Music in Ads

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (97 of them)
oops: cynicism ISN'T blah blah (*sigh*)

mark s, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

To me, that doesn't make it moot at all

Actually, I just meant it's moot for me to speculate about how embarrassed Nick Drake would be. I still wouldn't want my own song to be thought of as the VW song -- unless I wrote it just for VW.

dleone, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

blimey it is Honour The Hidden Intention Day in the Precious Posture Camp!!

mark s, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

the secret unspoken assumption being made by the ANTI-AD people is that ads are BY DEFINITION stronger art than the songs they tap into

Depends on whether you're taking the short or the long view. In the latter case, of course the ads won't make a whit of difference: they're not meant to survive, not even as memes, for longer than a few years. (Although jingles, which are another matter entirely, have ungodly long legs: anybody older than thirty-three who doesn't remember "Plop, plop, fizz, fizz"? Didn't think so.) In the short view, though, perfectly lovely songs get these balls-and-chains attached to them which don't speak so much to the "power of advertising" as they do to the effortless brute weight of association and the efficacy of senseless repetition.

That said, no, the use of "Walk on the Wild Side" in that Honda ad years back (Lou: "Don't settle for walking") put only a small taint on hearing the song which has now faded. I think people like me get overexcited about this question because of how violent the short-run effects are.

John Darnielle, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Question: is it more upsetting to hear Nick Drake in a VW ad than it is to hear Moby in a *whatever* ad? If so, why?

Sean, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

My thoughts on Yoko inside, doesn't this just mean there are good ads and bad ads? Using Coke as your example is like taking potshots at Kenny G. Fair enough. I was trying to invoke 60's ads and avants in order to re-unite a couple of earlier points... I stand by the sentiment though. Even the übercoolest of ultra-new ads (in fact, particularily those ones) leave me mildly vexed and suspicious in this respect. I'll take "plop plop fizz fizz" any day of the week.

The Actual Mr. Jones, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

It's all about exclusion and perceptions of coolness - people who define themselves by how cool their record collection is don't feel special and unique and sensitive if they own "Play" by the living, famous, ubiquitous, popular Moby. But at one point, they did feel special and unique and sensitive because they owned "Pink Moon" by the dead, neglected, genius, unpopular Drake.

I just don't believe people worry about songs getting swallowed whole by the corporate whore-beast as much as they worry about feeling a little more like a regular joe when they have to share something they thought was above the heads of the common people.

fritz, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

What about me then, fritz? Again, I couldn't care less about the man, but the ad remains an awfully tacky artifact in my books. Has nothing to do with damaged elitist pride.

And that's "mildly vexed" up there mark s, not "righteously indignant", before you jump all over me with your fancy talk and your reckless slang. I already copped to being a cultural flat-earther on this question, but "precious" I won't take sitting down. Git yer dukes up, ye! (winky faces all over the place here, incidentally, in case it's not implied)

The Actual Mr. Jones, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

even in the short view, ads aren't stronger, just LOUDER and for a few weeks OMNIPRESENT (which is actually probably a measure of their weakness...)

did the tony kaye/michelin/venus in furs ad showe in the US? it was the pinnacle of the Velvet Underground's entire (Warholian) project, i think => partly because the absolute opposite of their mimsy band-that-invented-indie millstone heh

mark s, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

(Precious Posture camp = me and ben, not you guys, after darnielle's phrase, seeing as we both got so over-excited we left the surface of the english language)

mark s, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

hicks marketed and advertised himself
Yes, but thats the ONLY thing he advertised. He didn't get rich and then destroy his credibility "shilling Doritos to bovine Americans."

Lord Custos 2.0 beta, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

no but his estate got rich peddling the dead prophet schtick to bovine american pot smokers. he's the intellectual equivalent of x- treme sour cream n onion, dude.

fritz, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

(sorry that's a bit harsh. full disclosure: I worked in an indie sweatshop a few years ago. it was full of totally cool dudes avoiding the tyranny of straight jobs, working in a warehouse run by cool punk rock dudes. the work itself was pretty repititious and dull but you could roll in an hour late, smoke a joint in the afternoon, hang out and have a beer after work. You could listen to loud abrasive music of all kinds all day and nobody would hassle you about it. but there was no health insurance, no vacation pay, no raises, no increase in responsibility no matter how hard one worked, and the pay sucked. The guys I worked with listened to Bill Hicks over and over and over again as they worked this crap job laughing at all the fuck-the-man rhetoric. Over and over and over. It drove me up the wall. Here were these smart lefty guys letting themselves be exploited as a work force day in day out just because the employer didn't mind if they had ripped jeans and letting Bill Hicks pat them on the back for their far out views. I just can't disconnect that attitude from Hicks himself. He was a smart enough guy, I know. but he just makes me sick.)

fritz, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

I think selling people on carpal tunnel syndrome and repetitive stress disorder and noble poverty is a worse offense than selling them doritos.

fritz, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

I just think it's a waste of hot air when alternative types blow hard about coca-cola and volkswagen as immoral when every single "alternative" capitalist venture I've ever encountered has treated its employees like dirt. Lied, cheated, stole. And marketing, ad companies, corporate magazines, major labels... they've always paid on time and in full, baby. but I should really go cut my head off and let satan shit down my neck cause I'd rather be able to pay my rent than be Captain Groovy.

fritz, Wednesday, 22 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Yeow. The notion of Noble Poverty IS a complete farce, but I don't think being poor is really the main PURSUIT of most "alternative types". I can sympathise with your work experiences, fritz, but you're letting a few ex co-worker yahoos and this Bill Hicks character make the whole thing a convenient question of absolutes for you. It's facile. You've had a rough go of it with the indie crowd, so anyone who questions a VW ad is a sham?

I ought to clarify my position too, since I don't identify with many of the arguments so far ventriloquized for the refusenik side up- thread (and my, it's getting lonely on this side of the fence). I don't begrudge any particular "obscure indie groups" for peddling their music out to ad agencies, either. As Ben correctly noted, they're more likely to make a living that way than they ever will on sales. What bothers me is the reluctance to investigate WHY that's the way it is. This may come as a shock, but it isn't because small businesses are somehow inherently more deceitful and greedy than major corporations. Please.

The Actual Mr. Jones, Thursday, 23 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

The Bill Hicks marketing quote irks me for two reasons. The first and entirely selfish reason is that this board exists because somebody who works in marketing (i.e. me) set it up and has worked to try and make it an intelligent place. The second reason is that Bill Hicks wasn't entirely wrong - the problem is that he exaggerates. This is his job - it's why he was a comedian not a reporter. But the whole marketing = antichrist schtick has become gospel to some people and it draws a line under discussion rather than opens it up.

Tom, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Some other points:

- Case Study: the latest Gap ad here uses Marmalade's "I See The Rain". I know this song already and quite like it. I don't like it in the ad because the ad looks crappy and out-of-date (slow-motion black- and-white = reminder of Stiltskin). Does it diminish the song for me? Privately, no. But I have to admit I would be less likely to put it on a mixtape, say, for a clued-up friend because said friend would reasonably assume I'd heard it on the Gap ad. I would be a bit ashamed to have 'got into' a song via an ad - this isn't because of the commercial soiling of the song but because my self-image is of someone who gets into music quite early. BUT I would be more likely to put the song on a mixtape for someone less musically aware because I think they'd like it more with the added exposure.

- On the other hand I never have got into music via an ad and I find music in ads a bit irritating because of that not despite it, i.e. most of the music choices in adverts feel a bit forced and obvious to me, because I know it all already. I would love an ad to introduce me to some brilliant song I didn't know.

- Changing music in ads is more annoying than using original music. That version of Toots and the Maytal's "Broadway Jungle" used to advertise Nike (I think) and some football tournament - brilliant song, entirely appropriate usage, good ad - but then they remixed it to make it sound more 'modern' and my respect went out the window. Changing the WORDS is totally unacceptable (unless it's Wheres Your Cheese At?).

- Use of songs in movie soundtracks generally upsets me a lot more than use of songs in ads. A song being associated with a product I can cope with - unless I loathe that product. A song being associated with a story though is intolerable - I want it to fit into MY story.

- Case Study #2: Babylon Zoo's "Spaceman" is an example of a dreadful song being enormously improved by an advert.

- Actually picking music for ads must be one of the best jobs in the world and I bet I'd be good at it - any vacancies going?

- Whether or not "cool" as a concept was invented by the ad world or not, it's a nasty divisive idea which we'd be much better off without, culturally. So any attempt to 'co-opt' it is fine by me.

- But the thing I'm saying about movies above does in the end mean I don't like music I like being used in ads. It feels like an invasion of the context I've built up around a song - that the invasion is for commercial gain doesn't bother me, it's the fact of the invasion that irks.

Tom, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Anybody who watches TV shouldn't complain. Switch the fuckin' thing off if you don't like it.

dave q, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

fritz is completely OTM. as are mark s and ben.

i think basically people like their 'art' to exist in a particular context, and resent ads for a) providing a different context, and b) turning art into product. BUT! surely there is no 'correct' context, art doesn't exist in a vacuum, there are many contexts, between the artist and the consumer lies the world. the only problem i can see here is saturation, and that exists outside of ads anyway (radio, charts, tv), and b) IT IS PRODUCT ALREADY! you can buy it can't you?

most artists make no money whatsoever and to begrudge them money just sucks (esp if you're sitting in nice job making $ yourself, in which case, glass houses and stones.

gareth, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Dave Q is right.

John Darnielle, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

My TV doesn't have an off switch.

Andrew L, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Look, sorry if I flew off the handle there but the "you are satan's little helper kill yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself" bit has been quoted a few times in recent weeks on ILx. Yes it's comedy, it's hyperbole. it is funny. But it's also facile. And the whole small business good/big business baaaaaaad sheep-herd mentality doesn't really offer a solution to anybody. Also I think some indie-type entrepreneurs are hypocrites who use the perceived righteousness of their underdog position to their advantage. It's not an absolute, but it's very very common.

fritz, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

i didn't think you flew off the handle Fritz, i think you stated things pretty clearly, and i totally agree with everything you've said, i don't think you've anything to worry about on this one

gareth, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

songs in the sense anyone means them here only exist at all as a function of commercial self-promotion back in the day, on the part of performers or composers... eg they already always ARE ads

I simply don't accept this statement as true. (Mr. Jones' answer basically sums up why.)

isn't the actual reason for the nausea being announced here, that ad-ppl, who you despise, think a lot of a record that you think a lot of, which makes you feel you might be more like them than you want to be?

And I don't buy that either. Sure, there may be individuals of whom it's correct, but saying it's the "actual reason" is just silly.

Unfortunately, I number myself among those who believe that art can have within itself an articulate, intentional aesthetic communication, and in turn, that that act of communication can be rendered impossible by context. So if nothing else, I resent a lot of the commercial use of music because it doesn't give the music a context in which to sound. It takes the most superficial aspects of a song, beats them into the ground, and rules out the possibility of any kind of aesthetic response that would take longer than 30 seconds to play itself out.

That being said, I've heard more than a few ads that used music effectively, and even some that improved on the original. There's a Bally's fitness commercial that uses "Get This Party Started" -- a song I can't much stand -- but uses a version with some weird edits that chop up the phrase lengths, making Pink's voice enter on strange beats. It's much more interesting than the original.

I guess the bottom line is that some music is as effective -- and even on occasion more effective -- when it's used in commercial contexts. But there's a hell of a lot of music out there that simply doesn't work well in a 30-second spot -- whose entire point is lost in that format -- let alone with voice-overs and incongruous images (or ones that literally contradict the lyrics of the song, when there are lyrics). The end result is that the only access we get to the piece is of the most superficial kind, and so we're left with the musical equivalent of the same force that leads people to say things like "Money is the root of all evil" and "Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds".

Phil, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

the salzburg response to my song point = completely missing my point (also pretty poor history re mozart himSELF, but that's sorta neither here nor there, as i actually meant composers like irving berlin rather than haydn) but greenspun went down while i wz formulating my reply propah, it so i nevah finished putting the point plain, let alone posting it

maybe i will at the weekend

"I number myself among those who believe that art can have within itself an articulate, intentional aesthetic communication" => yes phil, and so do i (cf my titanic struggle with Momus over what Garry Wills is talking abt on the Firbank thread on ILE), it's just that i think communication happens in the world and in history, and NOT just in a perfect-forming instant in one person's head then in perfect manifestation abstracted and uninterrupted for all time. "Song" came into being as a form and a behaviour gradually and for a reason: it isn't an axiomatic structure or social dynamic handed out by God and/or Plato at creation. Nor was the formal distinction ad/art.

(In fact the fact that you're citing the Salzburg argt — once you tidy it up historically and factually — will actually drive a coach and horses thru the "anti-pomo" line you're laying down with its help...) ("pomo" in quotes cuz you never use the p-word, thankfully, and I try not to either)

(must stop now as shd have left work half an hour ago!!)

mark s, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Salzburg argt

When I first read this I had no idea what you were talking about until I went back and reread the whole thread. My mistake -- the Jones post I was referencing was the "I don't know about this at all mark s." one, not the Salzburg one which I haven't really finished chewing on yet.

Phil, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

sorry (ie sorry phil and sorry actual mr jones), i missed that one: my objection is to the all-or-nothing absolute, basically (the bill hicks position, i guess); as soon as you say, actually there is this one ad where song x sounded better, then you're in the same territory as me

(most ads are awful, and most use of music in ads is awful => this is NOT because the use of music in ads is intrinsically and by definition a producer of awfulness)

mark s, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Yeah, to clarify that: I didn't know Darnielle had mark s's song comment in mind with the Salzburg quip (did he?). I thought he was referring to the more general notion of the Patron As Benevolent Force (and agreed on the simple basis of this as myth/irrelevant w/ respect to indie groups & the very deceased N Drake. My knowledge of the inticacies of Mozart's biz arrangements(!) is admittedly very sketchy: I have none whatsoever).

I backed off on that point when I realized no one was actually saying it on this thread. I later mentioned points being "ventriloquized" because much of the debate is being directed at imaginary arguments. Once again: I'm making an effort to steer clear of passé punk reactionary hysterics here, avoiding not only "pomo" but also "immoral", "whoring", "big business is evil" etc.

The Actual Mr. Jones, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Case study three: song used in ad is powerful enough to retain its meaning and purpose and in doing so completely destroys advertisement. Lou Reed's "Perfect Day" in the Superbowl football self-aggrendizing ad falls in this category. The song is used as though it is about an actual perfect day, but is really about never being kept hanging on, and never being what you want and thus is a simultaneous slap in the face to millions on millions of six-packing tv-watching Americans at once.

Sterling Clover, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

I saw a preview for _The Salzburg Argument_ and it looked like the story of a hard-boiled cop who doesn't play by the rules who gets caught up in a dangerous game of cat and mouse.

Kate Spiren, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Also, Darnelle produces gr8 music and if the "no surrender" ethos aids him in this then more power to it.

Sterling Clover, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Also: "Where's Your Cheese At".

hahahahahaha.

Sterling Clover, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

(ethos = necessary misreading sterl!?)

mark s, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Since we're all clarifying our positions here, I would like to state that I too do not think ads are a good way to hear music. I just don't think there's anything intrinsically wrong with it.

There is one song I can think of that will forever be associated with an ad (I guess you have to live in the US to get it tho): Bob Seger's "Like a Rock." There is no way he can ever play that song again without people seeing a Chevy (I think) ad in their minds. However, that took years and years of mindless repetition to achieve. And I bet him and his kids never need to work another day because of it.

Ben Williams, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

sinkah: absolutely! the slippage is what makes art social!

Sterling Clover, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

Something that didn't occur to me until this morning: a few years ago the Bank Of Montreal ran an ad featuring "The Times They Are A-Changin'" and the ensuing uproar was absolutely fascinating: it said more aboutappropriation, "sellouts", Dylan, 60's counterculture self-image then/now, Boomers in Business, etc than any essay on the subject ever could.

The Bank's statement came from spokeman George Bothwell: "We thought the lyrics caught rather nicely the imperative for large institutions, like banks, that they face having to change".

The Actual Mr. Jones, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

I own The Typo today.

The Actual Mr. Jones, Friday, 24 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

two weeks pass...
Reasons why TV ads can be good: "Without You" -- an average technoid song made brilliant by the twisty hand movements which everyone in America now does while driving to this song.

Sterling Clover, Monday, 10 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link

one year passes...
htey shouldn't put ads in music just because we listen to it the most

king, Sunday, 25 April 2004 16:13 (twenty years ago) link

"hicks marketed and advertised himself"

Oh, shut the fuck up. He never appeared on any Gap commercials or pepsi advertisements and didn't allow his work to be displayed on such commercials, either. Obviously you decided to skew the intent of what Bill Hicks meant to serve your own stupid fucking needs.

Die.

huh, Sunday, 25 April 2004 17:07 (twenty years ago) link

"Saint Bill Hicks lived on the planet where everything's free, and he never advertised his shows or cd's, he never appeared on network television, he never accepted payment for his Kounter-Kulture Komedy Kavalcades, his shows were never an excuse for club owners to sell liquor, he never talked about his favourite brands of cigarettes and booze as if they defined him as a freewheeling rebel who played by his own rules... of course he's entitled to cast moral judgements on how people earn a living - he was an artist, maaaaaaaaan.
And his collegiate fan base never used their parents' ill-gotten gains to pay for 4 - 8 year vacations in Bongville.

fuck that hippy crap."

Spoken like a true idiot. congratulations, dumbfuck.

uh, Sunday, 25 April 2004 17:09 (twenty years ago) link

and by the way, he appeared on HBO, which is far removed from the basic cable masses, free of Budweiser, McDonald's and other corporate commercials. Yea, still a part of "pop culture", but christ, hardly the same thing.

Your argument is as tenuous as arguing that somebody who has socialist/communist beliefs is a sellout for accepting money for their cds.

uh, Sunday, 25 April 2004 17:12 (twenty years ago) link

two months pass...
Wow! I didn't realize how strongly some people feel about certain music being used in ads! LOL! I mean c'mon people! Lighten up! It's music....some notes on a page. And we're not talking the likes of Dvorak or Beethoven, for the most part. I mean "Pink Moon"??? Have you musically analyzed the piece? Nothing theoretically brilliant there. So what if it's used in a VW commercial. What do you care? Advertisers use the songs they use because they think it will help sell their product because of the affect the music has on people or the people they are targeting to sell. Sheeeeooot.....I saw a commercial the other day for a toilet that used part of Mozart's Requiem Mass.......I thought it ingenious! Laughed hysterically....c'mon......lighten up folks!

Anilese Kissling, Thursday, 1 July 2004 02:37 (twenty years ago) link

seven months pass...
Interesting thread. I agreed with the opinions that many of us don't like the songs being used in commercials because it feels like they are taking something we are attached to and exploiting it so now joe average is now aware of it, but in a cheaper sense. The post about not wanting to include "used" songs in mixtapes out of fear that they would think we just learned about the song from the ad was honest and on the money.

Sometimes I'm glad an artist gets exposure (The Sonics with Have Love Will Travel, etc) but sometimes we feel that you're cheapening a song by exposing it to the average person.

What can happen is that we stop taking music at face value and it serves the prupose of being another extension of ourselves. Exploiting "hip" music can make hipsters feel like they're being exploited. Hip people seeking hip music to go along with their other hip tastes.

As for Mr. Hicks, he was hilariious but contradictory. He would rave about gov't conspiracies while simultaneously denouncing "gun-nuts" (why does he think they have so many guns?). He would also talk about how stupid gun people are for thinking that "more guns will mean less crime" when he followed that logic when it came to his opinions about the war on drugs. He thought it was incredibly stupid to think prosecuting drug users it would make anything better. His logic was "more drugs, less problems".

The problem with many "fight the man and/or corporate greed" people is that they define things like "greed" in an awfully shady way. When people come up with ways to make money giving the public what they want it's "private greed", but when they tell the people what they should want it's public interest. It was "Do What Thou Wilt" until they started losing their own money, and then it was "STOP ALL THE DOWNLOADIN'", to cite just one example.

Cunga (Cunga), Wednesday, 23 February 2005 08:46 (nineteen years ago) link

five years pass...

Wasn't expecting to be introduced to the sounds of JIM REEVES through an ad but hey it works!

xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 30 March 2010 19:42 (fourteen years ago) link

(or other sounds beyond the one xmas tune...)

xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 30 March 2010 19:43 (fourteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.