Case Study: Prince and Warner Bros. Records

This case study focuses on the battle between the musician Prince and the record label Warner Bros. Records, and the study is situated within the area of abuse. Prince successfully was authentic to himself and his music he wrote, recorded and produced. Though while having issues with Warner Bros., Prince once said,“the company owns the name Prince and all related music marketed under Prince” (Till, 2010). This was raising the question of what was happening behind the scenes between Prince and Warner Bros. This is important socially and culturally because it shows some artists are being exploited by the big record labels they sign with. This is when musicians feel overused, their work being stolen, and their names being taken away from them. In this case, these things happened with Prince.

Prince was only 18 years old when he signed his first contract with Warner Bros. Records. He was lucky he had control over his music’s ownership as he produced and played every instrument on them. A few years into his career and the success he was having, particularly after his first number one with ‘Purple Rain’, Prince signed an extended contact deal Warner Bros extended. This was a six-album contract, and it allowed the record label to take ownership of all his music, future and present, and have it under Warner Bros.

When Prince realised working with Warner Bros. was not working out for him, he wanted to break the contract, which Warner did not allow. Prince decided to quickly complete the six-album contract to be let free from the label. After leaving Warner, in a press release Prince said, “the first step I have taken towards the ultimate goal of emancipating from the chains that bind me to Warner Bros. was to change my name” (Till, 2010). He then became commonly known as the “Artist Formerly Known as Prince”, which was also shortened to “Artist” or “symbol” as the name change was an unpronounceable glyph. He believed his name was not his anymore and the label trademarked and used his name as the main marketing tool to promote his music.

Prince did attempt to buy his music from Warner Bros., in 1992 after the extended contract, but as expected (since Warner was making money from his songs), they said no. This led Prince to re-record all his songs just so he could own what was his.

The case study is focusing on the concepts of authenticity in music and abuse in the must industry. The idea of authenticity as what Weisethaunet and Lindberg describe as can be seen as “integrity”, “honesty”, “sincerity”, “credibility”, “genuineness” and “truthfulness” (2010). Chandler and Munday (2020) have said authenticity “for Heidegger, a movement towards one’s individual being-in-the-world as distinct from the dehumanized inauthenticity of one’s public or social identity.” There are many authenticities in music, but this case study will focus on authenticity as truth. Weisethaunet and Lindberg (2010) defined authenticity as truth “is conceived in terms of the degree to which a representation is taken to offer access to the inner world of exceptional subject.” This concept will be used with how Prince wanted to be genuine, real, honest and authentic to himself and his music. Hawkins and Niblock (2011) said Prince’s “authenticity is situation in the space where the star and his audience interact, which begs us to conceive of popular music and identification in a different way.” Hawkins and Niblock explain how Prince was authentic in his own way by how he interacts with his fans and how it is different to other artists, making Hawkins and Niblock perceive music and identification in a new way, Prince’s way. He was aware of “branding” while acknowledging his influences on his own music, which lead him to have his own original sound (Hawkins and Niblock, 2011).

Abuse in the music industry is a concept that will be used, specifically, the ongoing battle Prince had with Warner Bros. Prince had felt abusively used by Warner. He said in a press statement, “I became merely a pawn used to produce more money for Warner Bros.” Some artists are exploited by the big record companies they sign with. When Prince signed his first recording contract, he maintained the full rights to his music, which meant the record label was unable to sell his masters and not control it. When the original contract was ending and he resigned the next contract with Warner, the label gained full rights to all of his music catalogue, and upcoming music he records and releases through Warner.

According to Deirdre (2019), “Prince was growing increasingly dismayed by WB’s [Warner Bros.] control over how and when he released his music.” In my opinion, Deirdre is saying Prince did not like being controlled by the label. He wanted to release his music whenever he wanted to, under his name. The second contract deal he signed with Warner in 1992 was a six-album deal that allowed him to release a new album every year, which was a standard music industry thing to do (Mitchell, 2002). Prince had done 15 albums in the 1990s across different record labels, with five being with Warner. Warner Bros. told Prince he could not release music under ‘Prince’ through other labels “since his name was trademarked and tied to his contract” with Warner (Deirdre, 2019). This is when Prince changed his name. I agree with Deirdre said how Prince’s name was trademarked and Prince became a brand of Warner Bros. Prince was one of the first musicians who took it to the public, did interviews with journalists and made the public aware of how controlling a record label can be to the point where Warner stole his name.

Prince’s work was authentic as he did everything on his own, from writing his own music, to playing all the instruments to producing it. The fans knew he was being genuine with his music and himself, even when he changed his name. Deirdre (2019) said, “changing his name, scrawling “slave” on his face, and releasing music through different distribution channels [record labels] were all moves geared towards contesting the industry’s practice of controlling the music catalogue and ownership of the master tapes of their artists.” Prince was pushing the boundaries to change the music industry to ensure artists, including himself, had more control and owned their own music when their work is distributed through record labels. Prince was still being authentic to himself, even with the name change, which became a culture shock at the time. He was an artist who signed under a major record label coming out and saying he was a slave and being vocal on not owning his own music. In a 1996 interview with Ebony magazine when Prince was asked about “slave” on his face, he said, “if you don’t own your master tapes [music], your master owns you… It’s all about ownership” (Norment, 2016).

When Prince changed his name, he was seeking to present an authentic image of himself still. Changing his name to an unpronounceable glyph, was his step to not only move away from Warner Bros., but to be authentic to himself and his music. He said in a statement when leaving Warner, “Prince is the name that my Mother gave me at birth. Warner Bros. took the name, trademarked it, and used it as the main marketing tool to promote all of the music I wrote” (Till, 2010).

Till (2010) said when Prince was struggling with the music industry he adopted “a symbol as a name, and playing with iconography using his onstage persona, colour, graphics, imagery, music, and religious references” he was remaining authentic, and the fans knew who he was. Prince included in his statement, “I was born Prince … and did not want to adopt another conventional name. The only acceptable replacement for my name, and my identity, was a symbol with no pronunciation, that is a representation of me and what my music is about” (Till, 2010).

This case study relates to the area of Media of Communication, specifically in the area of journalism. This is because this issue has been brought up in the media where music journalists have reported on, especially on this particular issue Prince went through. Journalist now still report on what happened with Prince years after it took place, and report on other artists who are having similar situations happen to them now. The authenticity the musicians have plays a large part in how journalists can write, critique and analyse their music in the journalist’s writings. Prince was very outspoken with what was happening, and this is when journalists came in place to give him another platform to express himself. A journalist should report on the correct information, for the general public to be informed on the truth.

Prince was authentic to himself and his masters he wrote, recorded and produced. The battle between him and Warner was a culture shock to the general public as they were not aware the music industry was so abusively controlling over an artist and their music.

Reference

Chandler, D., and Munday, R. 2020. A Dictionary of Media and Communication, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Deirdre, T. 2019. A Royal Revolution: An analysis of the influence of Prince on music marketing. Guion Peoples, North Carolina Central University.

Hawkins, S., Niblock, S. 2011. Prince: The Making of a Pop Music Phenomenon. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Surrey, UK.

Mitchell, G. 2002. Black Artists Struggle to Regain Ownership of Master Recordings, Billboard.

Till, R. 2010. Pop Cult: Religion and Popular Music. Continuum International Publishing Group, London, UK.

Till, R. 2010. Pop stars and idolatry: an investigation of the worship of popular music icons, and the music cult of Prince. Journal of Beliefs & Values, Routledge.

Weisethaunet, H, Lindberg, L. 2010. Authenticity Revisited: The Rock Critic and the Changing Real. Taylor & Francis.