Officers Columns

Here are the latest posts from our officers

Ray Hair – AFM International President

Connections Drive Impact in the Nation’s Capital

Much of the work the Federation does to advocate for musicians’ interests and influence laws and policies that protect them happens through the relationships we’ve built in Washington, DC. Ben Kessler is our director of government affairs. Last month, I joined him for a few days in the capital to discuss your interests directly with your representatives.

We met with Representative Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA), who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and House Committee on the Judiciary. We covered a range of topics that included intellectual property and the unique needs of scoring musicians.

We discussed AI and arts funding during our meeting with Representative Maxwell Frost (D-FL), who serves on the Committee on Oversight and Accountability. A talented musician himself, Frost is an advocate for AFM members.

We met with Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA), a ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Intellectual Property Subcommittee, who is a champion for creating transparency in AI development and protecting musicians’ jobs.

Our conversation with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) included the need to move American Music Fairness Act out of committee and through the legislative process as soon as possible. He has been a longtime advocate for the union.

During our meeting with Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD), ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, he expressed support for AMFA and performers’ rights.

We met with Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), who serves on the House Judiciary Committee and is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security and Enforcement. We discussed the many issues facing our Canadian members as well as protecting the rights of Seattle musicians. We also spoke about the cruelty of requiring transgender and nonbinary artists to list their gender at birth in document applications.

AFM Legislative Priorities

Tax Incentives for Postproduction Work—Many nonsignatory television and film productions are now scored overseas with cheaper, nonunion orchestras. New postproduction tax incentives could encourage producers to hire US musicians and studios and keep this work at home. We talked to elected officials about the importance of advocating for musicians’ jobs in the US.

Copyright and GAI Protections—With several cases on generative artificial intelligence (GAI) before the courts and uncertainty at the US Copyright Office, we need more allies in Congress to establish meaningful safeguards that protect featured artists and session musicians alike. We presented our concerns about maintaining the autonomy of the US Copyright Office in the wake of the attempted firing of the Register of Copyrights. The AFM supports those who are working with us toward consent, credit, and compensation when our work is used for AI development.

American Music Fairness Act—The American Music Fairness Act (AMFA) would allow compensation for musicians for AM/FM radio plays. The proposal would end special treatment for broadcasters while protecting small and local radio stations from arduous fees. Our opponents spend millions of dollars every year just to keep from paying musicians fairly. The AFM is also in conversations with members of Congress and a range of stakeholders on how to best improve streaming platform compensation models.

P-2 Visa Processing—What was already an expensive, slow, and difficult process for Canadian musicians wishing to obtain a visa to work in the US has become even worse. The situation was compounded by the shutting down of the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman after its staff was put on leave. This effectively ended immigration oversight.

Supporting Our Members

While in Washington, I met with senior staff at the Canadian Embassy. It is a critical time for the AFM to have open lines of communication with both the US Embassy in Ottawa and the Canadian Embassy in Washington, DC. The P-2 visa process has failed Canadian musicians for some time. And with the firing of the staff of the Office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman responsible for immigration services, we must look elsewhere for transparency and accountability. During our meeting at the Embassy, we discussed advocacy strategies and the need to engage US stakeholders if we are to affect change. We acknowledged the harm the visa application gender identification policy is having on our trans and nonbinary members. Unfortunately, the position of the Trump administration is unwaveringly cruel in its position.

Finally, I made time to meet with our AFM members of Local 161-710 (Washington, DC), who are working at the Kennedy Center during this very uncertain time. I listened to the concerns of those members facing challenging workplace conditions and assured them that the AFM is here to help. We are discussing the situation with other labor unions to present a unified stance in support of all Kennedy Center workers.

Boost Our Legislative Efforts Through a TEMPO Contribution

These visits to the capital and Kessler’s continued work are important for moving our priorities forward. As mid-term elections approach, supporting the campaigns of those elected leaders who fight for our concerns is more important than ever. We must restore balance in our government in order to protect the needs of musicians and union workers across the country.

TEMPO contributions allow the AFM to support lawmakers and candidates who advocate for issues critical to musicians. Please consider making a contribution to TEMPO. Every donation makes a difference.

Visit: https://www.afm.org/what-we-are-doing/legislative/tempo/

Remembering Bill Moriarity

My friend, former Local 802 (New York City) President Bill Moriarity, passed away at the end of April. He was a mentor with whom I sought counsel on a regular basis. Whether it was bargaining strategy or pension issues, I could always count on Bill to provide a fresh perspective on any problem at hand. The things I learned from him provided me with the tools to be an effective negotiator and president. I still have a copy of the Local 802 Bylaws he gave me when I first talked about running for Local 802 Executive Board. You can read more about his legacy here.

Jay Blumenthal – AFM International Secretary-Treasurer

Click here for more from AFM Secretary-Treasurer

Secretary-Treasurer’s Message

So it must be that many years ago—perhaps decades or even centuries ago—an ill-tempered character, with a chip on their shoulder about the encroaching Industrial Age, must have bestowed upon us denizens of this century the tried-and-true curse that we may “live in interesting times.” So interesting are these times that I struggled all month to decide what to write for this month’s issue—there is so much from which to choose. I settled upon an expanded discussion of artificial intelligence (AI), only to discover that AI was also on the minds of International Executive Officer Luc Fortin and Director of Government Affairs Ben Kessler. Regardless, for the 11 members who faithfully read this monthly column, I shall now add my own spin to the AI discussion.

Why would anyone want AI?

Let’s start with a small discussion about capital, capitalism, and the capitalist economy. In a capitalist economy, the role of capitalism is to aggregate capital in the form of profits. Those profits are gained when the cost of the commodity, i.e., the cost of the raw material and the cost of the labor to transform it into something of value to others, is less than the price for which the thing of value can be sold.

In the time when our present-day curse was laid upon us by that ill-tempered character of yore, this was a fairly simple equation: $ales price minus ($raw material + $labor) equaled profit. Before companies existed, that profit flowed back to the laborer. When the laborer realized that they could step away from the actual labor and entice other laborers to produce the same thing—perhaps for less cost, or perhaps for the product to be sold at a higher price—the idea of a company was born, thus amplifying the profit motive and setting up the dynamic within which we all live today—produce a thing of value for less cost and sell it for a higher price.

And that goal feeds upon itself year after year. Indeed, when a corporation reports that it lost a billion dollars in sales, it’s not saying that $1 billion of its money went out the window, it’s only saying that it didn’t match or exceed the sales of the previous year. Capitalism exists only to grow capital.

That’s where AI comes in. AI is not neutral—it is built to serve capital, not people (no matter what your phone tells you).

Technological change under capitalism is never neutral. It’s driven by the profit motive, and moderated only by the balance of class power and the unruliness of labor. AI, with all its bells and whistles, is no different. It’s here not to expand democracy or improve social well-being, but to automate management, speed up surveillance, and hide exploitation behind the veil of innovation.

AI isn’t loved for its creativity; it’s loved because it replaces people—the perfect servant of capital in its purest form. AI isn’t just a system—it’s the embodiment of a future where labor is optional, cultural landscapes are flattened, and government is outsourced to Skynet.

Against this backdrop, read Kessler’s account of the firing of the head of the US Copyright Office right after having issued a report on generative artificial intelligence (GAI) vis a vis the fair use doctrine. Big tech wants to untether GAI completely from the limitations imposed by fair use—which is to say that your face, voice, instrumental sound, writing, composition, or improvisation would no longer be yours.

Then, put that together with Fortin’s examination of AI in today’s music industry to get a flavor of where the forces currently in control see the live, breathing musician’s role in the music industry.

And then, think about whether the picture that those two columns paint matches your professional and artistic vision of the future of music.

Alan Willaert – AFM Vice President from Canada

Click here for more from AFM Vice President from Canada

Paint May Be Wet, but Doors Are Open

The paint on the nameplates of new government ministers may still be wet, but the government has taken office and things are moving quickly. We have a round of meetings planned for mid-June. The Canadian government has stated that it is focused on creating new trade partners, which means rethinking how things work in a new landscape.

The predictability of Washington no longer exists and government officials in Canada are focused on moving forward. As discussed during the campaign, removing the obstacles from provincial borders is high on the agenda. This can foster conversation on more funding for artists touring within Canada.

Since last year, the Creative Industries Coalition—CFM, IATSE Canada, Canadian Actors’ Equity Association, and Associated Designers of Canada—has been lobbying for a live performance tax credit in Canada. If the government wants to create more opportunities for interprovincial trade, a live performance tax credit adds to opportunities to create interprovincial cultural experiences for audiences.

There will be expectation and opportunity within our sector for government funding to facilitate cross Canada touring opportunities and further support Canadian culture. Bringing audiences back to concert halls, theatres, and municipal live music venues is a fundamental component of the live tax credit initiative. Furthermore, if the government wants to support Canadian workers and jobs, a live performance tax credit can be a catalyst to bolster our live music industry in Canada, especially as more Canadians are purposefully staying in Canada, rather than vacationing south of the border.

Culture in Canada relies heavily on public funding. For an artist to effectively tour in Canada, funding is essential, yet the employers who hold the purse strings of public funding are largely unaccountable for the working conditions of the artists. If the funding does not filter to the artists, there will eventually be no culture to subsidize. The roots and foundation of the cultural ecosystem must be supported better. We will continue to speak up to advocate for positive change.

What good is a touring grant, if for example, an airline refuses to let an artist board with their instrument? While we have seen improved policies in some areas, there remains much to do. Additionally, copyright reform and legislation on generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in our industry are urgently needed to protect the fabric of our musical ecosystem.

With a newly appointed AI Minister, I am curious to hear their approach to legislation or at least implementing some guardrails around AI. While corporations have largely self-governed how they use AI, with some kind of ethical guardrails, there is no doubt that GAI has already scoured the internet, “learning” from copyright protected content.

According to the French music streaming service Deezer, more than 20,000 “fully generated AI tracks” are being uploaded to its service every day. That’s 18% of all new music. Let that sink in and consider how, without urgent government legislation, GAI has the potential to replace so many parts of our already eroded way of making a living.

But don’t hold your breath. While governments around the world consider how AI can improve our lives, governments are taking the position so far of potentially giving individuals a choice to “opt out of AI.” This means having to decline to have one’s data, personal information, or other content used to train or improve AI models. This creates huge intellectual property challenges and questions surrounding copyright infringement.

While world governments grapple with how to legislate the ethics and legalities surrounding GAI, it’s more important than ever to use AFM contracts for any recording you are part of. We are and will continue to work through advocacy and lobbying with the government to ensure Canada takes a strong stance in protecting intellectual property and copyright in the context of GAI.

La peinture est encore fraîche, mais les portes sont ouvertes

par Allistair Elliott, vice-président de l’AFM pour le Canada

Les nouveaux ministres fédéraux ont à peine défait leurs boîtes, mais le gouvernement siège et les choses bougent rapidement. Nous avons des rencontres à l’horaire dès la mi-juin. Le gouvernement fédéral a annoncé son intention d’établir de nouveaux partenariats commerciaux, ce qui signifie que le paysage change et qu’il faudra repenser les façons de faire.

Washington est désormais synonyme d’imprévisibilité, et nos représentants gouvernementaux ne veulent pas rester les bras croisés. Comme il en a été question pendant la campagne électorale, l’élimination des obstacles au commerce interprovincial figure en tête de liste des priorités. Cette volonté pourrait ouvrir la porte à un dialogue sur la hausse du financement offert aux artistes qui font des tournées au Canada.

Depuis l’an dernier, la Coalition des industries créatives (formée de la FCM, de l’IATSE Canada, de la Canadian Actors’ Equity Association et de l’Association des designers canadiens) réclame la création d’un crédit d’impôt pour la production de spectacles vivants. Si le gouvernement souhaite multiplier les occasions d’échange commercial entre les provinces, un tel crédit favoriserait la création d’expériences culturelles interprovinciales devant public.

Il y a des attentes et des occasions dans notre secteur d’activité en ce qui a trait au financement public des tournées pancanadiennes et de la culture d’ici. Le retour des spectateurs dans les salles de concert, les théâtres et les salles de spectacles municipales est un objectif fondamental de la proposition de crédit d’impôt pour la production de spectacles vivants. De plus, si le gouvernement souhaite appuyer les travailleurs et le marché de l’emploi canadiens, un tel crédit pourrait avoir un effet catalyseur sur le milieu de la musique sur scène, d’autant plus que les Canadiens sont désormais nombreux à prendre leurs vacances au Canada plutôt qu’au sud de la frontière.

Au Canada, la culture dépend largement de fonds publics. Il est presque impensable pour un artiste d’entreprendre une tournée sans obtenir de financement; toutefois, les employeurs qui tiennent les cordons de la bourse n’ont pratiquement pas de comptes à rendre en ce qui a trait aux conditions de travail des artistes. Si les fonds publics ne se rendent pas jusqu’aux artistes, il n’y aura éventuellement plus de culture à financer. L’écosystème culturel doit être mieux soutenu, et nous continuerons de prendre la parole pour réclamer des changements constructifs.

À quoi bon recevoir une subvention pour partir en tournée si, par exemple, une compagnie aérienne interdit à un artiste de monter à bord avec son instrument? Malgré certaines améliorations apportées aux politiques, il reste beaucoup de travail à faire. De plus, il est urgent de procéder à une réforme du droit d’auteur et de légiférer sur l’intelligence artificielle générative (IAG) dans notre secteur pour protéger le tissu de l’écosystème musical.

Je suis impatient d’en savoir plus sur l’approche du tout nouveau ministre de l’Intelligence artificielle en matière de législation ou, du moins, d’adoption de mesures d’encadrement de l’utilisation de l’intelligence artificielle (IA). Comme les entreprises sont en grande partie libres de choisir ce qu’elles font de cette technologie, il est évident que l’IAG a déjà balayé le contenu en ligne et « appris » d’œuvres protégées par le droit d’auteur.

Selon Deezer, plateforme française de diffusion musicale en continu, plus de 20 000 pistes musicales entièrement générées par l’IA sont versées sur son serveur chaque jour, soit 18 % de toutes les pistes musicales. C’est énorme. Si le gouvernement n’adopte pas de lois de toute urgence, l’IAG pourrait remplacer une part importante des activités qui nous permettent de gagner notre vie, et qui sont déjà passablement érodées.

Ne vous faites cependant pas d’illusion. Alors qu’ils réfléchissent à la façon dont l’IA peut nous simplifier la vie, les gouvernements semblent pour l’instant estimer qu’il revient aux particuliers de « se retirer de l’IA ». En d’autres termes, il serait de notre devoir de refuser que nos données, nos renseignements personnels ou que les autres types de contenu qui nous appartiennent servent à entraîner ou à améliorer les modèles de l’IA. Cette approche soulève d’importantes questions liées à la propriété intellectuelle et à la violation du droit d’auteur.

Alors que les gouvernements de partout dans le monde se demandent comment légiférer sur les aspects éthiques et juridiques de l’IAG, il est plus important que jamais d’utiliser les contrats de l’AFM dès que vous participez à un enregistrement. Nous travaillons et continuerons de travailler à faire valoir et à défendre nos intérêts auprès du gouvernement afin de nous assurer que le Canada prendra une position très ferme en matière de protection de la propriété intellectuelle et du droit d’auteur dans le contexte de l’IAG.

Artificial Intelligence and Us

The technological challenges musicians face are not new. We can go back to Edison’s invention of the phonograph, which at the time, fundamentally altered the relationship between listeners and music. Audiences could now listen to recorded music on a physical medium, at any time, without having to go to a venue where musicians were playing. Musical performance was no longer an ephemeral art form. Later, radio, television, and the internet followed, with their share of challenges, to which artist unions and collective rights management societies eventually responded as best they could.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to create music represents a significantly more disruptive shift than the introduction of the phonograph and electronic media. This transformation extends beyond altering the relationship between listeners and music; it fundamentally changes the nature of music creation itself.

You can now “create” a work from A to Z without owning a musical instrument, without hiring musicians or lyricists. While recreational use may have limited consequences, it is important to consider the significant potential impact of this technology on the profession of musicians and the music industry overall.

AI tools can offer new opportunities but they raise crucial questions about intellectual property. AI is redefining the challenges of creativity and musical performance.

“... Dive into our professional editing tools, your next song is just one step away.” This is an excerpt from the Suno.AI website. Suno is just one of an entire range of AI-based online authoring tools (Meta’s MusicGen, Google’s Music LM, FlexClip, AIVA, etc.) Some of these are aimed at trained musicians, but others can be used by people with no musical experience.

What these tools have in common is the ability to generate so-called “original” and “royalty-free” compositions by analyzing millions of existing tracks. In short, it’s a form of legalized plagiarism. Obviously, such tools will never replace a Paul McCartney or a Stevie Wonder, but AI can be used to generate background music for films, documentaries, or jingles—background music ... without paying any artist.

The challenge for artists’ unions is to limit as far as possible the use of such tools in collective agreements negotiated with media content producers. For example, the collective bargaining agreement between the AFM and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) “incorporates new protections against the encroachment of generative artificial intelligence (AI), providing compensation for musicians when their performances are used in conjunction with AI tools, and ensuring that human creativity remains at the heart of the industry” (AFM press release, April 2024). We must also highlight hard-fought efforts of our colleagues at SAG-AFTRA to protect the acting profession against the use of digital replicas of actors (voice and image).

Copyright is in dire need of new protective legislation. Composers receive no royalties for the re-use of their music by AI algorithms. The absence of transparency and source traceability is concerning, though upcoming European regulations aim to address this.

A study by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) predicts a 24% drop in composers’ revenues by 2028 due to AI-generated music potentially replacing certain types of creation. It’s reasonable to expect a drop in income for performing musicians, too.

Another troubling aspect is the distribution of AI-generated music on streaming platforms. The French streaming service Deezer has set a good example by implementing controls to detect the presence of AI-generated tracks. Its detection software has identified a growing presence of AI-generated music (10% to date and rising).

Unlike Deezer, other major platforms, such as Spotify, do not seem interested in the incursion of fake original music into their platforms. There are even fears that Spotify and others will become producers of AI-generated music content, so as not to have to pay copyright fees.

We must be vigilant and continue to make our elected representatives aware of the dangers of unaccountable use of AI. The fight to protect us from the harmful consequences of AI has only just begun, and the AFM will remain an important player in this field.

L’intelligence artificielle et nous

par Luc Fortin, membre du conseil exécutif international (IEB) de l’AFM et de la section locale 406 (Montréal, Qué.)

Les enjeux technologiques auxquels ont fait face les musiciens ne datent pas d’hier. On peut remonter à l’invention du phonographe d’Edison qui, à l’époque, a fondamentalement modifié le rapport entre les auditeurs et la musique. Le public pouvait désormais écouter de la musique enregistrée sur un support physique, à tout moment, sans avoir à se déplacer dans un lieu où des musiciens jouaient. La performance musicale n’était désormais plus un art éphémère. Plus tard, la radio, la télévision, l’internet, suivirent avec leur lot de défis auxquels les syndicats d’artistes et sociétés de gestion collective de droits ont fini par répondre du mieux qu’ils le pouvaient.

Avec l’intelligence artificielle appliquée à la création de musique on est devant un changement nettement plus disruptif que l’apparition du phonographe et des médias électroniques. Ce n’est plus le rapport entre l’auditeur et la musique qui est bouleversé, mais le rapport à la création musicale. On peut maintenant « créer » une œuvre de A à Z sans posséder un instrument de musique, sans engager de musiciens ou de parolier. Si ce n’était que pour un simple usage récréatif les conséquences seraient limitées, mais on se rend compte de plus en plus de l’impact potentiel énorme de cette technologie sur le métier de musicien et l’industrie de la musique en général.

Les outils de l’IA peuvent offrir de nouvelles opportunités, mais posent des questions cruciales sur la propriété intellectuelle. L’IA redéfinit les enjeux de la créativité et de la performance musicale.

« … Plongez dans nos outils d’édition professionnels, votre prochain morceau n’est plus qu’à un pas. » (Extrait du site web de Suno.AI). Suno n’est qu’un exemple parmi toute la panoplie d’outils de création en ligne par IA (MusicGen de Meta, Music LM de Google, FlexClip, AIVA, etc.) Certains de ces logiciels s’adressent à des musiciens formés, mais d’autres peuvent être utilisés par des gens qui n’ont pas de formation musicale. Ces outils ont en commun la possibilité de générer des compositions dites « originales » et « libres de droits » en analysant des millions de morceaux existants. Bref, c’est une forme de plagiat légalisé. Évidemment, de tels outils ne remplaceront jamais un Paul McCartney ou un Stevie Wonder mais … l’IA peut être utilisée pour générer de la musique de fond pour films ou documentaires, ou des jingles, de la musique d’ambiance … sans rémunérer le moindre artiste.

Le défi pour les syndicats d’artistes consiste à limiter le plus possible l’utilisation de tels outils dans les ententes collectives négociées avec les producteurs de contenus médiatiques. Par exemple, l’entente entre l’AFM et l’Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) « intègre de nouvelles protections contre l’empiètement de l’intelligence artificielle générative (IAG), prévoyant une compensation pour les musiciens lorsque leurs performances sont utilisées en conjonction avec des outils d’IA, et garantissant que la créativité humaine reste au cœur de l’industrie » (communiqué de l’AFM, avril 2024). Il faut souligner aussi le dur combat de nos collègues de SAG-AFTRA pour enfin protéger le métier d’acteur et contre l’utilisation de répliques numériques d’acteurs (voix et image).

Le droit d’auteur a vivement besoin de nouvelles lois protectrices. Les compositeurs ne touchent pas de redevances pour la réutilisation de leur musique par les algorithmes d’IA. Le manque complet de transparence et de traçabilité des sources soulève beaucoup de préoccupations, bien que des règlements européens soient en préparation pour y remédier. Une étude de la CISAC (Confédération internationale des sociétés d’auteurs et compositeurs) prévoit une baisse de 24 % des revenus des compositeurs d’ici 2028 en raison de la musique générée par IA qui pourrait remplacer certains types de création. On peut raisonnablement prévoir aussi une baisse de revenus des musiciens interprètes.

Un autre aspect troublant consiste en la diffusion d’œuvres musicales générées par l’IA sur les plateformes de diffusion continue. Deezer a donné le bon exemple en mettant en place des contrôles pour repérer la présence de morceaux générés par l’IA. Son logiciel de détection a révélé une présence croissante de musique générée par l’IA (10 % à ce jour, et c’est en augmentation constante). Contrairement à Deezer, d’autres grandes plateformes comme Spotify ne semblent pas intéressées par l’incursion dans leurs plateformes de fausses œuvres musicales et on craint même que Spotify et autres vont devenir productrices de contenu musical par intelligence artificielle pour ne plus avoir à payer les droits d’auteurs.

Il faut être vigilant et nous devrons continuer à sensibiliser nos élus aux dangers de l’utilisation non responsable de l’IA. La lutte pour nous protéger des conséquences néfastes de l’IA ne fait que commencer et l’AFM restera un intervenant important en cette matière.

Art vs Politics at Kennedy Center; Workers and Audience Caught in the Middle

The Kennedy Center’s February 12 change in leadership has become the subject of much discussion among members of the arts community and beyond. Following soon after this announcement was the news that a number of high-profile artists had made the decision to withdraw from their commitments to the center.

Currently, artists, arts creators, and others are reevaluating their relationships with the Kennedy Center. This is their right. As President John F. Kennedy once remarked, “If art is to nourish the roots of our culture, society must set the artist free to follow his vision where it takes him.”

The Kennedy Center, a living memorial to the performing arts, has always been a testament to Kennedy’s visionary support of the artists in our society.

Donors and audience members have also begun to reevaluate their support for our national performing arts center and the programming featured there. With respect to the conversations taking place among these groups, little attention has been focused on the impact these actions have on those whose livelihoods depend on the Kennedy Center’s success. It is important to provide additional context to the discourse by considering the implications to these workers.

The participation of artists and art creators is essential to the mission of the Kennedy Center. The Center was created through an act of Congress. First among the obligations of the Center’s Board in the National Cultural Center Act is a duty to “present classical and contemporary music, opera, drama, dance, and other performing arts from the United States and other countries.”

This mandate, focused on presenting these art forms, is not possible without the direct involvement of dedicated artists in each of these disciplines. As Kennedy said, “I see little of more importance to the future of our country than full recognition of the place of the artist.” This message will not continue to be heard without the voices of the artists he championed. The opportunity to utilize this important platform in service of that message will then be lost.

Kennedy Center Artists and Workers

The Kennedy Center is home to two world class orchestras: National Symphony Orchestra and Washington National Opera/Kennedy Center Opera House Orchestra. Their member musicians are represented by Local 161-710 (Washington, DC). We are justifiably proud of the artistic accomplishments of these orchestras and the essential role they have played in establishing the Kennedy Center as a major arts destination.

We also recognize that they are a part of a larger story. The fulfillment of the Kennedy Center’s mission would not be possible without the work of the many arts professionals represented by the International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees (IATSE), Actors’ Equity Association (AEA), American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA), and Stage Designers and Choreographers Society (SDC). The livelihoods of more than 1,500 artists and arts workers at the Kennedy Center are dependent on the robust support of the artistic community, audiences, and donors to ensure the continued vitality of one of the premier centers of American cultural life and performance. For more information, please visit https://kennedycenterunions.org.

Kennedy Center Audiences

Nonprofit arts organizations, such as the Kennedy Center, exist to connect audiences with the arts and to greater humanity. Kennedy said, “… art establishes the basic human truth which must serve as the touchstone of our judgement.”

The success of the Kennedy Center’s mission is as dependent on the support of its audiences as of its artists. While federal funding provides for the repairs, operations, and maintenance of the building, it is public support that ensures performances by the amazing variety of artists employed at the center will continue long into the future. Support focused on specific programs, such as the National Symphony Orchestra and the Washington National Opera, is important.

Throughout this column I have repeatedly quoted from President Kennedy’s remarks at Amherst College on October 23, 1963. His address on this occasion, in honor of the poet Robert Frost, is truly inspirational and worth revisiting in its entirety. I feel it’s appropriate to end with one last quote from that day, “We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth.”

All Musicians Deserve Fair Pay and Safe Working Conditions

“It was the best of times; it was the worst of times …”

When I was a kid tagging along with my dad on his gigs and meeting his musician friends, hearing them perform together in a concert or nightclub was only part of the experience. I also got to hear them talk about the music they were listening to and the musicians they admired.

In that primarily Greatest Generation circle, they really loved music that incorporated South American rhythms, that borrowed from European folk songs, and of course, there was the omnipresent African American jazz and blues influence. Folks worshipped Oscar Peterson, Dave Brubeck, Antonio Carlos Jobim, Django Reinhardt, Miles Davis, and Chet Baker among others. Musicians have always shared and been influenced by each other’s cultures and experiences. Music has no borders.

But there are barricades to money and opportunity. Good instruments are expensive and opportunities to learn while you earn are few and far between. Some genres basically require an expensive education. Many musicians have teachers who also serve as mentors, but it’s not treated like a real apprenticeship.

Our profession has become increasingly complicated as entry-level, paid, live work has eroded. Recording is more accessible due to technology, but monetizing recordings is a challenge. Technology can be helpful, especially when it comes to education, but it’s always changing and comes with additional expenses. And exploitation of musicians by technology is rampant.

Political and societal changes are creating uncertainty. Technology has made the world smaller, while creating greater divisions. Musicians traditionally have been important in turbulent times, whether by documenting, empathizing, or influencing. I’ve been thinking about folks like Dmitri Shostakovich, Billie Holiday, Woody Guthrie, and Marvin Gaye. We can bring people together, lift up voices, give comfort, and inspire. But beyond making music to the best of our ability, another important role is in our union.

We are the American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada. We will work together to build strength in our union and make sure that musicians have a voice in any decision that affects us. We each have a responsibility to ensure that our workplaces are safe and free from harassment. We must make our local unions places where all musicians feel welcome, valued, and respected.

We all have colleagues who are not in the union. Now is the time to invite them in; ask them to join you in the effort to make a better life for musicians. Beyond having the ability to purchase and maintain instruments and pay off student debt, musicians need affordable housing, practice spaces, health care, child care, food, and reliable transportation.

Even if music making is a part-time job, there should be fair compensation and safe working conditions. Much of the work to be done is local, so we must build strong local unions to network with the rest of the labor community, identify community partners, and build relationships with elected officials.

I still have this ideal that success in music making should be based only on the sounds produced. If a musician makes sounds that others want to hear they should be able to develop a career. We have challenges that impact all music makers, and we need to call in all working musicians to unite against the exploitive and divisive forces we are all facing.

Thank you for your work!

Let’s Elect Governments that Work for Us

As I sit down to write my February column, wildfires in Los Angeles are still burning, Donald Trump is on the eve of commencing his second four-year term, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has resigned as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

The wildfires are certain to have a negative impact on the economy in Southern California. Not only are thousands of persons displaced, but thousands have lost their jobs. For gardeners, cooks, baristas, cleaners, drivers, waiters, performers, far too many occupations to list—the fires have destroyed their workplaces.

Tragically, many AFM and other entertainment union members have also lost their homes and tools of their trades, unable to work as they put their lives back together. The cause of these fires will be investigated. But make no mistake, climate change has played an oversized role with drought like conditions and unusually strong Santa Ana winds.

In my own home province of British Columbia, we too have had our fair share of wildfires. In 2021, the entire village of Lytton burnt to the ground. Not yet fully rebuilt, residents are still living in temporary housing. Severe windstorms are on the increase in Vancouver, and heavy rains have caused catastrophic mudslides as drought ravaged soil cannot absorb the excess volume of water.

In Toronto, our subways shut down last summer when sudden severe torrential downpours flooded the downtown stations. Don Valley Parkway, a major artery into the city, flooded too. Climate change is impacting our lives right in our own backyards.

We now have an individual taking control of the Oval Office, who flip-flops on their position on climate change, querying whether it is really manmade. In Canada, the political party leading in the polls to form the next government also has members who question if climate change is manmade.

Their leader, Pierre Poilievre, is a true career politician who has never known another job. He has yet to share any policies on climate change—except to “axe the tax” (referencing the carbon tax). Other snappy soundbites include “defund the CBC” and “burn, baby, burn.”

Let’s face it, no government is perfect and change in leadership is good, but it should not come at the expense of its citizenry’s well-being. More than ever in these times of change and crises we must elect people to government who work for us. We need government that does not pit worker against worker and that understands that, for our countries to take meaningful action on climate change, we need a just transition for those whose livelihoods are impacted by job losses.

Yet, politics has become driven by emotion and it shouldn’t be. Citizens around the world are electing politicians to governments that do not govern in their best interests, but in that of the politicians themselves and at the beckoning of their billionaire masters.

Emotions and stories, over facts and progressive policies, are driving the narrative. The party with the better stories, rather than the better achievements, is winning the day.

American Author Thomas Frank states: “You vote to strike a blow against elitism, and you receive a social order in which wealth is more concentrated than ever before in our lifetimes, workers have been stripped of power, and CEOs are rewarded in a manner that is beyond imagining … It’s like a French Revolution in reverse in which the workers come pouring down the street screaming more power to the aristocracy.”

My fellow Canadian members, I invite you to join me this spring by helping your constituencies elect a government that works for working people—a government that funds our cultural institutions and the arts, enacts legislation to protect human creators’ copyright, protects jobs in the age of artificial intelligence, acknowledges that climate change is manmade, funds public health care, and upholds the rights of workers to organize, in other words, a government that supports CFM musicians and their families.

We may be apt to disagree on various issues, but we should never lose sight of our and our family’s collective well-being. As AFM President Tino Gagliardi recently stated: “Our solidarity is needed now more than ever.”