Question: Music may be art, but it is also big business. To what degree do you think independent artists actually have a shot at "making it" today?

If we are going to answer this question properly, we must first explore what the term "making it" actually entails. It could really mean a variety of things, ranging anywhere from making it to the top 40 charts or winning a Grammy to selling out your first venue or showing up on a college radio station. If it were my band, I would probably just be happy with the latter two options, but the positions of the authors of the book would say otherwise.

First, I will touch on my opinion on the matter. Ever since 10th grade, I have been listening to music that generally can't be heard on the radio; "indie" music, if you will. Now, this "indie" music in my opinion has always risen above the quality of music that I find on the top-40 radio stations, as it is safe to say that the usual top-40 stuff sounds alike. From my personal experience of only listening to "indie" music, I would have to say that yes, independent artists do have a chance at getting big, it just may not be the usual direction as, say a top-40 artist would take.

Take the band The Flaming Lips for example. The group formed in 1983, releasing their debut album in 1986. The band is still together, and just released two full-length albums in 2009 (Embryonic, and a cover album of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon). Their song "Do You Realize??" was also unanimously voted as the official rock song of Oklahoma (due to the band's formation and residency in OK City). With all of this sucess, during the Flaming Lips' history, I have yet to hear any of their singles on any top-40 radio station. The band has also been awarded only three Grammys during their 27 year history. Yet, does this define them as unsuccessful? In my opinion, it does not.

The Flaming Lips would have sided with Chuck Salter in his argument that there is a way behind the power of the record company promoters. Salter and John Legend agree that there are ways to get around the music conglomerates; especially with the rise of Web 2.0 and the extended use of social networking, music and media blogs, and digital transfer of music files. Boehlert argues that radio has become ridden with cookie-cutter music, and that this problem is due to record promoters influencing radio's choice of music.

I agree with Boehlert, the radio has become overwhelmed with music that is no longer creative; it all sounds the same, with the same catchy beat that's fun to dance to. If what he says is accurate, that the indie promoters of the music world are bringing the industry down, then I say, artists who actually want to make music for the sake of music (think, The Mountain Goats, Neutral Milk Hotel), then by all means, find another way to pay the bills. Don't rely on the potential of "making it big" (think, Brittany Spears, U2) by intelligently using the internet.

Radiohead for example, is another extremely well-respected band who has been together since 1985. They have won three Grammys for "Best Alternative Album", and even sold their last album In Rainbows via digital media outlets, allowing customers to set their own price. The band sold three million copies of their album, all without a record label (on the digital media). Radiohead's front man Thom Yorke told Time, "I like the people at our record company, but the time is at hand when you have to ask why anyone needs one. And, yes, it probably would give us some perverse pleasure to say 'Fuck you' to this decaying business model."

Even Yorke agrees that the music is more about the business than the music. In conclusion, you asked if independent musicians can make it big within the music market today. My simple answer: yes, they surely can, but it will take much patience, and a strategic utilization of internet and information resources.