In Praise of Selling out...in the Chicago Reader

[LouieB]

I hope this wasn't posted while I was out of town, but this is a pretty interesting article about our current favorite subject and on top of it VC gets a major mention. Check it out.

 

LouieB

 

 

In Praise of Selling Out

 

The Shins; Sonic Youth

 

By Miles Raymer

June 22, 2007

 

IF YOU WERE in line for the Fergie show two Sundays ago at the House of Blues, you probably picked up on two things: the excitement of the club-casual crowd and the hum of corporate synergy. None of us had to pay money to get in -- a few tickets had been given away to the general public in radio promotions, but the rest had gone to fans who bought Verizon-enabled Motorola phones, downloaded Fergie content through Verizon's V Cast media marketplace, or won them in contests held by Candie's and Kohl's or at brick-and-mortar Verizon outlets.

 

Inside the venue there was no possible sight line that didn't intersect a poster, placard, or video screen carrying one or more sponsors' logos. After the opening band's set, an immense screen dropped in front of the stage, displaying text messages sent by concertgoers and still more logos. And that was when it wasn't showing actual commercials. Even before the fashion show by Candie's and Kohl's, even before Fergie's onstage shout-outs to the sponsors, I started to feel exploited. And I thought to myself: I'm watching the concert of the future.

 

As the music industry struggles to adapt to the changes forced on it by file sharing and the Internet, big labels are becoming inhospitable places for all but the hugest stars. Album sales continue to decline, profits are more or less flat despite increases in single-song downloads and ringtone sales, and blogs that can leak new music with impunity are stealing the promotional thunder from commercial radio. The majors, feeling threatened, are shunting more and more of the financial risk of selling music onto the artists, shrinking advances so that bands run out of money before they see any royalties. Labels are taking fewer chances on up-and-comers, and they're flat out dropping bands left and right -- EMI's recent merger of Virgin and Capitol, for instance, was followed by a purge of both their rosters.

 

In this environment, corporate sponsorship -- once the domain of geezer megabands like the Rolling Stones and the ultimate sign of artistic bankruptcy -- and its close cousin, music placement, are increasingly seen as acceptable ways for young groups to break or for established acts to sustain themselves. For the past couple years Scion, Toyota's youth-targeted model line, has been sponsoring shows by hip-hop heavyweights like Redman and GZA, and tickets to Mary J. Blige's date at the House of Blues last November, cosponsored by American Airlines, were only available to Citibank cardholders. In 2003 Detroit garage weirdos the Clone Defects got a nice payday when Mitsubishi bought one of their songs for a TV ad (the company's also used the Buzzcocks and the Fall), and the Dandy Warhols were able to buy a quarter of a city block in Portland thanks in part to a massive overseas Vodafone campaign in 2001 that used their tune "Bohemian Like You."

 

It's hard to say what counts as "selling out" these days, even for the dedicated punks and hip-hop heads most likely to deploy the phrase. Corporations want the credibility that comes with the music they're co-opting, so an artist doesn't have to tidy up to win their patronage. And letting somebody pay you for the use of music you would've made anyway is hardly the taboo it once was, in part because such deals have become so ubiquitous. Musicians get exposure and buy real estate, and when companies sponsor shows, fans benefit too, getting free tickets, downloads, and merch, along with other perks. The music industry might end up rescued by corporations that make everything but music.

 

Indie bands, once firmly enjoined by the DIY ethic of the underground to steer clear of capitalist devils, have been well represented among the beneficiaries of corporate largesse -- probably because they're relatively cheap. When the Shins released Oh, Inverted World on Sub Pop in 2001, they were a typical Sub Pop-size act, making waves on the indie scene but not in the mainstream. They got their big break not from a daring radio programmer who saw their potential or a viral video that made the leap to MTV but from a McDonald's commercial that used their single "New Slang" in 2002, exposing them to an audience much larger than the one Sub Pop's promotional efforts could've reached. (The Garden State soundtrack didn't hurt either.) Oh, Inverted World and its follow-up, Chutes Too Narrow, sold about a million copies put together, and the band's third album, Wincing the Night Away, debuted at number two on the Billboard 200 in late January. It's sold more than 400,000 copies to date -- massive numbers for an indie release. The Shins obviously know they're getting juice from ad appearances -- since the McDonald's spot aired, they've licensed songs to the Gap and, in Ireland, to Guinness.

 

Even Sonic Youth -- the gold standard for indie-rock incorruptibility, their major-label deal notwithstanding -- recently let it slip that they're putting out a celebrity-curated best-of CD available exclusively through Starbucks. Considering that releases from the coffee chain's imprint, Hear Music, routinely sell well enough to compete with records from the band's own parent label, Universal Music Group, it's a savvy business decision, and Sonic Youth have certainly accumulated enough cred to weather the disapproval of their more orthodox fans.

 

Bands with older listeners -- folks more likely to hold on to their old-timey indie ideals -- have to brace themselves for that sort of backlash when they make compromises. Wilco is licensing songs from the new Sky Blue Sky for use in a series of Volkswagen commercials, and an entry on the Wilco fan forum Via Chicago titled "The inevitable sell out post" has provoked 41 pages of debate. The band defended the decision at wilcoworld.net: "This is a subject we've discussed internally many times over the years regarding movies, TV shows and even the odd advertisement," they wrote. "With the commercial radio airplay route getting more difficult for many bands (including Wilco); we see this as another way to get the music out there. As with most of the above (with the debatable exception of radio) the band gets paid for this. And we feel okay about VWs. Several of us even drive them." Corporate-connected acts with predominantly younger audiences, on the other hand, don't spend a lot of time apologizing for making money -- punk rockers are supposed to be especially hostile to the Man, but music consumers in the 15-24 demographic grew up watching punk, emo, and metalcore bands on the Vans Warped Tour, Rockstar Energy Drink's Taste of Chaos tour, and the Honda Civic Tour.

 

If you remember the days when it was tantamount to treason for an indie rocker to sign to a major label, you might feel like commercialization is eroding a vital but intangible spirit and polluting the noble ideal of art for art's sake. But people who make music for a living have always needed to support themselves somehow, and they have to change with the industry that pays their bills -- if they can't stay safely in the black by playing gigs or selling records, some of them are bound to choose licensing deals and sponsorships over day jobs or credit-card debt.

 

And the corporations -- what do they get out of the deal? Well, less than a week after Fergie, I saw the Walkmen play Taste of Randolph Street. They're one of my favorite bands going, and almost every one of their songs is tied in my mind to a certain time and place, the way all my favorite songs are. But when the piano riff that opens "We've Been Had" started up, all I could think of was the Saturn commercial I heard it in back in 2003.

[bobbob1313]

Awesome. We're going to the toppermost of the poppermost, boys.

[W(TF)]

I missed the big debate here on VC... but fwiw the VW ads are fine by me. I take the band's word at face value on this one...shit, clearchannel owns the airwaves and they are nothing but corpoganda bastards anyway. The Starbucks thing is mildly 'offensive', in the vaguest sense of the word; just because I don't really care much for Starbucks Culture. And again, it's just another distribution channel.

 

I was a lot more put out by Dylan's Bank Of Montreal ad campaign. But, I was so much older then....

[Atticus]

41 pages?

 

puuuuuuullllleeeeeeeezzzzzzz...

[deepseacatfish]

I'm not crying "sellout" at anyone, but I don't like the idea that the music industry would be heading in a direction where every concert/album/etc. would be corporate sponsored in some way. I don't mind commercials at all, or little things, but concerts that are super-saturated with coroporate stuff and too many company exclusive tie-in deals irks me. I just don't like the concept.

 

 

I still teh Wilcos, and I hope news media will start dedicating more of its time to scouring VC for tidbits.

[beadsman]

Nah, not every artist will sell out their art for the corporate dollars.

 

The cost of making and distributing a recording has fallen to the point where you no longer need a label to finance it for you.

 

There'll be two kinds of artists: corporate whores and those who do it for the love of music.

 

The Pitchfork approved former will do anything and everything to sustain their fat lives by selling their music to anyone and everyone.

 

The latter will, like T.S. Eliot, rely on a day job or other line of work for their income and produce their art...cuz they still love rock and roll.

[OOO]

yes, there can only be two types of artists.

[napoleon]

since when is there a piano in "we've been had"?

[beadsman]

yes, there can only be two types of artists.

 

Obliviously. Now you're catching on.

[EL the Famous]

yes, there can only be two types of artists.

 

it's closer than you think.

 

again, no matter how bombarded by it you are...you do have a choice as to how much you let this stuff affect you. that fergie example is a little crazy, but if somebody was a fan and the show was good, are they really going to care? i really like the example of the vans warped tour, which my company sponsored one year. the sponsorships offset the cost of the tickets and allowed the organizers to really put together a very cool day for those that attended. a day so cool you ended up numb to the marketing onslaught after 15 minutes of being there. granted, some of that credit has to go to the artists involved as well and how interactive they were w/ the concertgoers even outside of their actual performance...but still.

 

staying the same wheelhouse, most of the attendees are completely comfortable w/ said sponsorhips due to the practice of action sports (skateboarding, snowboarding, etc.) atheletes having a gaggle of them. much like this scenario...everybody wins. the bands get enough financial solvency to continue and/or expand their creation/distribution of the music you love while the corporations get some exposure to you as a consumer AND...circling back to my original point, if you are confident/smart enough in yourself to make your own decisions in the face of media influence, who the hell cares?

[deepseacatfish]

again, no matter how bombarded by it you are...you do have a choice as to how much you let this stuff affect you.

 

staying the same wheelhouse, most of the attendees are completely comfortable w/ said sponsorhips due to the practice of action sports (skateboarding, snowboarding, etc.) atheletes having a gaggle of them. much like this scenario...everybody wins. the bands get enough financial solvency to continue and/or expand their creation/distribution of the music you love while the corporations get some exposure to you as a consumer

I completely agree with you on these points. I definitely see the benefit for the artist/fan/corporation, and certainly I've been to festivals and shows that have had some sponsorship that has either reduced ticket prices or in conjunction with something else made them free. That is great for everyone.

 

My only trepidation is where it becomes very difficult for music that is not sponsored or tied in to something to be made and distributed reasonably. I don't know if that will be a problem. The Fergie situation is also disconcerting and I hope that things don't generally make it to that point, I would feel very dissillussioned. But in general sponsorship isn't a big deal, it's a good thing...I mean, it's been in art galleries for a long time and you don't hear people screaming "sellout" at them.

[LouieB]

I mean, it's been in art galleries for a long time and you don't hear people screaming "sellout" at them.

I wish I thought Fergie was an actual "artist". People at North Hampton were talking about her and all I kept thinking was Fergie and Wilco?? Same fans???

 

I have never known an artist of any sort that didn't want their work consumed by others.

 

LouieB

[deepseacatfish]

I wish I thought Fergie was an actual "artist". People at North Hampton were talking about her and all I kept thinking was Fergie and Wilco?? Same fans???

Yeah, Fergie is not really worth consuming in my book.

[Good Old Neon]

it's closer than you think.

 

again, no matter how bombarded by it you are...you do have a choice as to how much you let this stuff affect you. that fergie example is a little crazy, but if somebody was a fan and the show was good, are they really going to care? i really like the example of the vans warped tour, which my company sponsored one year. the sponsorships offset the cost of the tickets and allowed the organizers to really put together a very cool day for those that attended. a day so cool you ended up numb to the marketing onslaught after 15 minutes of being there. granted, some of that credit has to go to the artists involved as well and how interactive they were w/ the concertgoers even outside of their actual performance...but still.

 

staying the same wheelhouse, most of the attendees are completely comfortable w/ said sponsorhips due to the practice of action sports (skateboarding, snowboarding, etc.) atheletes having a gaggle of them. much like this scenario...everybody wins. the bands get enough financial solvency to continue and/or expand their creation/distribution of the music you love while the corporations get some exposure to you as a consumer AND...circling back to my original point, if you are confident/smart enough in yourself to make your own decisions in the face of media influence, who the hell cares?

 

But does that not open the door to corporations molding what we hear, similar to what has happened with the news? And of course I understand labels are business

[LouieB]

Yeah, Fergie is not really worth consuming in my book.

Actually..I may have fucked up...I think they were talking about Feist...but then again I may be getting these singers with single "F"ing names mixed up.LouieB

I guess what I

[EL the Famous]

i hear you. although, the whole fergie thing is a little vexing to me...between that album and the black eyed peas radioplay/trophy 'hip hop' band status, she/her record company aren't getting enough exposure as it is? granted, i'm aslo a capitalist...so, get paid, pee pee pants.

[Good Old Neon]

Actually..I may have fucked up...I think they were talking about Feist...but then again I may be getting these singers with single "F"ing names mixed up.LouieBAdvertisers have always decided what music gets heard, or at least some sort of payola has been around since the dawn of recording. It happened within days of Edison inventing the phonograph.LouieB

 

 

That of course is true, but are we simply making it worse?

[deepseacatfish]

the whole fergie thing is a little vexing to me...between that album and the black eyed peas radioplay/trophy 'hip hop' band status, she/her record company aren't getting enough exposure as it is?

Hey, she's probably just trying to make some easy $. I doubt they're worried about exposure or anything.

 

 

LouieB--I think you're probably right about it being Feist rather than Fergie, though it wouldn't be ridiculous to think otherwise.

[uncle wilco]

pee pee pants.

 

ha ha

 

that image with forever be in my head.

 

thank you internets.

[W(TF)]

Advertisers have always decided what music gets heard, or at least some sort of payola has been around since the dawn of recording. It happened within days of Edison inventing the phonograph.LouieB

 

'Zactly.

 

Or you could look at it another way; the record industry (A&R men) went nuts with greed in the 50's and 60's, producing untold billions of crappy LP's (yes it WAS the "Golden Age", but any vinyl nut knows it was also the worst period of commercialization - I typically have to whip through 100 LP's at a yard sale to find one of interest). So they created an industry WAY bigger than it ever should've been, and now all those fat cats are collecting big pensions down in Ft Lauderdale. Artists greedy? F-ck that, the executives are the ones that destroyed everything. And now they'd like nothing better than to employ musicians at minimum wage, or rape the consumer.....neither of which are gonna fly.

[mchchef1]

HULLABALOOZA, not about the music man, it's about youth oriented product placement man!

[Good Old Neon]

'Zactly.

 

Or you could look at it another way; the record industry (A&R men) went nuts with greed in the 50's and 60's, producing untold billions of crappy LP's (yes it WAS the "Golden Age", but any vinyl nut knows it was also the worst period of commercialization - I typically have to whip through 100 LP's at a yard sale to find one of interest). So they created an industry WAY bigger than it ever should've been, and now all those fat cats are collecting big pensions down in Ft Lauderdale. Artists greedy? F-ck that, the executives are the ones that destroyed everything. And now they'd like nothing better than to employ musicians at minimum wage, or rape the consumer.....neither of which are gonna fly.

 

You

[EL the Famous]

But does that not open the door to corporations molding what we hear, similar to what has happened with the news? And of course I understand labels are business

[W(TF)]

So, how is shifting that responsibility into the hands of other, even less experienced executives going to make for a better outcome?

 

Was it not Wilco who was dropped for not conforming to label demands

[Edie]

first, I bet it is actually Fergie...not Feist. I've seen Kohl's and Candie's ads on TV w/ Fergie in them.

 

to ... : yes, your fear makes sense, but I think it's irrational. why? due to the very vehicle we are using to communicate right now. the corporate paradigm of music distribution is too easy to get around due to the web...indie labels have flourished by the ease of it's use to market artists and, in growing numbers, allow artists to market themselves. what i'm saying is, is that as the major labels and corporations merge and (sort of) shrink in #...the amount of independent labels and artists utilizing other means to release music grows.

 

This is 100% true and the major tenet of niche marketing. If you recall the "Snapple" craze in the late 90s (I think it was then), they exploited a niche that they found for fun, easy to drink, mostly natural beverages. There are a million more examples of it. The product cycle is niche -> mainstream (market acceptance) -> consolidation -> niche. Each consolidation cycle is followed by more niches to be started/exploited.

 

 

 

plus, i still think ad fatigue is a cop-out and is a viewpoint mired in a victim mentality. avoiding it isn't impossible and even if it is in front of you, you can choose see it and discount it's presence. again, until someone has clockwork oranged your eyelids open and strapped you down in front of a continous loop of VW ads, it's not truly unavoidable. take some accountability in the transaction and choose to deflect it rather than let it affect you.

 

Exactly. I choose not to watch shows that upset me. Same for TV commercials. I found the violence-filled ads for some horrible movie during NFL games far more offensive than these VW ads. I switched them off (or at least muted them).