The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #130020 Message #2927900
Posted By: GUEST,The Shambles
14-Jun-10 - 07:06 PM
Thread Name: PRS call for a Busking Day
Subject: RE: PRS call for a Busking Day
Could it be because not enough people are prepared, as Dan and I have been, actually to engage with PRS - and too many remain content merely to snarl at them from the undergrowth, and often in ways which completely miss the rights, legal issues and practical costs of the situation, while promoting misinformation and encouraging misunderstanding and conflict?
I'm sorry but this is 'them and us' nonsense. I do tire of the defence that anyone who may be critical of PRS cannot be well-informed. The public who are not PRS members have to rely on those who are members to use their voice to effect any practical change.
PRS members have responsibilty to the public but often some members
think that the best defence is to continue to simply mock their concern.
The fault here is plainly with the failure of PRS to actually engage with the public and especially in their many attempts to broaden what is performance in order maximise revenue for their members. It is this which is promoting misinformation and encouraging misunderstanding and conflict. As you say:
The PRS system is flawed, for sure, and some of their initiatives have been wrong-headed, and we have to correct them all the time.
The PRS is its members. The tail is wagging the dog if you (its members) feel you have a system where you are embarrassed by and have to be constantly correcting the initiatives those who are employed to collect and distribute the fees.
Do you not understand and accept that the damage is done, both in real and in PR terms, long before any of these initiatives can be corrected?
I suggest that it should be the PRS members who dictate any initiatives and the extent and areas where revenue is maximised and the employees are left to the collecting and distributing.
Do you think that there is really any comfort to be had for the public in the fact that some PRS members may not like the damage that has already been inflicted by initiatives undertaken on their behalf?
Would you not accept that the public may expect PRS members to prevent the damaging initiatives before the damage is done?