-
Posts
2,930 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by mnino
-
-
No one ever wants to admit or take responsibilty for their contribution to a situation. Everyone has a hand in how things evolve.
Madonna made a quote and I can not find the exact quote but I know she said something like this because I was waiting for her reaction.
"Everyone needs to ask themselves, what have I done to contribute to hate in this world."
I could be wording it slightly wrong but that is basically what she said.
This could be applied to what have I done to help create this situation? Has the music industry been trying to survive in the face of illegal downloading? What do artists have to do if radio won't play their music based on their age? No one is an angel but there are REASONS people do what they do good or bad. It's important to know WHY instead of pointing fingers like we are the good guys and you are the bad guys.
Guy Oseary at work again.
This is the reason the music business is screwed. Its run by people who are clueless and think they can continually rip people off whether its through over priced cds or selling concert tickets on secondary sites and then claiming the shows are sold out. Then they wonder why people download illegally.
Wait, so they've cobbled together a bunch of dire B sides, called it an album, and given it away for free, then they expect people to actually buy their REAL new album? What a bunch of chancers. These jokers have been coasting along on their so-called "legend" status for far too long now. Fuck you U2!
The thing is that most people won't buy the real album. They will stream it or download it illegally. This is the real reason the music business is screwed: people don't want to pay for their music. It's survival of the fittest and Guy O has done U2 a huge favor: 33 million people downloaded it in 6 days, every single media outlet in the world has mentioned U2 (whether in a positive or negative light is irrelevant), and they won't have to spend $100 million of their own money to promote their upcoming album and tour. I think it's genius.
They wanted people to listen to their new album: they got it.
They wanted to be paid handsomely for their music: they got it.
They wanted exposure: they got it.
Oh, but that's not very nice of U2 to do that...
Well, as one smart lady once said: "I'm tough, ambitious, and I know exactly what I want. It that makes me a bitch, okay."
-
I'm down for some Vogue, Waiting or I Don't Give A rapping. Now, AL... I'll pass.
-
meh, if backlash is truly real then it will show with ticket sales or lack thereof....i dont see why anyone on this planet would cry 'my privacy' over this when their using iphones, LMAO even computers - hello!!!! wtf.
-
that's not genius. u2's existing fanbase would spend money on them anyways just like any other fanbase would. the whole point was to bring in new customers. it did not work. i'm sure apple will not spend another $100m on this idea in the future. this hurt apple's brand. imagine getting tons of junk mail in your inbox that you didn't want and couldn't get rid of it. then your isp has to create a special tool to remove the unwanted mail they purposefully sent you. it wouldn't make the isp look good just as it did in this case with apple.
also considering u2 was paid $100m for this stunt, it makes them come across as desperate and as sell-outs to the general public. if someone was passionate about their music being heard, they could easily release it free via torrents without getting $100m to do it.
But why on Earth would anyone turn down that offer??? Apple was willing to pay it. And their fanbase (and I'm using the broad sense, not the loons like us that are searching for news all the time) would not have spent money on them if they didn't know there was a new album out. In order for any broad fanbase to be aware of a new release, advertising money has to be spent. U2 didn't have to spend a dime on store signs, adverts, music video, even pressing of physical albums and yet they have $100 million guaranteed. Genius for them. This will not hurt their career whatsoever.
-
and while I was looking for other "Madonna blinking" gifs I happened on this one.
You beat me to it!!
-
Even Fincher had trouble with Madge's damn blinking! Interesting stuff. I wish he would talk more about those days collaborating with her.
-
I do like some of Avicii's work but it has that acoustic guitar thing mixed with dance/electronic beats that she already did on AL. I like AL but I don't think I want her to do that sound again. I want her to find something different from her previous records and not repeat the AL acoustic thing.
Did you just....
equate...
Avicci's sound...
to the sound of AL and Mirwais?
Be careful, the "American Life is her best album" troop will not be down with that.
-
Will Avicii become the Rick Nowels of this album?
-
This thread...
-
this messy, messy ass thread
I'm excited for this!
Me and my alter egos too!
-
I'm sorry to contradict you but in terms of image it absolutely did not work. The publicity is negative. Having a tool made to remove your album from people's appliances ? It's a bad marketing strategy. I work as a journalist in pop culture and 99% of the feedback i got from this is super negative, ageist shit and other horrible things. If you become the butt of a joke on Twitter, Facebook and late night shows you obviously did not do something right. They should have put it for free on their website.
To go back to Madonna i so fucking wish this is not what Guy has in store for her because she does not need to be more ridiculed than she already is. Madonna needs a young manager and team. People who are aware of what's hot and what's not in marketing strategies. This was a mistake.
You are definitely right when it comes to the band's image to the masses, not their fanbase. But I've been talking about business and how much they have to gain from this hoopla. The fact that the feedback is ageist is a big red flag pointing to the matter that their target market couldn't care less about this controversy. The fact that the album is a sort of throwback to their earliest albums shows that they were aiming to please the fans that have been with them all along (and spend a whole lot of money for their tours). From Apple's perspective though, it really undermined their credibility as a platform to launch such campaigns.
Now, Madonna has been the butt of a joke on late night shows since the 80's and, as you have already pointed out, she already is ridiculed on Twitter, Facebook, etc. Is that proof that she's doing something wrong? Now, who are these young managers and teams that are aware of what's hot and what's not in making marketing strategies? Who are they managing at the moment? What is it that they are doing that have these artists being mentioned in pretty much every single news media in the world?
This was a mistake for Apple. U2 is clearly the winner. Reminds me of a certain soda pop in the 80's and an Italian-American singer...
-
I've been talking about U2 all this time. Apple is the one who will suffer from this backlash for sure. U2 may still attract new fans that will listen to the album and like it. I wouldn't put my money on it though. Now, people talking about people buying back catalogue have forgotten that you can stream all of it on Spotify for free nowadays. Back catalogue sales are gone forever.
-
The backlash is from people that would not have spent a dime on U2 anyway. Now, the fans are going to defend them and most likely be more willing to spend money on them. Genius. I think it's funny how Madonna had much bigger "backlashes" and sold out tours. If anything, this will energize their fanbase.
-
It's a character but anyway, she creeped me more when she posted a pic of her father when he was young and was the absolute twin brother of Sean Penn. She's so fucking oedipian.
-
You can't buy this kind of free press. Bad publicity is no publicity. Madonna thrived on articles like that, Guy O. is doing just fine. $100 million for an album and a tour!
This is Bono and company right now...
-
Just never seen this before - a Warner Bros promotional Christmas Recipe Book from 1993 - including a recipe from Madonna of "Krispy Marshmallow Treats".
I like the sound of them.
As if Madonna would get 10 feet close to margarine!
-
Their tour will not be as big as they hope. No one cares about U2 anymore. There has been zero buzz about this album and the reviews are middling. This negative hype won't help either.
Compare that with say the buzz about the new Madonna album. The internet is lapping it up!
I have to disagree. There was very bad buzz about their last album and they had the biggest tour of all time. The demographics of their fans is busy raising their kids and not spending time complaining about the album on Twitter. The tour won't be as big as the last one because the 360 thing won't be new. Album buzz doesn't fill arenas... Celine Dion and Bruce Springsteen would know something about that.
-
i·conˈīˌkän/noun
Anything or anyone can be an icon as long as it symbolizes something.
Gaga is an icon of false victimhood.
Bjork is a hipster icon.
Anna Nicole Smith is a Playboy icon.
Twinkies are a junk food icon.
Honey Boo Boo is a white trash icon.
JazzyJan is an icon of bullying.
-
Can people stop talk about MJ Please!!! damn why start a debate on that NOW. First the guy is dead!! Second, Madonna like him obviously so why start AGAIN a freaking debate on that! Nobody knows really what happen behind the curtains!!! So seriously, stop the comments on MJ! It's annoying, out of the topic and inappropriate to bash a dead guy who can't defend himself!
Amen! There's a thread for that: http://forums.madonnanation.com/index.php?showtopic=47081
-
I still think that the release is genius. First of all this supposed backlash is free publicity for U2. It's certain that they expected and actually wanted to generate headlines and media attention. Secondly people who are complaining wouldn't care for a U2 album anyway. I doubt that even a mild U2 fan would go oh boohoo Apple forced me to download this. What's more important is what would have happened if they had released their album traditionally. U2 had two multiplatinum albums in the 00s but their last one was a relative disappointment (1m sales in the US). With the new one they faced the law of diminishing results. Now they have an exciting release, old fans that have drifted away took notice, casual fans too and U2 will be on the radar when they announce their new tour.
You nailed it. Whoever was going to pay for a tour ticket will be aware that they'll be going on tour. The people complaining would not have spent a dime on U2 and the band, frankly, doesn't give a damn about these haters.
-
At that moment in time, Scream came after that.
Mark Romanek seems to disagree.
-
This thread as of late...
-
So, according to Mark Romanek, the Guinness Book got it wrong with "Scream" by MJ being considered the most expensive music video ever.
In an interview with NPR in 2010, he said "I'd love to state again for the record that Guinness got it wrong and it's not the most expensive video ever made. There are two other videos of the era — both produced at Propaganda Films, incidentally — that cost millions more."
Here's link to that interview: http://www.npr.org/blogs/therecord/2010/09/15/129890627/speaking-of-the-vmas-mark-romanek-wasn-t-there
Propaganda was one of the oldest and most important companies to make music videos. For quite a long time, it managed to remain one of the main driving forces in the music video industry. Then September 11 came along and the company was forced to shutdown soon afterward.
Out of the list of videos they produced (see below), I don't see anyone else that would have the money to spend over 7 million for a music video in the mid 90's (the same era as "Scream").
And after reading this on the 20th Anniversary thread of BS (thanks acko), I think I may be onto something.
Thoughts?
-
Happy 14th Birthday to the Music album!
in ARCHIVE - Madonna
Posted
Instantly impressive!