Chapter 2: Looking at the Data

When examining the landscape of the global music industry, it’s impossible to ignore the centralization that has occurred due to mergers between major publishing houses, such as EMI and Sony Music Publishers. These mergers have consolidated market power and created an environment where U.S. independent artists are thriving through self-publishing, while artists in other countries—such as Australia, Canada, and many emerging economies—are facing additional constraints.

Data: APRA’s Revenue and Distribution

APRA (Australasian Performing Right Association) collects approximately AUD $19.23 per capita, resulting in an estimated AUD $476 million annually. Despite this, only a small percentage of these funds reach smaller, independent creators. According to APRA’s reports, 90% of royalties are typically paid to just 10% of its members, suggesting that the system disproportionately benefits major corporations and top-performing artists [source].

In comparison, BMI and ASCAP in the U.S. operate under a non-exclusive input agreement model, which allows artists to have more control over their rights. This more decentralized model results in a more equitable distribution of royalties. BMI, for instance, generated USD $1.4 billion in revenue in 2023, with a significant portion reaching smaller creators compared to APRA’s distribution model [source].

Disparities in Music Exports

Looking at music export data reveals further disparities. In 2023, the U.S. music industry generated USD $17.1 billion, with a large portion coming from global music sales. Meanwhile, Australia’s music export revenue amounted to only AUD $195 million, or approximately AUD $7.50 per capita. This stark contrast highlights the challenges faced by Australian artists in accessing international markets, especially compared to their U.S. counterparts [source].

The Role of SAG-AFTRA and U.S. Content Dominance on Australian Artists

The Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) primarily represents U.S.-based performers, including vocalists and musicians, in union-regulated productions. Through Global Rule One, SAG-AFTRA requires its members to work exclusively under union contracts worldwide, which effectively prioritizes U.S.-based talent for roles in Hollywood and other union-affiliated productions [SAG-AFTRA: Global Rule One].

For Australian artists, particularly those represented by APRA, access to these lucrative U.S.-based content markets is challenging. Unlike ASCAP or BMI’s non-exclusive systems in the U.S., which empower artists to negotiate direct licenses and pursue international opportunities independently, APRA’s centralized licensing model restricts Australian artists’ ability to access these projects. As a result, Australian talent often misses out on participating in U.S.-based productions that are SAG-AFTRA affiliated, including music roles in film, television, and streaming content.

The dominance of U.S. content in Australia further underscores this challenge. In 2023, U.S. films made up 86% of Australia’s box office revenue, and American streaming platforms like Netflix have a significant presence in Australian households, with approximately 65% penetration [Screen Australia], [Statista]. This pervasive American media presence means that Australians are primarily consuming U.S.-produced content, but Australian artists, under APRA’s exclusive model, find it difficult to participate in these projects.

The ABC’s Role and the Centralization of Australian Culture

The ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) plays an essential role in Australian culture, providing news, entertainment, and educational content. With an annual budget of approximately AUD $1 billion, the ABC costs each Australian roughly AUD $40 per capita. Despite being a critical public broadcaster, it has experienced funding cuts, leading to a 40% reduction in its workforce since 1989. The rising costs of producing content—30% for general content and 90% for children’s TV—have placed further financial pressure on the organization [source].

Both the ABC and APRA operate within centralized structures, limiting opportunities for decentralized, grassroots innovation. Just as the ABC focuses on nationalized programming, often influenced by government priorities, APRA’s structure favors the