If ever there was a misleading and off-the-mark article, it is "iTunes Under Threat as Bands Take Their Business Elsewhere" at The Telegraph. The piece rehashes the same points made in a very similar Wall Street Journal article a few weeks ago (Kid Rock doesn't want to sell single tracks, Estelle's album was pulled from iTunes by her label, Katy Perry can sell singles but not many albums).

The article added a quote from Elbow's Guy Garvey. "iTunes is responsible for the death of the album," he said. Quite a sentiment from a guy that keeps on releasing albums and just won a Mercury Prize for his latest one, not for a single track or an EP or a ringtone or a ringle or a track/ringtone bundle. (I wonder if he would have won the Mercury Prize if the tracks were not available on iTunes?)

Now that AC/DC has chosen not to release its album at iTunes, The Telegraph acts like a mass movement is underway.

I'll save you from reading the article and break the news to you right now. iTunes is not under an imminent threat. There is no movement away from iTunes, only occasional decisions by bands with a back catalog of considerable renown and demand. That a handful of high-profile bands have chosen not to sell music at iTunes means little. iTunes is where most people shop for downloads. Artists will put their music where people will buy it. It's really pretty simple.

iTunes has managed to do brisk business without the mother of all catalogs, The Beatles. It can survive without a few more superstars. The strength of Apple and the iPod, not the actions of a few bands, will determine iTunes' position as the preeminent music store.

[music jobs] New York University is seeking a Department Chair for The Clive Davis Department of Recorded Music.