RATM for Christmas number one

[shermarama]

Hmm. I've seen several posts by friends wondering what the point is, so here's the point as I see it.

I have a long-standing theory, which I've yet to see anything to contravene, that by definition anyone who goes on X Factor is talentless. If you had any talent, you would try to get somewhere on your own merits; why put the millstone of 'talent contest' round your neck if you don't have to? But there it is, it's a TV programme, lots of people find it entertaining and they're free to watch it.

Most sales of singles are on download now, but the X Factor winner sells an unusually large proportion of physical CD singles, I read somewhere but can't find the citation, bad trainee academic. Why is that? Because at Christmas, people are often casting around for something convenient to give as a present; something small and physical that people can open on top of whatever less wrappable thing they may have got, something safe to get mum, like a nice cover version by a nice presentable boy/girl and they've been watching the program so the single will be a nice reminder... If the single came out at any other time of year, it wouldn't sell anywhere near as many. It's not that the programme-makers want the song to be Christmas number one, it's that they're using the Christmas present effect to get it sold. Using the way people buy things to get things sold; it's the way things work, I don't mind that either. I don't have to buy it so I don't.

But this specific selling effect, unfortunately, is linked with the phenomenon of the Christmas number one, which does not and has never really mattered, but which we've got a weird cultural tradition, out-dating most people's interest in the charts otherwise, of keeping track of. Since I'm probably going to be seeing a TV clip show or listening to a radio programme or reading a magazine article about it in twenty years' time, I'd rather that the thing that gets recorded wasn't something that's only there to take advantage of when people buy presents. They're not even seasonally themed songs; I have more time for a bad Christmas novelty being Christmas number one than a song which has nothing to do with Christmas other than taking the sales advantage from it.

So I'm quite sympathetic to the idea of having something else be the Christmas number one. I don't even care what it is; why not Stop The Cavalry, being as how that's both good and Christmassy? It doesn't matter what record label it's on, I don't care who makes money from it, even if it's still Simon Cowell; he's a rich man anyway, it makes little difference how much more he earns. Someone somewhere has started a campaign for it to be RATM's Killing In The Name. Well, why not? It's become associated with petty teenage rebellion and I'm afraid Tom Morello popping up to call it "a wonderful dose of anarchy" is unfortunate. But picking something that goes 'fuck you, I won't do what you tell me' is kind of to the point, given the reason for this happening in the first place, and hey, it's a classic. You could pick something more genuinely alternative or on an obscure, non-mega-corp record label but if it's obscure, that's probably because most people don't want to own a copy, whereas Killing In The Name is probably the most pop-negating thing you could sell to a sufficient number of people. You could probably get somewhere with some Sex Pistols, maybe, but maybe not in the era of Country Life butter ads.

I dunno. I'm not doing it solely because a Facebook group told me to, same as I'm not actually buying the X Factor single even the X Factor's commercial machinery would tell me to. A facebook group suggested the idea and I have gone along with it; seems like a better idea to me than just cursing Cowell and avoiding the radio all week, despite whatever apparent absurdities it may hold. I'll have a slightly merrier Christmas for having bought a copy.

Comments

[steer.livejournal.com]

Good to see someone actually in favour of this rather than the millions of mindless grumpy rants against it. Anyway, I love RATM.

[bengraham.livejournal.com]

Well said. I bought a copy too, and I'm looking forward to tuning into the charts on Sunday (admittedly for the first time in years) to see if the Rage campaign has been successful.

[ironlord.livejournal.com]

But picking something that goes 'fuck you, I won't do what you tell me'

...was probably a bad idea on the BBC's part. On Five Live this morning, they decided to have a live interview with RATM from Los Angeles, after which they played... Killing In The Name. The infamous line was censored... briefly.

The sound of mass panic of Nicky Campbell and Shelagh Fogarty scrambling frantically to cut off the live recording was absolutely priceless. I mean, RATM have been known for controversial political stunts for the last 17 years, so what did they think was going to happen?

[damerell.livejournal.com]

As the Eye put it after Johnny Rotten's similar stunt on TV, "MAN FAMOUS FOR SWEARING ON TELEVISION SWEARS ON TELEVISION".

[shermarama]

Nice!

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

see i'm not so sure that everyone that goes on is talentless. leona clearly has an astonishing set of pipes on her. according to this article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/dec/03/x-factor-chart-success) i read the other week (about three quearters of the way down) the record companies wouldn't touch her without "a guarantee that the public would like her".

now, whatever we think of the music, the idea that people CAN'T get signed in that genre *without* going through cowell's awful paws is rather disturbing to me...

[shermarama]

See, that's just it; maybe if she had continued to be unable to get onto a major label doing the conventional squally ballads and cover versions, and hadn't had the option of X Factor, she might have found something new to say with music, have teamed up with some interesting new producer or whatever, and instead all we've got is some more dreadfully conventional squally ballads and cover versions. Yawn. Going on X Factor, especially if you've got some talent but haven't found a good home for it yet, is basically equivalent to giving up.

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

i think that's a bit reductionist. people be liking squally ballads, she is good at singing them, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with giving people what they like/want/feel comfortable with.

it's more that if that branch of the industry requires singers to be validated by cowell and his machine that they're not interested in a whole world of genuinely talented people who, in previous decades, *would've* got deals...

[shermarama]

Yeah, fair point about things having to be rubberstamped by Cowell. But we've had the problem of record labels being unimaginative for much longer than he's been around, and some good things have come from people deciding they want to do their own thing instead. If all he's doing is enlarging the number of people doing the things people have already done, I don't think that really helps.

[purplegril.livejournal.com]

Well put. It has nothing to do with profit, simply wanting a song that some people think is good as Chrsitmas number 1. And the Shelter donation is good too. Annoyed I couldn't join in due to wrong country error, though. Bah!