More on the "controversy"

[boywiththorninside]

The question of expanding the audience is an interesting one. What is the answer?

 

When Wilco happens to get a bad review, I often see people comment, "I'm glad they got a bad review. This means less people at their shows. Easier for me to get tickets, etc." However, when they do a commercial, the consensus seems to be, "Great! A wonderful opportunity for a new audience."

 

I've been confused by this incongruity. Selfishly, I would put myself in the former group. I like being able to get tickets to shows.

[Guest Mr. Sandman]

Mr ....

 

At first I was concerned about your recent name change. Why would someone so new want to change his name so quickly? Is it out of shame because Jeff and his family don't really like this jnickerson character? Is it because you are on the run from the law and can't have anyone trace you?

 

but aha! I have realized why you changed your name:

 

The four dots each represent a grain of sand that has been firmly wedged into the recesses of your vagina. You are showing solidarity with all those people out there with sandy vaginas, and for this i salute you!!!

 

However, should you want to get rid of this sand and become happy once more, here are my suggestions, 1 suggestion for each grain of sand:

 

1. Watch the "Man in the Sand" DVD and comment in the the "Just a Fan" section of the forum.

2. Tell people in "Someone Else's Song" how much you like the Talking Heads album "Sand in the Vaseline"

3. Tell people in the MLB thread how much you enjoy Sandy Kaufax

4. Go to the Ummm.... section and make a joke about the sand in your vagina.

 

Sandily Yours,

Mr. Sandman

 

edit: this is ction Analogman

[tongue-tied]

i'm upset that the commercials don't feature wilco members driving around in their v-dubs

[Chendizzle]

You are correct... I dismiss the philosophy of socialism, communism and any others that directly oppose individual liberty (the concept this country was founded on). I suck that way.

 

Ok sorry to go off topic, but I gotta stick up for my man Marx: Communism has NOTHING to do with opposing individual liberty or everyone having the same amount of money or wearing the same shirt any of the gobbledeegook that conventional American thinking would have you believe. Communism is one thing and one thing only: when the workers who produce the surplus value are the same entity that appropriate and distribute the surplus value. That's it, that's all it has ever been. If you are referring to Cuba/USSR/North Korea/whatever, the bastardized thing they do is really state capitalism. I just ask that before you bash some philosophy, you know your shizzle.

 

Ok once again I apologize for going off topic

[MrRain422]

Fugazi really isn't a better example though - they still made a living from their music. It was a relatively meager living, for sure, and one spent on the road for long periods of time (among other sacrifices). But I don't think those guys had to work day jobs much past the first tour.

 

Also, I'm not sure that Ian MacKaye has ever condemned bands that didn't adhere to his concept of how to do business. In fact, his label released records by at least a couple of bands who later went on to sign with major labels. If he's militant, it's in regards to living up to his own standards, not judging others who fail to meet his expectations.

 

It should also be noted that Ian MacKaye came from a relatively priveliged background, and that allowed him to take the time to get his independent music ventures fairly viable before he starved. Not a knock on him at all -- he's probably got more artistic integrity than anyone else I can think of -- but it's certainly something that played a roll in how successfully he's been able to live by his chosen principles.

 

The question of expanding the audience is an interesting one. What is the answer?

 

When Wilco happens to get a bad review, I often see people comment, "I'm glad they got a bad review. This means less people at their shows. Easier for me to get tickets, etc." However, when they do a commercial, the consensus seems to be, "Great! A wonderful opportunity for a new audience."

 

I've been confused by this incongruity. Selfishly, I would put myself in the former group. I like being able to get tickets to shows.

 

The "I'm glad they got a bad review because it means less people competing for tickets" perspective has certainly been out there, but I'm not sure that it was ever a concensus. Regardless, unless you can show that it's the same people taking both of those stances, then I'm not sure what you're point is.

 

Of course they aren't necessarily in conflict anyway. If the idea is to make seeing them easier, then anything else that supplements the Wilco income can help to keep ticket prices down.

[redstripe]

that they posted this message indicates that they received at least some negative feedback. it's not unreasonable to think their label might have an intern monitor this board.

 

obviously they feel that making that money was more important than isolating the percentage of fans who felt alienated by this move, and who's feelings won't have been ameliorated by that post.

[caliber66]

that they posted this message indicates that they received at least some negative feedback. it's not unreasonable to think their label might have an intern monitor this board.

Jeff's wife has an account here, and has posted a thread on the subject. The band is aware of a lot of things that go on here.

[Good Old Neon]

The question of expanding the audience is an interesting one. What is the answer?

 

When Wilco happens to get a bad review, I often see people comment, "I'm glad they got a bad review. This means less people at their shows. Easier for me to get tickets, etc." However, when they do a commercial, the consensus seems to be, "Great! A wonderful opportunity for a new audience."

 

I've been confused by this incongruity. Selfishly, I would put myself in the former group. I like being able to get tickets to shows.

 

I

[ction]

The question of expanding the audience is an interesting one. What is the answer?

 

When Wilco happens to get a bad review, I often see people comment, "I'm glad they got a bad review. This means less people at their shows. Easier for me to get tickets, etc." However, when they do a commercial, the consensus seems to be, "Great! A wonderful opportunity for a new audience."

 

I've been confused by this incongruity. Selfishly, I would put myself in the former group. I like being able to get tickets to shows.

 

I guess the question is, are the contradictory statements coming from the same people?

[EL the Famous]

Good point - I had a subscription to Adbusters for a year or so before realizing I was tired of being yelled at/talked down to. I can turn on the TV and get the same feeling.

 

I guess I can just cite examples from a personal and professional perspective that sort of deflate the whole 'en masse' effect that brand advertising/marketing play in our buying decisions.

 

My company took drastic cultural changes to focus more on or brand and it did indeed help. However, at the end of the day, it's our product design and quality that determines our success in the marketplace.

 

On a personal level, you may lure me in to at least consider a particular product...but if the taste/performance/design/etc. isn't worth the price tag you've attached to it and I can get the same thing that has little to no brand attached to it, i'll do it.

 

Granted, those are MY personal experieinces and viewpoints. I'd never say it's wrong for you to feel the music has been soiled by this partnership...I will say that it's dissapointing that someone who prides themselves on rallying against the concept of 'advertising' or 'marketing' in relation to art

(or in general for that matter) would let these ads influence you at all...positively or negatively. You are just giving it creedence that the ads hold that much power over the art itself. At the end of the day...it is the same exact music you listened to before...the ads didn't change the music, they changed your PERCEPTION of the music or, really, you ALLOWED them to change your perception. I guess one could challenge you should look at your own accountability in the dyadic of this whole scenario.

 

True' date=' but you can't ignore scale. I don't see public art filling nearly every crevice of available space.[/quote']

 

but who's to blame for that? The marketing/advertsing firms and the companies they represent OR those who own the properties these ads are taking up? let's put accountability where it should be. i'll one up that stream of consciousness, by arguing that it still boils down to your personal ability to interact or not interact with it. until they brand Nike on the inside of your eyeballs or your significant others good parts, you can choose to physically structure your life outside it's reach or learn to shut it out. we're all involved in this scenario and while some people in the equation have more power than others...it's up to the individual on exactly who has the lion's share of said power. it's advertising, not law.

[jdmel]

this is ridiculous, if anything via chicago sold out by being so collectively upset about this.. its the music BUSINESS

[Sir Stewart]

The band is aware of a lot of things that go on here.

[OOO]

I for one don't think "wanting the band to be very successful" and "wanting to get good tickets to see the band, preferably in a small venue" are mutually exclusive at all. Most of us here want both of those things. Even if they can't realistically happen at the same time, we still want them both

[Dreamin']

but who's to blame for that? The marketing/advertsing firms and the companies they represent OR those who own the properties these ads are taking up? let's put accountability where it should be. i'll one up that stream of consciousness, by arguing that it still boils down to your personal ability to interact or not interact with it. until they brand Nike on the inside of your eyeballs or your significant others good parts, you can choose to physically structure your life outside it's reach or learn to shut it out. we're all involved in this scenario and while some people in the equation have more power than others...it's up to the individual on exactly who has the lion's share of said power. it's advertising, not law.

You're right, I can shut down, tune out, hit the mute button, etc., but it's like swatting flies sometimes... and I still can't see the fucking mountains!

[Good Old Neon]

You're right, I can shut down, tune out, hit the mute button, etc., but it's like swatting flies sometimes... and I still can't see the fucking mountains!

 

Am I hallucinating, or, was there some discussion a while back about beaming advertisements back to us from like, outer space? Or from like, way up there in the sky there?

[jethro]

But, but, the VW press release says that this is Wilco's first-ever licensing deal or something like that.

You're doing it wrong, it's more like: Bu-bu-bu... the VW press release...

 

I don't really care about this one way or the other but there's no getting around 5 or 6 songs being a different thing than one song. Even so I don't really have any emotional attachment to the SBS songs so I don't care much how they're used. If it was for a song like Via Chicago, Poor Places, Lonely 1, etc. then I'd be kind of disappointed and would hope at least that the commercial got a Pink Moon style treatment as opposed to the superficial 20 seconds of background music that the current ads feature.

 

My advice to Wilco would be to stop worrying about it, judging by the limited amount of attention I've paid to this "controversy" here 99.9% of the fans either don't care or would support the band no matter what.

[ms. yvon]

sir stew, WHERE do you find those things.

 

did americans REALLY dress like that in the 80's.

 

christ. that clip put me right off my oatmeal

[OOO]

I still can't see the fucking mountains!

 

thats because of smog. at least in my case.

[caliber66]

[Dan-O]

I disagree with you 110% - but let

[Good Old Neon]

let's put accountability where it should be. i'll one up that stream of consciousness, by arguing that it still boils down to your personal ability to interact or not interact with it. until they brand Nike on the inside of your eyeballs or your significant others good parts, you can choose to physically structure your life outside it's reach or learn to shut it out. we're all involved in this scenario and while some people in the equation have more power than others...it's up to the individual on exactly who has the lion's share of said power. it's advertising, not law.

 

Or, maybe there ought to be limits put on advertisings obtrusivness in public areas

[Sir Stewart]

sir stew, WHERE do you find those things.

 

did americans REALLY dress like that in the 80's.

 

christ. that clip put me right off my oatmeal

[beadsman]

WILCO selling its music to VW leaves some with a bad emotional after-taste:

 

 

http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/08/082906.html

[EL the Famous]

You're right, I can shut down, tune out, hit the mute button, etc., but it's like swatting flies sometimes... and I still can't see the mountains!

 

Move into the mountains then.

 

Kidding. I don't disagree w/ the essence of what you are saying Judy...i'd rather see more public art than advertising...mountains than billboards. I'm just saying that the billboard doesn't really ruin the mountain itself, but just your view of it.

 

Also, if you are going to try and stop something like that from happening...one could challenge you'd get more mileage rallying against the property owners versus the companies that would take dvantage of the available space. One/several property versus millions of businesses.

[Sir Stewart]

WILCO selling its music to VW leaves some with a bad emotional after-taste:

http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/08/082906.html

That guy just called my grandmother a "brand." Jesus.