Why Would Blogs Play with Mediafire?

I check out a lot of online news and music. One site I recently visited, Rock the Dub, offered music via the site Mediafire. After clicking the music, a Mediafire screen dutifully instructed me how to disable one of my Firefox browser add-ons, Skipscreen, so I could start my download.

Huh? I closed the Firefox tab and looked for another site hosting the sounds I wanted, but my experience is not unusual.

To be fair, when I checked around, it seems plenty of music sites, including Nah Right, 2DopeBoyz, and others, use Mediafire regularly to distribute music, presumably given to them by promoters interested in getting their artists out to consumers, either to break them to new audiences or create buzz for established performers. But this got me wondering, are these bloggers just not aware?

The Woodlands, Texas-based filesharing site Mediafire is generating a debate on privacy, money and user rights. So why are people still using a service bent on fighting potential users, and presumably driving consumers away from the music?

At issue is the Mozilla Firefox add-on Skipscreen, which permits Firefox users to skip the advertising pages and wait screens on sites like RapidShare, Megaupload, Mediafire, zShare and others. Mediafire contends Skipscreen “steals” its bandwidth and asked Mozilla to ban Skipscreen from its add-ons list. Last month, Skipscreen went public with Mediafire’s demands, and revealed the Electronic Frontier Foundation came to its defense. Refuting Mediafire’s claims, the EFF’s reply letter stated:

SkipScreen does not bypass MediaFire’s website or present its content as SkipScreen’s own. Nor does SkipScreen cause users to breach any contractual acceptable use policy (“AUP”). It does not appear that those who use MediaFire simply to download files enter into any contractual agreement with MediaFire when doing so. Absent a binding contractual promise, website owners have no right to control a user’s browser plug-ins. Any other rule would imperil dozens of plug-ins hosted by Mozilla (and the Firefox browser itself, should some site operators decide to prohibit site visitors from using it).

Mozilla affirmed Skipscreen’s acceptability, but the battle rages on, bad press be damned.

Mediafire uses a dead-simple business model, but one that shouldn’t be immune from technology or protected by legal threats. But this isn’t so much about Mediafire, which seems to not care about looking odd for paying techs to try to defend against a single add-on of a web browser with a fraction of Internet Explorer’s base, but the people who use Mediafire, but may be damaged by its business practices.

I, and I would guess lots of users, utilize Skipscreen to go over the annoying ads that filesharing sites present. I don’t mind a text ad or small banner once in awhile, while many sites use ostentatious pop-ups and full page ads you have to wait through before downloading anything. I would venture to guess plenty of media people, DJs and tastemakers would prefer this option over waiting for an ad before a download can begin.

I deal with lots of musicians and music promoters. They all know how hard it is to get product out to the public and what a feat it can be to get a blog feature. I also know the user experience is critical to them. If some tech issue or annoyance prevents artists and promoters from getting their music out to consumers, they’re on it. Totally understandable. If I am looking for new stuff, discovering something new and unknown better be quick and simple, as I have a lot of time demands. Would you invest a lot of time trying to get music of an artist you’re not that familiar with if the website they’re using isn’t friendly, or getting to what they’re offering means you’d have to rearrange your browser setup? Probably not.

I posed the question of tech and music to Rafi Kam of Oh Word, a site with a long history of unique coverage of music. Kam just penned an intelligent, insightful piece on real and perceived values of posts on hip-hop blogs entitled “What’s That Blog Post Worth?” Kam has said for years that most artists would be better served by alternate options for file-hosting that aren’t the same old ad-filled experiences like Mediafire and similar services. “By hosting the files themselves they have more control over the experience,” Kam says. “Why not ask for email address or feedback at the point of download, or at least attract people to their web presence? When artists use the same tools as any other file-sharer for their distribution strategy, they are failing to leverage their position as media creators.”

Oh Word’s Kam directly and indirectly raises a valid issue: if you are an artist or a site distributing artists’ music, why not try to maximize your position by having your own channels? Bandwidth is cheap, infrastructure is available easily, and your users don’t need to be bullied by the likes of Mediafire. In the meantime, why use Mediafire, which seems bent on attacking users, when other services are out there?

By the way, when I went back to try that file again, Mediafire allowed me to see the stuff I wanted, but slipped a pop-under banner. Petty? You tell me.