Last week's "Dope or Nope" was so successful, I figured I'd give it another try ... who knows, maybe this thing will catch on. This week, my co-worker friend (who I give all the credit for coming up with Dope or Nope). We were discussing rock/pop bands and hearing their music on commercials. We got to the discussion of "selling out." Certainly many remember when the Stones allowed Microsoft to use "Start Me Up" in some of their ads in the mid 1990's. U2, the Beatles, Kiss, The Who ... they've all done it.
So, with that said ... Dope or Nope? Is it OK for bands to do this? Do you lose respect for them? Here's a twist, though.
A lot of "newer" bands are being "discovered" in commercials, especially with the new Apple-related commercials. It's a pretty good way to get discovered.
To me, it's really not a big deal to allow your music to be played in commercials (with the exception of any music played on Chevy commercials). Bands need to make money, and for the most part, it doesn't take away from the music (at least, not in my opinion). Now, this is coming from a person who is not a musician ... I'm sure serious musicians may have a different opinion than I do.
Passing The Baton
10 months ago
4 comments:
I would say this is somewhere between NOPE and DOPE. Depends what the commerical is for.
Liquor - Dope
Granny undies - Nope
NOPE...Everytime that song is played..they pay a royality....I do like the way prime time is "featuring" artists, comeback artist too.
The AC/DC tour increased after it's debue on primetime.
Grey's Anatomy, "save a life" by Lighthouse...
All goes into the pocket of the people who creat/write/produce songs.
I'm with Neil Young on this one. I concider it a sell-out of their art, but there are so few left who haven't sold out. Even Yoko One did it.
Let me add that John Lennon wouldn't have approved.
Post a Comment