We’ve got the same thing going on here in Atlanta, except the singer is promoting a store called Service Merchandise. (Maybe an affiliated company?) Same thing, though. It is a blatant Natalie Merchant rip off.
OK some sellouts:
Frank Sinatra (beer commercials, I believe, featuring “The Way You Look Tonight”)
Phil Collins Also beer commercials (Michelob?).
Soft Cell
Thomas Dolby (Using his name and music to promote a company in which he apparently has some interest, so this is kind of a qualified sell-out.)
That Sting song is called Desert Rose and it’s a damn good one. One of two or three songs on his latest album that’s excellent. In contrast, all the other songs should never have been recorded (IMHO).
As fore selling out to Jag/Ford, I guess it’s pretty expensive to heat that castle he lives in.
You can only lament the state of the world for so long…
Also: Ani DiFranco sold out to the NFL? As in National Football League? This just doesn’t add up (although if there was a linebacker beyond my peripheral vision, I would sure as hell turn my head).
No, he hasn’t. And according to him, he never will. I believe he owns most, if not all, of the rights to his songs and his music, too, making it impossible for any of his stuff to be used commercially without his consent.
I agree with tomndebb about the whole thing.
Still, something is just…wrong about a commercial that used to be on here in Columbus. (may have been national, I don’t know)
“You can get anything you want
at a Ponderosa Restaurant.”
“Selling out” shouldnt have to refer to music being used for commercial gain, it should more refer to artists who change their style and ideals just so they can sell more music.
For example, take a band called Jamiroquai.
from 1993 onwards, they were producing damn funky music with a message, about the environment, equality and so on.
Now its just about how fast can he drive his ferrari and how he stiffed his bassplayer for more money.
Under the Canadian Copyright Act, artists still have moral rights, even if they don’t have the economic rights, unless they have waived them.
Dee da dee da dee dee do do / Dee ba ditty doh / Deedle dooby doo ba dee um bee ooby / Be doodle oodle doodle dee dohhttp://members.xoom.com/labradorian/
THANK YOU for mentioning this!! I was going NUTTY when I saw that. Even if it’s not technically a “sell-out”, I was revolted. And I’m not even a Kiss fan.
Also, I wonder if that “Service Merchandise” Natalie Merchant rip-off is actually Bree Sharp, of “David Duchovny, Why Won’t You Love Me” fame. Bree sounds a lot like Natalie.
I think it’s a little hard to level a charge of selling out to an artist who’s dead (a la Sinatra, Hendrix, Morrison) since they obviously can’t control how their voice, face or work is being used.
You also can’t blast an artist who’s work was sold to someone else, since they don’t have control over it. The Beatles music being sold to a publisher controlled by Michael Jackson is the leading example, but I’d wager many struggling artists gave up their rights to their music somewhere along the way in exchange for cash or a recording contract.
William Shatner, at least, is having fun while making his money, but what do you say about the actors and singers who will make commercials for Europe or Asia, but not for North America? If you’re going to cash in (I prefer that term) at least be honest enough to let your hard core fans see what you’re doing.
I understand all the words, they just don’t make sense together like that.
David Bowie has gone so far beyond and out the other side of sell-out that he has redefined the concept, for which I again respect him. “Sell-out” doesn’t quote quite adequately express the degree here. I mean, I want to buy David Bowie stock (which you can do-- buy shares of David Bowie). He’s been appropriated by himself. I think he is an evil genius.
Well, er, I gotta add this. A number of blues musicians were on a recent Winston campaign, with ads in major mags, and Winston bankrolled a national tour. Yeah, it was a “sell out”, and by a tobacco company, but they put up a sustantial amount of money that was really needed by these guys. It helped these musicians get the attention they deserved, especially later in life when that money is really needed. Yeah, it was a tobacco company, but arts funding being in a pretty sad state these days, I say take the money and use it to further your own artistic agenda.
I understand the OP, but would like to indicate that,in some arenas, what may be termed a sellout is vital to the artist’s livelihood. As is exemplified in the Natalie Merchant reference, it’s common practice in the Biz to rip off an artist’s style, with just enough vaguery to avoid a lawsuit. So an artist might be better off to sign a deal than to bear a diluted semblance of their work. It ain’t right, but that’s the way it is.
