This morning over the radio I heard people being interviewed at the Republican convension with the song “Barracuda” by Heart was playing in the background. And I wondered what was going on in the Wilsons’ minds.
Reminds me of Rush Limbaugh using that great intro to “My City Was Gone”, in spite of the Pretenders’ wishes.
And I remember George H.W. Bush, in '88 or '92, using “This Land is Your Land”, which is basically an anti-people-like-George-Bush song. No sense of irony.
And in the case of Barracuda, never mind irony – the most cursory listen to the lyrics makes it clear that the allusion is meant to be NEGATIVE. It’s not saying to the unnamed addressee “oh, yeah, go, you’re fierce!”, it’s saying “damn, you’re a dangerous cold-blooded predator!”.
Reagan had that problem twice-both Bruce Springsteen and John Mellancamp refused to let him use their songs, because his campaign misinterpreted both-
“Born in the U.S.A” (about homeless Vietnam vets, IIRC), and “Little Pink Houses”, respectively.
According to this Rolling Stone article, they eventually struck a deal on that song. So now Rush can use the song as long as he donates the royalties to PETA!
Didn’t Ronald Reagan use Bruce Springsteen’s “Born in the USA” during one of his campaigns? Not exactly a hopeful, upbeat anthem.
I believe you are mistaken. The song is being used for commercial purposes, there Heart has a definite say in whether or not it is used. If McCain wanted to serenade Palin with it, then he could pay the royalty and do so. But once it starts getting used as a campaign song, the rules change.
Not sure if that is correct or not but overall the whole article was a decent read for those of us (ME) that didn’t understand just what ASCAP was to be begin with.
If only Sony Bono still lived, he could set them straight…
(Maybe they are under the impression that author’s right to object to the use in promotional materials is only for commercial and not for political use)