Rebecca Black Lessons

[Greg_L]

Reading comprehension, you haz it.

 

You sure about that?

[Oswlek]

I said "maybe." Try reading the actual words. You sure about that?

Yes, because tossing a "maybe" completely changes the intent.

AfroNinja specifically said - despite ultimately making money off of it - that he wouldn't do it again. How does that prove your point again?

[Greg_L]

Yes, because tossing a "maybe" completely changes the intent. AfroNinja specifically said - despite ultimately making money off of it - that he wouldn't do it again. How does that prove your point again?

Jeez, I said "seems he's doing okay", and he is. Try reading what I type and what's in the article without your angry glasses on.

[Oswlek]

Jeez, I said "seems he's doing okay", and he is. Try reading what I type and what's in the article without your angry glasses on.

 

 

You don't quite understand what you write, do you?

 

Or do you just not write what you really mean?

 

Either way, I'm done. Enjoy your life.

[Greg_L]

You don't quite understand what you write, do you? Or do you just not write what you really mean? Either way, I'm done. Enjoy your life.

 

 

I will. Thanks for stopping by.

[ermghoti II]

 

Jeez, I said "seems he's doing okay", and he is. Try reading what I type and what's in the article without your angry glasses on.

 

 

Hint: you wrote what you wrote, not what you thought you wanted to write. In any event, the guy has lost business due to the clip, lost money trying to make lemonade out of that glass of pee, and openly states he wish the whole thing never occurred. Whether he is OK isn't even relevant, his story utterly deflates the "all publicity is herpy derpy" claptrap.

[Greg_L]

Hint: you wrote what you wrote, not what you thought you wanted to write. In any event, the guy has lost business due to the clip, lost money trying to make lemonade out of that glass of pee, and openly states he wish the whole thing never occurred. Whether he is OK isn't even relevant, his story utterly deflates the "all publicity is herpy derpy" claptrap.

Really? We're still talking about him years later. And actually, I didn't even know who he was until that article, so apparently his bad publicity got him into the head of at least one more person.

You don't know how much business he's lost, and have no idea what his potential earnings might have been, so quit beating your head against the keyboard trying to prove me wrong. You can't. Nice try though.

[daddymack]

being remembered for doing something stupid is not where I would want to be in the history books...no amount of money will erase shame. Even if Ms. Black and her family make a million off this, whch is highly unlikely, over time the glow of that wealth will fade and the pain of the vilification will endure.

 

Frankly, Greg, with your antagonistic approach and passive-aggressive responses you are starting to look like a troll in here, which..well...let's say maybe you should move on to the off-topic forums.

[Greg_L]

Seriously? I "look like a troll" because I have a differing opinion and people don't know how to respond without getting angry? Really? That's how you guys roll here?

I apologize for not falling in lock-step with the acceptable collective thought process in here.

[MellowMateo]

No, you "look like a troll" because you say things like "I'm right and you're a liar." or "keep trying to prove me wrong. You can't. Nice try though."

 

That sounds like a troll to me.

 

There's nothing wrong with differing opinions, but try not to be so condescending about it. Opinions are like assholes...

[Greg_L]

No, you "look like a troll" because you say things like "I'm right and you're a liar." or "keep trying to prove me wrong. You can't. Nice try though." That sounds like a troll to me.

 

 

Fair enough. I apologize for seeming/sounding/looking like a troll. But let's examine those two comments:

 

"Im right and you're a liar" was a response to being told that I was "wrong, and wrong". No clarification, no reasons. Just "wrong, and wrong". Nice thoughtful discussion there!

 

and for the other comment you singled out, actually, what I said was "quit beating your head against the keyboard trying to prove me wrong", and it was in response to the same guy basically tripping over himself to win some internet debate out of anger. Again, for the third or fourth time, you guys need to actually read the words and digest them before you try throwing them back at me. That seems fair, huh?

 

I realize I'm new here and therefore must go against the old-guard pack-mentality, which is the case at any message board, but come on yall. You're better than this.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Why would I want to be a 13 year old girl?

 

 

 

To understand that song in the OT.

[ermghoti II]

Really? We're still talking about him years later. And actually, I didn't even know who he was until that article, so apparently his bad publicity got him into the head of at least one more person. You don't know how much business he's lost, and have no idea what his potential earnings might have been, so quit beating your head against the keyboard trying to prove me wrong. You can't. Nice try though.

He stated he had difficulty finding work after the video came out. Is he right, or are you? We are still talking about Milli Vanilli too, I guess they got some of that good publicity you're talking about.

[Greg_L]

He stated he had difficulty finding work after the video came out. Is he right, or are you? We are still talking about Milli Vanilli too, I guess they got some of that good publicity you're talking about.

Yup, now you're getting it!

[ermghoti II]

With delusion, all things are possible.

[daddymack]

Seriously? I "look like a troll" because I have a differing opinion and people don't know how to respond without getting angry? Really? That's how you guys roll here? I apologize for not falling in lock-step with the acceptable collective thought process in here.

ah, more passive aggressive responses...perfect example.

No, see there is no 'lock-step', but what we do require here is mature discussion, with respect to other's opinions, right or wrong. That is how we roll here. You came in here, and started espousing an opinion which many of us here immediately saw as fallacious. When it met with replies not in your favor, you got angry.

 

Since you are relatively new here, and since I know from whence you came, just think things through...this is an on-topic business-related forum.

[Greg_L]

ah, more passive aggressive responses...perfect example. No, see there is no 'lock-step', but what we do require here is mature discussion, with respect to other's opinions, right or wrong. That is how we roll here. You came in here, and started espousing an opinion which many of us here immediately saw as fallacious. When it met with replies not in your favor, you got angry. Since you are relatively new here, and since I know from whence you came, just think things through...this is an on-topic business -related forum.

I'm sorry friend, but there's no anger here. I am a little disappointed by the double-standard though.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

One can not discuss music business matters with people who have zero experience in music business. I usually don't say anything about this facts here in this forum, but post here and there what really is going on in the music industry as well in productions, of course nevertheless people keep on discussing their unrealistic ideas about the music business, which is of course only waste of time.

this is an on-topic business-related forum.

Of course, and I am the emperor of China.

[ermghoti II]

 

One can not discuss music business matters with people who have zero experience in music business. I usually don't say anything about this facts here in this forum, but post here and there what really is going on in the music industry as well in productions, of course nevertheless people keep on discussing their unrealistic ideas about the music business, which is of course only waste of time. Of course, and I am the emperor of China.

 

 

Anybody who sells or markets their music or performance is conducting music business. "Music business" is not limited to the music industry.

[richardmac]

 

To understand that song in the OT.

 

 

Ah. It all makes sense to me now.

[daddymack]

 

One can not discuss music business matters with people who have zero experience in music business. I usually don't say anything about this facts here in this forum, but post here and there what really is going on in the music industry as well in productions, of course nevertheless people keep on discussing their unrealistic ideas about the music business, which is of course only waste of time. Of course, and I am the emperor of China.

Do forgive this humble Moderator, oh most high majesty...

The music business, for the purposes of this forum, is not strictly limited to the recording/sales/marketing...etc. side of the industry.

I have worked in the industry for many years in several capacities, including manufacturing equipment, and manufacturing CDs...as well as teaching, producing, performing, studio work, etc.

[Poker99]

The latest viral sensation is hailed as “the worst song ever written”. Oh-kay, that seems pretty strange, doesn’t it? Actually, looking over the history of viral “hits”, it isn’t very surprising. For reasons that I will explain shortly, I won’t provide a link, embed a video or supply any other direct reference to the song in question. You probably know what it is already. However, for the benefit of readers who stumble onto this years from now, I will name the song and “artist” exactly once: the song is “Friday” by Rebecca Black. Given how bad everyone thinks the song is, it has sold surprisingly well, managing to shift 37,000 units in the first week and entering th Billboard Hot 100 chart at 72 and Digital Hot Songs at 57 (source: Billboard.biz). Before I get to what I want to talk about today, a few words about the song itself. Calling it the worst thing ever written is a bit of an overstatement. It is bad, but frankly it’s mostly bland. It plays like something written by a person who read a book on how to write a pop hit, but never actually heard one. The same goes for the production and the video – it’s like the folks involved knew what tools to use and how to use them, but were never informed how they should evaluate the results. Having worked in a rehearsal studio for a while, I’ve seen this countless times – bands coming in who sort of had an idea of what they were supposed to be doing, but lacked the experience and critical facility to come up with something beyond mediocre. Plus, there would be the occasional jarring bit – a rhythym that was completely off (but not in a good way), chords or notes that didn’t fit or a lyric that just made you cringe. I’d say that the majority of the music out there is just like that. However, you don’t see those bands cracking the charts, so what gives? We could chalk it down to the recent vogue for… ahem… younger artists. The singer is 13 years old and female, so perhaps the brains in the background were looking to create a Bieber counterpart. The idea may – or may not – seem creepy, when you think about it. I have another idea as to why the song has sold and it’s to do with our usual TCM fare. We have to appreciate that it’s popularity is mostly due to YouTube – at the time of writing, the video has been viewed over 53 million times. Amazing, given how bad it is. Well… not really. You see, “viral” doesn’t necessarily mean “good”. The way I became aware of the song was by seeing the video pasted all over the place, usually captioned “world’s worst song”. Seeing something like that, you’re naturally going to want to play it – if only to see if it really is that bad. If you’re the kind of person who passes these things on, so your friends can snicker about it too, you will (and probably did). Before anyone notices, the wretched thing becomes an international sensation. Now, we should be aware that exposure doesn’t have to translate into sales. In this case, the 40-odd million views the song had when the chart was compiled translated into only 37,000 actual sales. I say ‘only’, because the actual conversion rate is less than 0.01%. I also wonder how many of those who bought the song actually liked it. My guess is that quite a few people got it only so they can annoy others with it or similar ulterior motives. I mean, for a dollar it offers great ironic value, if you care for that sort of thing. From the artist’s perspective, those 37,000 sales generated a revenue of $25,900 at the standard digital wholesale price of 70 cents. I am informed she is distributed by CD Baby, which would mean a net revenue of $23,569, after their 9% cut of digital distribution receipts. A triumph of Internet promotion? You could make a case for it, if you’re so inclined. I confess I have a big problem with the whole affair. Notice that the song’s popularity emerged from it being touted as something completely dreadful. Normally, we wouldn’t waste a great deal of effort on promoting something we consider horrible, but one of the traps of the Internet is that it removes pretty much all effort from passing information along. This leads us to stop asking ourselves whether disseminating certain information is worthwhile. Comparing the song’s YouTube performance with radio illustrates information cost quite well. The aforementioned Billboard post says that the song was played only 12 times on the 1,200 stations that were monitored. My guess is that the only reason it got any airplay was that it was already hugely popular via the Internet. Radio stations have a limited amount of space for playing music and – frankly – much better music to allocate it to. Without virtually costless dissemination, the song would probably have plunged headlong into total obscurity. Again, you could see this as a triumph of the Internet, but ask yourself this: is there really nothing better out there that is deserving of such promotion? So why this? My cynical take is that it’s much easier to promote something bad than it is something good. Pointing out something hilariously bad is a win-win situation: if the person you show it to agrees, you can both have a laugh together, if they disagree, they’ll be grateful to you for pointing them to something good. Moreover, the Internet has fostered a culture of celebrating the “fail”. Pointing one out is not only accepted, but even encouraged. We sadly don’t have such a culture of celebrating wins. The subjective nature of music means that it’s generally harder to get people to agree on what’s good than what’s bad. Thus, a song such as this might be widely celebrated as the quintessence of getting it wrong, but we’ll be hard-pressed to generate the same kind of momentum for something we consider brilliant. In the end, however, I don’t think anyone who posted, tweeted or otherwise linked to the video actually considered any of this. It seemed good for a few laughs and it cost them nothing to do so. The above should explain why I went to great lengths to avoid identifying the song: it has received way too much undeserved promotion from world+dog, who are all the while saying how bad it is. The artist has already earned considerably more than the minimum annual wage we talked about in “Paradise…” and I don’t see why I should help her earn any more. If this is the kind of artist promotion the Internet does best, then God help us all.

 

 

http://thecynicalmusician.com/2011/03/when-viral-goes-wrong/

[daddymack]

the last line is the most telling, isn't it?

[Vito Corleone]

I read that the song has so far made $1.4 million from iTunes sales!! If this is true, I am physically SICKENED. How the HELL is someone like me, and a lot of us on here, gonna do anything with THIS sort of thing around!? IS THIS REALLY WHAT PEOPLE WANT!?!? C'MON, {censored}ERS! GROW SOME MUSICAL TASTE!!!!

 

 

You act as if this is stupid, immature pop songs are some sort of new phenomenon. Perhaps we should go back to the good old days?

 

The number 3 song of 1953:

[video=youtube;2AkLE4X-bbU]

[richardmac]

NICE! Good point.