I liked the article (That's a first for me and TC), but one small nit: Payola is only unethical when it is not disclosed. In radio, payola was wrong becaue the radio stations claimed to be playing the most popular music as measured by sales or fan requests or whatever, when in reality they were playing what they were paid to play.<p>DEMO may be charging $18,500, but they disclose that up front. It may not be to their competitor's taste, but it isn't Payola.<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payola</a><p>"Payola, in the American music industry, is the illegal practice of payment or other inducement by record companies for the broadcast of recordings on music radio, in which the song is presented as being part of the normal day's broadcast. Under US law, 47 U.S.C. § 317, a radio station can play a specific song in exchange for money, but this must be disclosed on the air as being sponsored airtime, and that play of the song should not be counted as a "regular airplay." The term has come to refer to any secret payment made to cast a product in a positive light (such as obtaining positive reviews)."