For me, it’s different echelons of artist. I’m sure the major label marketing departments are constantly looking for a way to cut through the digital noise and they definitely scored with this one. But like Radiohead, Jay-Z, and several others before her, this is probably only a trick that she can pull off once. The ‘patronage’ style of bigger names raising up a new artist is generally successful because fans feel a genuine (or seemingly so) connection in the recommendation. When that becomes a paid promotion, it often gets out these days and runs the risk of discrediting both artists. Not exactly the same, but see how quickly Rihanna’s endorsement of Blackberry was torpedoed because every report noted she uses an iPhone.

Interestingly, and perhaps worth a future piece, I think Beyoncé’s sister Solange has more to offer indie musicians. The influence of her connections can’t be overlooked, but I feel like she’s carved out great respect with indie music channels and writers in her own right. I learned about her music via the semi-hipster blogs, rather than mainstream outlets, and had to Google to confirm the Knowles connection. Certainly not pure DIY marketing, but her approach speaks to the career longevity I discussed.

Good thoughts, thanks again!

Another brilliant one for the internets …

But I had a different take on the Beyoncé thing that had her record company learn from the release of “4″ using the whole “leaked” approach to seize attention from Lady Gaga.

It wasn’t as effective as they expected in sales and after all, with digital downloads limiting the choices of distributable media options, if it’s not made at the iTunes point if sale it’s pirated,

But what do you think of taking a “Diana Ross” approach breaking new artists, where an artist like Beyoncé is paid to endorse an indie act?