The Arcom study was presented on Thursday June 30 at the "Entreprendre dans la culture" forum at the Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Architecture Paris-Belleville, by Laurence Pécaut-Rivolier, member of the Arcom College, co-chair of the "Protection and diffusion of creation and sports-related contdnt on the Internet" working group and vice-chair of the "Supervision of online platforms" working group, and Séverine Morin, Director of Studies and Forecasting at the CNM.
Introduction
Livestream supplies, and in particular music livestreams , first appeared on the scene in 2007, when it became possible to show live video on the Internet, but their development accelerated with the health crisis and the sudden shutdown of cultural venues in March 2020. The first livestream initiatives were mostly isolated performances, filmed and shown online to fill a supply that was absent when concert halls were shut down. At the time, they reflected artists' need to maintain links with their audiences, to remain visible in the profusion of web platforms and applications, and to exist through their creative work. In the absence of a longer-term strategy, many of these projects were offered free of charge, and were highly artisanal in nature. Few of them were designed with a radically innovative aesthetic or staging (making a link with the world of video games, through avatars or interactive cameras, for example). Supplies then gradually became more professional, offering paying models with sometimes highly elaborate content.
The reopening of concert halls in May 2021 and the end of capacity restrictions in February 2022 signal a significant development in the audience's relationship with live events. While the return to live performance venues is slowing down, with one in two spectators who have historically attended cultural venues acknowledging in January 2022 that they had reduced this activity, the consumption of live (live) and deferred broadcasting (replay) musical performances seems to be becoming entrenched in the habits of part of the public. Paradoxically, at the same time, livestream production is running out of steam. With the exception of a small number of initiatives (most of which are international in scope), artists and the professionals who accompany them now seem to be concentrating on replaying physical concerts.
Considered by a majority of industry stakeholders as a palliative to live performance, essentially serving a promotional purpose in times of crisis and venue shutdown, livestreams are now being used by a significant number of people, prompting us to take a fresh look at this format. It's crucial that we now define the support conditions needed to develop supply and demand, so that livestreaming can become a fully-fledged digital practice with a strong value proposition.
How can we create and maintain a virtuous circle offering fair remuneration to all players in this market? To what extent should the regulatory framework in which music professionals operate be developed? What is the position of French players in the face of the market reorganization underway? How does the livestream experience differ from a physical concert, and how can we capitalize on these differentiating factors? What are the different livestream models and their profitability prospects?
The aim of this study, carried out jointly by the French regulatory authority for audiovisual and digital communication (Arcom) and the Centre national de la musique (CNM), is to provide some answers and food for thought to the issues and uncertainties raised by the development of music livestreaming in France.
