A posting in another thread started me to thinking again about the use of great music in bad commercials. I clearly remember the uproar in the mid-80s when Nike used The Beatles "Revolution" to introduce a new shoe. I didn't share some people's degree of outrage, but it was a poor, sad use of the song.

That being said, I don't have a blanket objection to the practice. Volkswagen, for instance, seems to make an effort to choose appropriate music and airs some really creative work (e.g. the 60-second spot that introduced the new convertible Beetle to the tune of E.L.O.'s "Mr. Blue Sky.").

What's hard, though, is watching a happy family frolic in the Carribean to the tune of "Lust for Life." When the song has to be edited to keep the kiddies from swimming with stingrays while Iggy sings "With the liquor and drugs/And the flesh machine/He’s gonna do another strip tease," somebody has made a poor decision.

So, how 'bout it? Is it a good thing that The Polyphonic Spree reaches a greater audience through their 30-seconds of prime-time airplay, or is the practice just a blight?

Thanks to Buck "Sweetie" McGuck for the inspiration for the thread. You're wrong, though, just because "Respect" is ubiquitous, doesn't mean it's cliche. I would be most peeved with you were it not for the fact that I finally checked out El-P's _High Water_ this morning on your recommendation. Good stuff. I hadn't noticed it's on Thirsty Ear and features Michael Shipp and William Parker among others. Thanks for the tip.

Now Playing: "They Won't Let Me Run" John Vancerslice _Cellar Door_ (Barsuk)

I don't have a problem with songs being used in commercials, so long as bands and/or artists aren't catering to that (see Moby's 18) sort of scene.

It can get independent bands to sell more records, like what "We've Been Had" did for the Walkmen when it was in that Saturn commercial (it didn't make them popular, but it did get more copies of Everyone Who Pretended To Like Me Is Gone to change hands).

On the other hand, it can make songs so ubiquitous that they slowly become unlistenable. But that's not just commercials; that's complete saturation.

I think that well known songs have been overused and the whole idea of using them is a bit overdone. However, I'm always glad to hear songs like the Walkmen's we've been had or Air's cherry blossom girl in commercials because it might make the bands a little extra cash and turn some people on to a good band that they normally would have never heard of.

It actually sickens me. I suppose if a little independent band can get a leg-up in the industry by doing it, that's fine. But for legendary artists, it's selling out for a little extra cash. Here are a few of the particularly objectionable examples:

1. The Who: Happy Jack (for Hummer)
2. The Who: Who are You (for "CSI")
3. The Stones: You Can't Always Get What You Want (for Coca-Cola's new "low carb" C2)
4. The Cure: Pictures of You (some camera company)
5. Beach Boys: Good Vibrations (seemed to have started it all)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Metacritic Games Editor,

I like some of the uses of songs in commercials...I kinda like the use of "Pictures of You" in the HP commerical. The Who allowed CSI Miami to use "Won't Get Fooled Again." What Who song are they going to use on the new CSI: New York show?

I don't like bands selling their whole catalog to a bunch of artists, but a song or two here or there doesn't bother me. The context matters: Iggy's "Lust for Life" on the Carnival Cruise liners commercial is borderline, but using the Clash's "London Calling" for Jaguar is just offensive. Sting hawking for Jaguar is not surprising, but it makes me care even less about him.

A couple of faves:

"The Way you Walk" by Papas Fritas in the Dentyne Ice subway commercial

"Pink Moon" by Nick Drake in the VW commercial.

It's kinda funny, though, when they added a sticker to the Nick Drake best-of with an exclaimation "as heard on the VW commercial"! They put the same sticker on the new Papas Fritas comp...

It annoys me because it reinforces alot of people's narrow taste in music. But then again, I absolutely HATE advertising. It makes my blood go hot. Argh, the world is full of people everywhere trying to hawk their crappy wares to me. It makes me so angry.

Well, the sad thing is that the only place where good new music is broadcast these days is on television commercials. So I'd have to agree with the consensus here so far--I'm all in favor of indie bands "selling out" by licensing their songs to commercials, because it is the only way they are ever going to get exposure.

Unless they want to buy their own ad time. Now that should just be stopped.

Well, the Shins did have one of their tunes in a McDonald's ad...can't recall which one.

I've always liked Volkswagen's ads, so the songs used there don't come off as tasteless to me. Same thing with some of Saturn's and whichever company used Air's "Surfing on a Rocket" recently.

Basement Jaxx's "Where's Your Head At?" was used for Pringles once, and that was pretty lame. And today I saw the Rolling Stones song for Coke's C2. Hella lame.

I have to say that I fully support bands being able to support themselves by selling their music to advertisers and TV shows like the WB. It may seem cheesy or like a "sell out." But I think it's a great avenue for bands to make money without having to rely on radio play and MTV to sell records. It's a way to advertise themselves and get paid for doing it.

I personally want good bands to make enough money from their music to be able to continue devoting their time to making it, and if that means licensing a song to be used in a commercial, then more power to them.

And yes, advertising is irritating and invasive, but it also provides us with many free or cheap services, so I am willing to endure the annoyance in order to enjoy the entertainment it brings me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Member 27:
It annoys me because it reinforces alot of people's narrow taste in music. But then again, I absolutely HATE advertising. It makes my blood go hot. Argh, the world is full of people everywhere trying to hawk their crappy wares to me. It makes me so angry.

---

I think I would feel more agitated about this topic if I wasn't of a mind that advertising is a necessary evil in a society where we can get music a million different ways. I certainly don't LIKE advertising, on the whole, (although some commercials can be pretty entertaining), but it's the price you have to pay to be able to buy crappy wares, if you choose to.

I'm certainly no pro-market libertarian. I have quite a deal of fun taking those folks on in the classes I teach. But I'm also a realist. I just do my best to tune it out. But I understand why you get so frustrated with it, Member 27.

quote:

---

Originally posted by KT:
I have to say that I fully support bands being able to support themselves by selling their music to advertisers and TV shows like the WB. It may seem cheesy or like a "sell out." But I think it's a great avenue for bands to make money without having to rely on radio play and MTV to sell records. It's a way to advertise themselves and get paid for doing it.

---

Getting a song on a choice show can do wonders for a band. Look at Alabama 3's "Woke Up This Morning" as the theme to the Sopranos. I'll bet they can retire off that one!

Sunday night's season premiere of Six Feet Under featured The Pernice Brothers "Baby in Two" (a brilliant song from a brilliant record) prominently. The band also had a song played on the Gilmore Girls, another refuge for good music on television.

I just think that it's a sad thing when you hear a song and the first thing you think about is Coke, Pringles, I-Pods, or whatever other product the band sold out to. I'd rather think of my first true "experience" with the song. It's just an unfortunate state of the music industry that all the Brittney, Justin, and Rap All-Stars crap is dominating the money, and the other quality bands need to sell out their songs. But again, I agree that if that's the only avenue for art to survive, we'll have to live with it. But for the Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin, etc -- all of whom have hundreds of millions each -- they should be ashamed of themselves.

I dont think lending music for commercials would be considered "selling out". The only way I would have known about my now favorite rapper, Kanye West, was from that car advertisement. Now, Adrien Brody starring in a Diet Coke commercial----thats selling out!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eccentro:
I dont think lending music for commercials would be considered "selling out". The only way I would have known about my now favorite rapper, Kanye West, was from that car advertisement. Now, Adrien Brody starring in a Diet Coke commercial----thats selling out!

---

Do you have respect for artistics who staunchly refuse to associate themselves without commercials, or think they are hard headed idiots?

I'm sure you would have eventually heard Kanye West's music. I haven't seen the commercial you are talking about, and I am not particularly into mainstream rap, but I have still heard two of his songs! And how is an actor, any actor, appearing in a commercial a sell out? Isn't that part of the industry that they make their living from? I don't like hearing artists I enjoy in commercials because it cheapens the experience of listening to their music on my stereo, but I don't have a problem with artists making some money. Like the Games Editor mentioned, it is a little sad when multi-millionares are selling off their important creations, but at least it is just their music, not shameless appearances like Bob Dylan in that lingerie ad!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smenkharon:
And how is an actor, any actor, appearing in a commercial a sell out? Isn't that part of the industry that they make their living from?

---

Umm...yeah. Tell me how walking around various locales, co-starring with computer generated cola fizz, and saying absolutely nothing qualifies as acting. It's just as bad for an actor to ONLY lend his/her appearance to a commercial as it is for a musician to ONLY lend his appearance in a commercial.

How sure are we that The Who are doing as well as they are? I saw Roger Daltry in an informercial the other day pimping the Timelife 1970s Collection. Someone who was successful would, I imagine, be above that, but I don't know where "Timelife Rep" stands on the ladder of stardom, even though I hypothesize that it's low.

For The Rolling Stones to sell their tunes to commercials is scummy, I agree with that. However, I would theorize that they didn't sell their songs, but rather the advertisers asked to use them. For every obscure song chosen for an ad because it fits, I think that there is a popular song ("Lust For Life," "Rock and Roll") that is chosen because it is amiable. History has planted it in the consciousness of the music listener and it could be argued that perhaps Mick Jagger didn't put together a Powerpoint presentation to get Coca Cola to use "You Can't Always Get What You Want." Maybe Coca Cola just chose it because everyone knows and likes The Rolling Stones.

"Selling out," as previously established, is not quitting your local foodstuffs supplier in order to perhaps be a full-time musician. I wouldn't mind if, tomorrow, I saw Kim Gordon, on my television, winking at me and telling me that M&Ms melt in my mouth, not in my hand (perhaps that's easier to say because I know that it won't happen), and it never bothered me to see "Do You Realize??" or "Gravity Rides Everything" in a car commercial. I think that this world would be a better place if a talented, artistically motivated band could make tons of money by doing what they like. (In other words, the world would be full of Kid A-like experiments and the media would be fuelled by art.)

However, most of the money is distributed among the untalented pop-schlock, and so, until then, if Isaac Brock can afford some luxeries from lending a wicked song to a modest (hahaha!) commercial, then more power to him. It's not like Modest Mouse have gone nu-metal, betrayed their audience, and put out a true stinker album. What I'm trying to say is that "selling out" is very rare, and, when an artist lends one song to one commercial, then it's nothing other than paying the bills. Any kid who still thinks that a three- or four-piece band can and should live off of average album sales (read: not quadruple platinum plus) is living an indie-inflicted dream world and needs to be brought back to reality. (This is, of course, assuming that the artist has any control over whether their music appears in a commercial.)

And, for the record, the only commercial that could be simultaneously more disturbing and funny than Bob Dylan's cameo in the Victoria's Secret commercial would be my proposed M&Ms commercial with Kim Gordon.

Hi.

Now would be an excellent time for you to scroll up and read Monheim's post again.

It's just that good.

Thanks for including the link to Music Underwater, Monheim. I take it you write for the site? I hope so, because I think I have just become your newest fan.

Now Playing: "Night Lights" -- a new jazz program my friend David Brent Johnson is producing on WFIU-FM in Bloomington, Indiana. It will eventually be archived on the Web site. Consider this a plug. It's good work, too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LinnTate:
Hi.

Now would be an excellent time for you to scroll up and read Monheim's post again.

It's just that good.

---

Thanks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LinnTate:
Thanks for including the link to Music Underwater, Monheim. I take it you write for the site? I hope so, because I think I have just become your newest fan.

---

Thanks again!

And yes, I write for the site. We are, obviously, derivative of Pitchfork, but we're trying to deviate away from them and perhaps become something more interesting and creditable. Some of the people on the site are a little more irreverent with their reviews than others, but hopefully, with time, we'll become something better. Hell, we might even be featured on Metacritic someday!

And yeah, my sig is technically a plug, but it's not an underhanded or bad one, I don't think. It's pretty modest. I would reference the DJ Shadow topic right now for comparison, but I can't think of a clever way to work it in.

For a different perspective, I think it depends on the artist and what they stand for. Signing a song away to a commercial jingle could rob it of its meaning and integrity. This did not used to be the case, but now it's pretty commonplace for artists to do this because the financial rewards are so great. Which makes my respect for artists who resist even greater. To Paul McCartney's credit, he was horrified when his former friend Michael Jackson outbid him for the Beatles catalogue and whored the songs out left and right to commercials.

Look at Tom Waits. He's gotten numerous lucrative offers, and I'm confident he'll never relent as long as there's a breath left in his haggard throat. His successful lawsuit against Frito Lays was a rare milestone victory for artists' rights.

quote:

---

I get it all the time, and they offer people a whole lot of money. Unfortunately I don't want to get on the bandwagon. You know, when a guy is singing to me about toilet paper you may need the money but, I mean, rob a 7-11! Do something with dignity and save us all the trouble of peeing on your grave. I don't want to rail at length here, but it's like a fistula for me. If you subscribe to your personal mythology, to the point where you do your own work, and then somebody puts decals over it, it no longer carries the same weight. I have been offered money and all that, and then there's the people that imitate me too. I really am against people who allow their music to be nothing more than a jingle for jeans or Bud. But I say, "Good, okay, now I know who you are." 'Cause it's always money. There have been tours endorsed, encouraged and financed by Miller, and I say, "Why don't you just get an office at Miller? Start really workin' for the guy." I just hate it... The advertisers are banking on your credibility, but the problem is it's no longer yours. Videos did a lot of that because they created pictures and that style was immediately adopted, or aborted, by advertising. They didn't even wait for it to grow up. And it's funny, but they're banking on the fact that people won't really notice. So they should be exposed. They should be fined! [bangs his fist on the table] I hate all of the people that do it! All of you guys! You're sissies!

---

PLAYBOY; To create a marketable pop song, do you have to sell out?

WAITS: Popular music is like a big party, and it's a thrill sneaking in rather than being invited. Every once in a while, a guy with his shirt on inside out, wearing lipstick and a pillbox hat, gets a chance to speak. I've always been afraid I was going to tap the world on the shoulder for 20 years and when it finally turned around, I was going to forget what I had to say. I was always afraid I was going to do something in the studio and hate it, put it out, and it was going to become a hit. So I'm neurotic about it.

Tom thanks The Doors' John Densmore for his eloquent rant against artists selling songs to commercials:

quote:

---

Songs carry emotional information and some transport us back to a poignant time, place or event in our lives. It's no wonder a corporation would want to hitch a ride on the spell these songs cast and encourage you to buy soft drinks, underwear or automobiles while you're in the trance. Artists who take money for ads poison and pervert their songs. It reduces them to the level of a jingle, a word that describes the sound of change in your pocket, which is what your songs become. Remember, when you sell your songs for commercials, you are selling your audience as well.

When I was a kid, if I saw an artist I admired doing a commercial, I'd think, "Too bad, he must really need the money." But now it's so pervasive. It's a virus. Artists are lining up to do ads. The money and exposure are too tantalizing for most artists to decline. Corporations are hoping to hijack a culture's memories for their product. They want an artist's audience, credibility, good will and all the energy the songs have gathered as well as given over the years. They suck the life and meaning from the songs and impregnate them with promises of a better life with their product.

Eventually, artists will be going onstage like race-car drivers covered in hundreds of logos. John, stay pure. Your credibility, your integrity and your honor are things no company should be able to buy.

---