So where do I sign up to sell out?

Apparently, according to this quite well-written post, there is no such thing as an artist "selling out" any more. We've all come to accept that the only people with the money to keep the rock'n'roll wheels turning are the major corporations.

As someone who spent most of his working life writing ads for some of these companies, while always having half his heart (at least) in the music world, I've always been torn on this issue.

I have to admit that I was dismayed the first time Dylan let not just one of his songs but one of THE Dylan songs - The Times They Are A-Changin' - be used in a commercial.

I didn't care as much when Elton John let AT&T use Rocket Man. Although I was appalled at how the creative team involved butchered the song through editing.

So is this simply another case of being concerned when it's something that is personally important to you and less concerned when it isn't. Dylan's 'Times' was one of the songs that shaped my life - setting me on a certain path both musically and attitudinally from the age of eleven.

Elton John was the quintessential pop star, on the other hand, whose songs have just not aged well. For me at least. (I find it strange that there are now performers I cannot listen to for this reason - Elton and Billy Joel top the list. Odd that they have recently been touring together.)

But I digress. As usual.

The key question, now my whole heart is in the music world, is, "Would I let one of my songs be used for marketing in the highly unlikely event I were ever asked?"

There was a time, for sure, when I would have said no. Now? I'd probably say yes. With the same exceptions I had when I was writing ads: no cigarettes, no pharmaceuticals.

Why the change? Well, it's the same reason I think everyone has loosened up a bit in this area - it's almost impossible to make money from music any other way! Sad but true. I'm sure The Who are very glad of the income from the CSI shows alone.

I still admire hold-outs like Paul Simon (Can you imagine how many times he's been asked to sell Bridge Over Troubled Water???) but he made his money back when music mattered. So he can afford to to say no. 

Comments

[Jeff Shattuck]

Just read the Newsweek post, good stuff, with its most salient point being: "When you’ve stolen from someone, it’s sort of inconsiderate to scold him for seeking money elsewhere."

Man, that is so true. Anyone complaining about artists "selling out" is most like throwing stones from a glass house.

I'm with you, Dave. If some big company wants to buy a song of mine, it's theirs. How the hell else am I going to recoup my recording costs in the Culture of Free?

Jeff

[malachy walsh]

I hear you. And I think the answer is different for everyone. And times can change the way the individual sees it (I wonder if the early, angry Dylan would've approved of the older Dylan's decision)...

I think it's interesting, too, that you refer to The Who, a group that showed they understood the ironic problem of rock and roll's anti-establishment (re: commercial) stance when they titled their third album THE WHO SELL OUT in 1967.

Albeit I'm not working in music, but my creative output falls into two large categories - "for sale" and "for me."

"For sale" means exactly that and I'm almost always willing to collaborate with a potential buyer on what it will ultimately be. This can lead to some extraordinarily good stuff... but it's not about just what I want. Its purpose is to fulfill a need that is not always my own.

"For me" may end up being collaborative (or not), but its purpose is distinctly different than that of "for sale." It's always about my personal vision for something, regardless of what any audience (collaborator, buyer, actor, director -etc) may wants.

[Dave]

Malachy - odd you should make that point about Dylan. I have been working for some time on a song that is a conversation between the young and old versions of the same man! It's not right yet but I'm still working. I'm sure it's been done before but maybe I can give it my own spin!

Music is odd. I think it always starts out as being "for me" and always ends up as a collaboration. Even if no other musicians are involved, working with a recording engineer, mixing engineer etc is still a collaborative effort if done right.

And poetry is always "for me" but sometimes ends up being "for sale" (in a different sense).

THE WHO SELL OUT - great album! Couldn't eat baked beans for months!

[malachy walsh]

One other thing... this from Wikipedia about Tom Waits...

"Waits has steadfastly refused to allow the use of his songs in commercials and has joked about other artists who do. ("If Michael Jackson wants to work for Pepsi, why doesn't he just get himself a suit and an office in their headquarters and be done with it?") He has filed several lawsuits against advertisers who used his material without permission. He has been quoted as saying, "Apparently, the highest compliment our culture grants artists nowadays is to be in an ad — ideally, naked and purring on the hood of a new car," he said in a statement, referring to the Mercury Cougar. "I have adamantly and repeatedly refused this dubious honor."

Waits provided the voice-over for a 1981 Purina dog food television commercial (Butcher's Blend).[46]

Waits filed his first lawsuit in 1988 against Frito Lay. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an award of US$2.375-million in his favor (Waits v. Frito Lay, 978 F. 2d 1093 (9th Cir. 1992)).[47] Frito Lay had approached Waits to use one of his songs in an advertisement. Waits declined the offer, and Frito Lay hired a Waits soundalike to sing a jingle similar to Small Change's "Step Right Up," which is, ironically, a song Waits has called "an indictment of advertising". Waits won the lawsuit, becoming one of the first artists to successfully sue a company for using an impersonator without permission.

In 1993, Levi's used Screamin' Jay Hawkins' version of Waits' "Heartattack and Vine" in a commercial. Waits sued, and Levi's agreed to cease all use of the song and offered a full page apology in Billboard.[48] Waits found himself in a situation similar to his earlier one with Frito Lay in 2000 when Audi approached him, asking to use "Innocent When You Dream" (from Franks Wild Years) for a commercial broadcast in Spain. Waits declined, but the commercial ultimately featured music very similar to that song. Waits undertook legal action, and a Spanish court recognized that there had been a violation of Waits's moral rights in addition to the infringement of copyright. The production company, Tandem Campany Guasch, was ordered to pay compensation to Waits through his Spanish publisher. Waits was later quoted as jokingly saying the company got the name of the song wrong, thinking it was called "Innocent When You Scheme".[citation needed]

In 2005, Waits sued Adam Opel AG, claiming that, after having failed to sign him to sing in their Scandinavian commercials, they had hired a sound-alike singer. In 2007, the suit was settled, and Waits gave the sum to charity."

[Dave]

I secretly admire Waits. But, like Paul Simon, he made his money a long time ago. He can afford to be righteous. Actually it sounds like he's made more money by holding out than by giving in!!