look at the screenshot of the results: Now consider the following: Google hijacks the search results by placing book covers and links to THEIR store. Do y'all understand what I'm saying? Do you know what this means? Google is grabbing visitors just as they are about to step into your store and pulling them into their with prettier pictures. Obviously, the sites most like to carry this content Are Black sites. These sites don't stand a chance. Anyone with the gumption to start a great Black children's website--good luck, because you can't do much better than I am and I'm struggling. But here is the kicker: Why is almost EVERY DAMN BOOK cover Google is displaying my MY LIST! Now I've been looking search results on these terms for a very long time and this is something new Google has pulled. I mean I pulled some obscure books for inclusion on my list and now Google is displaying them as if they came up with this shit on their own. Now the implications of this are profound. Not only has Google squashed all the competition, they are swiping content. Of course, one can argue there are a finite number of great books so any lists compiled will necessary have some overlap, but again I've monitored this list and the overlap is alarming. Still, even if I completely conceded point #3 entirely. Point #1 really should be cause for great concern. But because it is not, we are not doing anything about it and we don't have as many quality Black sites as we should. The growth of the sites that remain is constrained by Google. So what can I do? Sue Google for mining the search data for popular content then hijacking that traffic with content they've grabbed from Wikipedia and other sites and putting "their" content at the top of search results? Don't make me laugh. Work extra hard enriching other fantastically wealthy corporations by posting my stuff on their social media platforms, desperately trying to drag folks away to learn about some excellent book for children. Seek the support of people in my community by helping them understand what is happening and why it matters. This is just one small example, in one industry, that will never make the light of day. Sites like mine die in obscurity every single day. Lord only know what could have been, but never got launched because of the hostile environment we operate it. Look AALBC.com should not have been out of business years ago. I'm crazy for continuing to struggle with it. In some alternative universe, I'll be celebrating AALBC.com's 20th anniversary with a nice party, maybe a little press, and the promise of an ongoing legacy celebrating Black culture through books.

It is no joke. I stopped using Facebook for personal reasons more than a year ago I have just now decided to stop using Facebook and all the other corporate-owned social media sites too. I'll keep the accounts open to find people. But I'm not even going to post links back to the site anymore. I'm just gonna use the web. It will be interesting to see how social media derived traffic is impacted. Will all the traffic I get from social media stop completely as a result of my no longer using it? Thanks, y'all for helping me to make a decision I should have made years ago.

Yeah i hav done a few in the he past. What made me stop was how they were pitched. Only ___ people know this. There was this fawning quality ir congratulatory aspect for counting up to five. I don't generally like or share memes. Nor the imperative to cut and past not share. I think they are phishing. In the late 90's I saw some personality drivers. A neighbor said marketers wouldpay a lot for that info. I responded itvwould allow you to market to the subconscious mind, and advertising is persuasive enough. This is from that statistical analysis. In terms of meeting your goals. Thinking and emotions are not a factor but executive ability and intuition.

It Also Means,The Black Young ,Have A Gloomy .Future. Besides Demonic White Supremacy, The Street Gang Violence,Irresponsible Parents.. Leaders You Cannot Trust,Is Black Unity Possible? Black. Leaders Will .Not Follow,W.E.B. Dubois Talented Tenth,Malcolm .X Black .Economic Speech, Kwanzaa Principles To Have Strong,Black,Communities..There,Are House Negroes And ,Black Slave Holders..Enslaving Their Own People. Preachers,Are Pimps And Crooks...

When I got my personality results back from five.com I didn't think anything of it. I did remove it from facebook - and soon after I deleted my facebook account. While I thought some nefarious actions could result from knowing folks from what they write - I never thought it could be used to predict or even influence an election - now here we are. I read an article on motherboard.vice.com and how CA came to be... and it indicated it all started on facebook. (of course)

Mel 22 million dollars is nothing to Google. I picked Prince randomly I could have picked Michael Jackson, Jay-Z, or Beyonce it didn't matter none of them are immune. Besides, you don't think Prince's music only became available on YouTube after he passed, do you? Also you don't have to bring up the examples of musicians who are trying to reach an audience that's not who I'm talking about. I'm talking about established musicians who have an audience whose music is available on Google's for free, music that in our day would have been purchased.

@Troy He did not. When he was alive he controlled access to his music. It is a choice. Just like you pulled your videos and NBC pulled and blocked worldwide the one I posted with my godson in it...it is a choice. Those who leave it up want it discovered, others who want to control access have theirs removed... I have shaky knowledge of disruptive technologies but when it comes to copyright - I've noticed I'm not the only one like a pitbull to protect it...If you haven't already sign up for Law 360 updates (updates are free , subscription is about $4k a year) do so and you'll see uber rich make money but they are sued at a crazy rate and a lot lose millions in legal fees and awards. By the way, did you see that google lost their $22 million class action suit for adwords on dead sites. That's just this week. No telling how many pending suits are against them. These corporations play fast and loose with the rules but they lose big too.

When Prince was alive very little of his work was on YouTube. I heard he walked into Revolver records on West 8th aaid nothing took all of his bootlegs and walked out.

We do... you just confirmed we all have the power to stop youtube from exploiting our copyrights. We also permit their activity as well with our implied consent. You admitted that too. I'm strong proponent of copyright laws but I will look for music on youtube then I purchase it. I think this is why most won't remove their music - they want to make it discoverable. No harm if everyone wins.

@Mel Hopkins it is obvious Youtube is not trying very hard to police privacy. If you look at the two Camille Yarbough music clips I posted, I doubt both have permission to share this music. Of course downloading anything on Youtube is child's play. But if Youtube were not doing it; some other Napster-like platform would emerge. Youtube preempts the possibility of anyone else entering this space. It should come as no surprise that Google's Youtube is the 2nd most popular website, only surpassed in popularity by Google itself. Sure Google will remove copyrighted material if you file a claim-I've done this myself to have videos I've created removed. They will and even hunt for additional copies with it's algorithm. Still, despite that, I can download virtually any song ever made for my own personal use using Youtube. I stopped using Itunes because Itunes simply does not have the music Youtube has. Even if I never downloaded a single song--i can listen to them at will--for free (free to me that is). Youtube is smart enough to do a much better job o eliminating privacy but what is their incentive? Besides, who is gonna stop them?

this might not be accurate - It's been my experience youtube will remove copyright content in a bat of an eye but you have to file a notice.

Like most 70s television shows, I liked All In The Family (or as I called it the Archie Bunker Show) also. It was one of the few shows....both back then AND today....that exposed the true feelings of working class White men. The racism, the sexism, the anti-semitism, the ignorance, ect........ Like I said, the 70s shows like many of the movies of the 70s were the REAL. Not every story had a happy ending like they started having in the mid-80s. Imagine a television show today where the main character is a proud racist and bigot AND is portrayed as ignorant and wrong as hell like All In The Family. They wouldn't put it on television because too many White men who fit that description would complain about it! I was actually thinking of the Cosby Show too when I presented the challenge. That and Family Matters and a few others. I liked the Cosby Show too, but not because I could relate to it but strictly because of the quality of entertainment it provided. Cosby was funny as hell. Phylicia Rashad was fine as hell. There was a bit of realism in the show with the kids having fades, wearing contemporary clothes....but outside of that culturally speaking like you I didn't have much in common with them. I didn't grow up in poverty, but I certainly didn't grow up with the wealth the Cosby's portrayed.

Pioneer, I wasn't trying to take up for you. No one who posts here regularly needs to be defended. I just wanted you to know I know where come from (most of the time). I can't tell you anything about TV sitcoms today because I don't watch them. I haven't even seen a single episode of Blackish yet. When I did watch sitcoms I really enjoyed All in the Family. It really was a smart and funny program.I like serval others as well but that show towered over the others in my opinion. But what about the Cosby Show that was entertaining. It did not resonate with me, simply because I did not personally know any Black people that wealthy at the time. In fact, the first brownstone (like the one they lived in) that I ever went into, that was not cut up into apartments, was the one I purchased as an adult--and I grew up in Harlem. Even today, while I know some wealthy Black folks, they are not friends who invite me over to socialize. The Black people I hang with are within one standard deviation of my socio-economic class... I suspect that is true for most Black people.

We share a similar "culture." I "get" everything Pioneer writes even though I'll disagree with him from time to time. Everything he writes is familiar. Lol @ Troy trying to save me from Cynique and Delano's assault on just about every post I wrote. I'm glad to see SOMEBODY out there felt sorry for me....lol Yeah, this sho' nuff bring back memories, Actually this is the first time I heard THIS particular artist but her work brings back memories of what older cats used to listen to while they were getting high . It didn't go on in our home, but this was the norm for so many of our friends and their parents when we went over THEIR homes. It's funny how she mentioned the "big H" in one of her songs because for some reason this type of music was the favorite of people who were high on heroin (or as they called it "heron") and as soon as you walked into their home and you heard this playing on the 8-track and saw spoons laying around on the table....even as kids we KNEW what was up. We knew we'd have the whole house to ourselves because all the adults were going to be in the bed room either sleeping or doing "whatever" for a while....lol. Words aren't stagnant, they tend to change and evolve (or devolve) in different periods. In the West, the word "Black" is like the word "Jew"....isn't just a racial category anymore but today also describes a culture and particular perspective and way of looking at life. This is why people can create a television show called "Blackish". As Black people, we may come from different environments around the nation but just like "art" or "pornography" most of us can ecognize Black culture when we come across it. Me and a lady friend of mine when into a Chinese food buffet a couple months ago and they had fried chicken on the menu and I could tell by the way it was seasoned that it was a Black cook who fried it. She wanted to argue with me about how there wasn't any Black folks in a Chinese joint but only Chinese and Mexicans cooking. I decided to check around and sure enough there was a Jamaican dude....only one....back there who TOLD ME point blank that they just hired him in and he's the one who fried that chicken and used those spices...lol. I KNOW my people and what we produce when I see them! Which is why I and others will accuse Adele of stealing Black culture but not Lady Gaga or Christina Aguilera. Because there are subtle differences that often times only WE recognize. But back to Camille's work...... Besides the nostalgic effect, one of the things I like about so much of the music and televison shows from the 70s is how REAL they were as compared to today. To me, the 70s represent as close to the raw realness of Black American culture BEFORE it was mainstreamed and captured by the corporate media. You had BOTH the positive and negative story told from OUR perspective in a way that WE could relate to.....as opposed to today where you have White industry picking and choosing which aspects of our culture (usually negative) that they'll promote. Can anyone name me ONE OTHER Black television sitcom today that was as powerful and entertaining and still resonates with Black America as Sanford and Son, or Good Times, or The Jeffersons did back 40 years ago?

Hey @Del , what is your definition of spirituality? It seems to be we are born spiritual beings. It is only the rituals and practices we have to learn. In much the same way we are born with an innate ability to communicate. If we are not taught a specific language, we will come up with one on our own.

Yeah, Yarborough is highly esteemed elder here in NYC. I'm sure someone like Talib would have mad respect for her. She actually intervewed AALBC.com on her cable access show, Ancestors House but this was over 10 years ago. I knew she was in the film Shaft, but did not know she had a signing career until Fatboy Slim remixed one of her songs. The official video (supposedly) is below. Slim's treatment has completely extracted all of the soul and meaning from the original. But this is what white boys always do when they appropriate aspects of our culture for profit. In fact, they taught us how to do the same thing. But Slim did create a resurgence in Yarborough's work, and I'm sure he paid her for the use of her music, so I guess it is all good. For comparison purposes Yarbrough's originals. Taken in the content of the original album it is even more powerful... not to mention the same cultural experiences. I've migrated Gil Scott-Heron earlier today. Man, I wish he was alive and in his prime today. I would love to hear his words on Trump. Listening to him talk about Regan was just so deep. I appreciate his work even more now. I also moved The Last Poets and Abiodun Oyeloe work was slow today listening to these folks. There are SO many Youtube videos of these folks now compared to when these pages were created it is incredible. There was a time I could actually make money selling their music and video, but those days ended years ago. I can;t even image how much money the artist has lost. Youtube can generate revenue by providing a platform for piracy and no one bats an eye--but that is a rant for another day.... @CDBurns I was not aware of John Kasandra before now -- thanks!