I'm Your Puppet

The Myth of the Industry Plant

I remember the first time I noticed the term “Industry Plant.” I was asking my then-middle school-aged son Bennett about a rap musician, I think it was just after I’d seen Chance the Rapper guesting at the 2016 Eaux Claire festival. Maybe it was Travis Scott, I don’t know…could’ve been any number of breakout rappers. “I heard he was an industry plant,” Bennett said. What? Industry plant? I’d heard versions of the term for decades, but to hear it from my 12-year-old son was a shock. How does he know what that is?

Bennett explained that in the rap world fans pushed back when artists claimed to be street-level hustlers who achieved viral fame through their own inginuity, when in fact they’d received help in the form of investment or resources from some industry-connected people. Or, alternatively, they just had access to family money that provided opportunities, “nepo babies,” if you will. On Reddit boards and social media comments, being an industry plant was considered bad enough to cause my 7th grader to write off an artist as bogus because he didn’t earn his success. But is he any good, I thought?

I took the message to be - in the world of Soundcloud rap, epicenter of music virality at the time - the slur “industry plant” was more about misrepresentation of an artist’s back story than the source of virality.

Since then, however, the term has crept into other genres. Now it seems like practically any artist - particularly people of color and women - who enjoy quick success on digital platforms will be accused of being an industry plant at some point. In the toxic world of social media shitposting, it doesn’t seem to matter anymore whether an act has misrepresented their origin story.

And I can tell you most of it is complete and utter bullshit. Jack Harlow? I’m friends with the manager Chris Thomas, who as talented young artist manager from Harlow’s hometown of Louisville who took Jack on as a client half a decade before he broke, booking him on club tours before anyone in the mainstream had a clue. Is Jack an industry plant because somebody decided to believe in him and help him out? Phoebe Bridgers? First of all she grew up in LA - does being from LA make you a plant, even if you’re from a middle-class, single-parent home in Pasadena? I worked with Phoebe starting in 2014 - if she’s an industry plant, then it’s because of my own Machiavellian operation. Jack and Phoebe are major artists who pretty much came up the old-fashioned way - people responded to their talent, and the quality of their work. Yes they had some help along the way from people who work in the music business….but that is true of literally every artist who ever had any real success. Despite all the changes in the industry, that’s as true now as at any other time in the history of the music business.

Phoebe addressed accusations of women in particular being called out as industry plants, noting that some of the more egregious examples men benefitting from privilege are given a pass, such as The Strokes. Whether it’s Wet Leg, Olivia Rodrigo, Billie Eilish, or even Taylor Swift, recent accusations seem to focus on young women. I agree with Phoebe that this trend is driven by misogyny, plain and simple. Seemingly none of these artists misrepresented their trajectory. Men are given a pass, even when their privilege is self-evident. But women? People want to believe they didn’t earn their success.

Success is primarily earned through talent, through extraordinary work. I don’t believe artists should be required to disclose how they came to the public’s attention. I prefer if artists don’t make up their back-story, but if they do, it’s their business - between them and their fans. In the end, the work is what matters.

The industry plant thing reminds me of the “fake indie” controversy in the 80s and early 90s. Before we called the music “indie" (something I first became aware of touring in the U.K. in the early 90s), independent labels had iron-clad credibility compared to majors. Sometimes a major label would sign a band and create or utilize an independent imprint purely for branding. For example, Guns N’ Roses’ first release Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide came out on the Uzi Suicide label. The band had signed with Geffen Records; Geffen created Uzi Suicide solely for the one release. Similarly, when Smashing Pumpkins signed to Virgin in 1990, Virgin decided to market the band under its independent subsidiary Caroline Records. The guy who signed the band is a friend of mine - he confirmed to me they did this purely as a marketing play to build on the credibility the band had developed by releasing a Sub Pop single. Music insiders aka record store and college radio nerds scoffed at fake indies. But it didn’t stop GNR or Smashing Pumpkins from breaking huge on major labels.

When I played in Boston underground bands, I remember having an epiphany that practically every band on our scene came from money. I won’t name names, but yes - people close to me had trust funds and endless resources. I knew a guy in a band who inherited $30M at age 21. I remember going to an ATM after a band dude rumored to be wealthy and looking at the receipt he left behind - over $50K in available checking account balance. This was unimaginable - I never had more than a few hundred bucks in the bank at a time. You see, I’m a faculty kid from a college town - I grew up comfortable but I am certainly NOT “from money.” It was occasionally uncomfortable to be in a scene where others had a lot more money and resources than I did,¹ but I worked jobs so that I always had a few bucks, and in the end I benefitted from their advantages. I understood even at the time that success in music took funding and resources. We found it where we could until labels and publishers showed up, and it’s still that way today.

When someone accuses an artist of being an industry plant, here’s how I think about it. If the artist has made false public statements about being a true independent, from the street, or whatever, then that’s unflattering. Nevertheless, self-mythologizing is far older than rock n’ roll. Most origin stories are at least embellished. It’s better not to outright lie about it, but artists are going to use the resources they have. If I find a truly great artist who has access to funding and resources, I’m thrilled. In such a case, it’s usually family money or a benefactor who doesn’t expect a return. Early funding could mean the difference between a good deal and a bad deal with a label, publisher, or even manager. Ultimately, the artist will make it or not on their talent and work ethic. It’s a bottomless pit to start to talk about privilege, because you could make an argument that almost anyone had some sort of unfair advantage, whether it’s from music lessons, encouraging parents, or even the city they live in. Clearly there isn’t a level playing field, and that’s not going to change.

One thing I won’t worry a single second about is whether my getting involved with an artist at an early stage makes people think the artist is an industry plant. I work in the music business! I am constantly seeking exceptional talent! Of course I’ll turn over every stone seeking investment, resources, and strategies to build an audience - it’s what I do! Similarly, I’m not going to worry whether the funding and resources for a project are from a source perceived as a fake indie or some other bullshit media construct. None of this shit matters. I strongly believe the industry should strive for fairness and opportunities for musicians who have less privilege/are disenfranchised, and we need structures and resources for that.² Still, as gatekeepers are replaced by algorithms, exceptional talent plus effort continues to prevail. Resources flow to the most promising, most ambitious projects. Everyone is an industry plant, nobody is an industry plant. If you hear someone using these slurs, listen closely. It may mask opinions and objectives that are even more problematic and regressive.

1. Mostly it was annoying when obscenely rich folks let me buy them a meal because they didn’t carry money. They assumed someone would have money on hand, and because money for insignificant things like buying a meal was mostly an inconvenience, it wouldn’t matter if someone else picke up the bill. That drove me crazy because it was a meal I could barely afford for myself.

2. A good example is my friend’s nonprofit, Notes for Notes, which makes recording studios accessible to young musicians and music entrepreneurs in underprivilged areas.