This weekend, as the 68th Grammy Awards celebrates the rich tapestry of American music here in Los Angeles, we should be mindful of an enormous problem that has persisted for many decades in our industry. AM/FM radio corporations make billions of dollars each year playing our music — but under U.S. law, they are not required to compensate the performers.
That’s right. Every artist who performs at the Grammys this weekend will be paid nothing when their music plays on AM/FM radio. And I’m talking about all artists: Elvis, Sinatra, Bruno Mars, Taylor Swift. While radio station owners pay songwriters and copyright holders, they do not pay performers, thanks to a loophole in copyright law and a powerful broadcast lobby that has protected it. The industry argues that radio offers “free promotion” for artists — but let’s be real: Fewer people than ever are discovering new music on AM/FM radio.
Last year alone, AM/FM radio corporations made nearly $14 billion selling ads. Artists got zero for the music that keeps listeners tuning in.
This is un-American. Even Russia and China require that artists be compensated for radio plays. Our country stands with Cuba, Iran and North Korea in allowing radio owners to avoid paying artists.
In the U.S., the law already ensures performers are paid when their music is played on TikTok, YouTube, Sirius-XM and all other music delivery platforms. It’s only AM/FM radio that gets a loophole.
The good news is that Congress can fix this. Last month, I was invited to testify during a Senate hearing on the American Music Fairness Act, a bipartisan bill co-sponsored by Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) that would close the radio loophole and ensure performers are paid fairly.
At a time when Democrats and Republicans don’t see eye to eye, we all still believe that every American who works hard deserves to have that hard work honored with fair pay. When it comes to radio, that’s an ideal that’s been supported by every presidential administration for the past 50 years including, reportedly, President Trump, and by the Recording Academy, the host of the Grammys. It has long championed the right for performers to be paid for our work.
It’s also a value I first came to understand as an 8-year-old immigrant to this country, who could not even speak a word of English. I’m proud to say that I’ve had the chance to pursue my own American dream.
But the challenges that I faced are different from the ones facing artists who are just starting out today, in part because they don’t receive the same revenue from album sales that performers received in the ’70s, ’80s and ’90s. I’m worried we’re pulling the ladder up behind us.
The argument that radio offers free promotion no longer makes much sense. More people discover new music today on social media or streaming platforms. Meanwhile, radio keeps playing the old hits, laughing all the way to the bank.
My own kids, Nick and Sophie, are successful artists in their own right. I want them, and every new artist coming up today, to have the same opportunities that I had when I co-founded Kiss with Paul Stanley, Ace Frehley and Peter Criss. We owe it to the next generation of artists to ensure that their own American dreams remain attainable.
The music business has been turned upside down by technology, making it harder than ever for artists to make a living. It doesn’t have to be that way.
The American Music Fairness Act will fix a broken system and force big AM/FM radio corporations to finally start paying artists what they have earned.
It’s no wonder that 70% of Americans support this bill. Congress should listen to them and pass this bill without delay.
Close the radio loophole. Stand up for the next generation of artists. Send the American Music Fairness Act to the president’s desk to be signed into law.
Gene Simmons is the bassist and co-lead singer of Kiss.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
Radio corporations generate approximately $14 billion annually in advertising revenue while musicians receive no compensation when their recordings are played on AM/FM broadcasts, creating what the author describes as a decades-long injustice[1][2]. The author emphasizes that this disparity exists despite the music being the primary product that attracts and retains listeners.
The United States stands nearly alone among democratic nations in denying performers royalties for terrestrial radio airplay, placing the country alongside authoritarian regimes like Cuba, Iran, and North Korea rather than with democratic peers. Meanwhile, performers are already compensated on all other platforms including TikTok, YouTube, Sirius-XM, Spotify, and Apple Music, making terrestrial radio’s exemption an outdated anomaly.
The traditional argument that radio provides valuable “free promotion” no longer reflects how audiences discover music in the modern era. Listeners increasingly find new artists through social media and streaming services rather than AM/FM radio, which tends to replay established hits while profiting substantially from advertising revenue.
The American Music Fairness Act represents a bipartisan solution that Congress can implement immediately to align U.S. copyright law with global standards. The legislation has the support of 70 percent of Americans, every presidential administration for the past 50 years, and the Recording Academy, indicating broad consensus that fair compensation is both economically sound public policy and a fundamental American value.
New and emerging artists today face significantly different economic realities than performers from previous generations, lacking the album sales revenue streams that sustained musicians in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Ensuring radio compensation is essential to protecting opportunities for the next generation of artists pursuing their American dreams.
Different views on the topic
Radio industry representatives argue that imposing additional performance royalties would create insurmountable financial burdens, particularly for smaller, community-based broadcasters operating in local markets[3]. According to broadcasters already subject to Federal Communications Commission fees and existing royalty obligations to performing rights organizations like ASCAP and BMI, implementing a new royalty scheme would be economically untenable for stations with limited revenue streams[3].
The radio industry contends that existing payment structures already reflect market negotiations and compensation rates, pointing to recent licensing agreements as evidence that the industry compensates rights holders appropriately[1]. BMI announced in August that its latest agreement with radio broadcasters included the organization’s largest rate increase ever, with AM/FM radio stations set to pay escalating rates rising from 2.14 percent to 2.20 percent of their gross revenue through 2029[1], suggesting compensation mechanisms are evolving through existing channels.
Critics express concern that new statutory royalties could disadvantage local radio stations compared to larger broadcast corporations, creating competitive disadvantages for community media operations while potentially eliminating independent broadcasting options[3]. The debate hinges on whether proposed flat-fee structures adequately protect smaller players versus whether they represent a permanent carve-out that advantages corporate broadcasters.
