Mark said:
Yeah.... real Christmassy that...... :roll:
Id rather hear a family/kids/party song get it tbh but there ya go. I suppose I should be grateful that it may buck some certain ideas up in the music industry!
I do agree with what some people in the media is saying, the one who gets hurt in all of this will be Joe, when he really isnt the bad guy in all of this!
I don't think Joe is going to get hurt, but if he does...
1. Why should somebody be guaranteed a No.1 hit because:
a) They have been on a talent show.
b) A talent show designed to end when the sales of singles are highest therefore manufacturing an environment for them to get to N0. 1
2. Coming in at number 2 with sales of over 500,000 (potentially) is hardly hurting him. The sales of his single will not be harmed by the sales of RatM. People will be buying one, or the other (I can only imagine).
So, if he released in June, then his sales would not be as high and he would be less likely to hit number 1. Record sales will still be just as high.
So, the question is, how does he get hurt? He doesn't get a number 1 which is manufactured and not actually earned? He doesn't get paid as much (he does, sales figures will remain the same)? He won't get a record contract if he's not number 1 (doesn't sound like anyone really wanted to give him one in the first place then)?
So, in what way is Joe losing out?
Anyway, I agree Mark, I'd prefer something less "harsh" for a number 1 - which is why I supported The Muppets from the off (and bought their single too).
I think the reason I really support this (and probably many others) - is simply because there's been a huge group of people listening to "their own" music for along time.
The thing is, that they tend to listen to a genre, but never hook into a band (or single release) simultaneously. So the charts are always a representation of a manufactured "pop world" controlled by people
like Simon Cowell. Executive producers and the like who decide what it is people want to listen to, then putting in huge amounts of money to "make it so".
The charts have always been like this to be fair - even in the "musical purity" of the 70's and 80's the popular sub-genres where taken and mass produced for profit (The Damned, Adam and the Ants, etc.)
However, suddenly, it looks like everyone has stuck together. It's quite odd. I've been complaining about the charts for 20-odd years, and whenever I've bought a single, it's never done very well - as it's always something a bit too off the wall (though sometimes they've broken the top 40).
There's a gel here that has caught the imagination of music lovers though. Suddenly, everyone has a single focus to "get one over" on the manufactured nature of the charts.
Yes, Sony win no matter what (and Cowell, as he has shares in Sony). It's not about trying to break the labels though, or Cowell, or bring a new artist/label to light. It's just a way to actually finally make a protest. A "we've had enough of you telling us what to do, we want some bloke off Facebook to tell us what to do instead!" :lol:
Plus, it's all very silly
