In Fairley's excerpt, he addresses how small independent companies played a big role in the marketing of world music by starting the "world music movement" in the United Kingdom (Fairley, 2001, p. 276). Even though, the world music movement was initialized through recording and licensing decisions, the individual recording companies behind the decisions were driven by their commitment to make world music recordings more accessible to people (Fairley, 2001, p. 276). A significant characteristic of the world music movement is that the independent companies affiliated with movement were motivated by their passion for the music itself, and not due to capitalist goals of competing for market share as assumed by critics (Fairley, 2001, p. 276).
It is evident that the global music industry has flourished due to the introduction and cooperative marketing plan of world music, but there are still many who criticized the music industry for exploiting world music from its tradition contexts. In Fairley's excerpt, he describes how musician and record producer, Ian Anderson, replies to a journalist's remark criticizing the world music scene as "mistaken at best, exploitative at worst" (Fairley, 2001, p. 279). Anderson conveys through his statement that critics of the globalization of music, like the journalist Rick Glanville, could not understand how music enthusiasts could dedicate their work solely on bringing world music to mass attention, and therefore these critics ignorantly attempt to destroy the credibility of music enthusiasts by labeling them as "enemies" or cultural imperialists (Fairley, 2001, p. 279). Unreservedly, I disagree with Glanville's critical stance because I recognize that these enthusiasts are dedicated in putting out records and organizing concerts to promote world music in a global spotlight because they want more people to know about a type of music they have discovered and are passionate about.
