Yeah, kind of hilarious really innit.....? :lol:

 

People are taking what I say WAY too literally..... Jesus, it's about the TACTICS.... How can anyone argue that Clifford and Cowell haven't applied Goebbels-esque techniques to their domination and manipulation of the media.... They're not using it to build concentration camps sure, but let's face it, it's just a different form of Brainwashing...... :rolleyes:

It's a question of degree though isn't it? Goebbels was partly responsible for allowing a genocidal maniac to commit acts of mass murder across Europe. Simon Cowell is responsible in the opinion of many (including you and me) of damaging the music industry. As Bert for Lashes says, the English language is rich enough for such hyperbole to be unnecessary and lazy.

 

It's the same as describing defeat in a football match as a disaster. If that is a disaster, what words do we then use for the death of over 100 people in a fire in a Russian club at the weekend, not to mention many far worse events?

I dont need to be taught any lessons in history from you.... I learned all this stuff myself.... Some of it from my Grandfather who actually killed some Nazis..... So, there is absolutely NOTHING you have to teach me.... You take my point far too literally.... AGAIN... Cowell's campaign to dominate UK music and popular culture is in its own way, been carried out with the same SORT of ruthlessness and use of Propaganda... Which is my whole point.... And yet again, you lot seem incapable of seeing that....

 

That Popjustice article is the sort of "Anti-Rockist" sh!te we've come to expect from its retarded "Journalists" who believe that the mainstream and manufactured is all there is to music, they're worse than the bloody NME.... And, tbh, I think The Muppets have a better chance of kicking Cowell's arse than RATM does... Esp at Christmas... So, just as a method of p!ssing off the Cheater Cowell, that has my personal backing more than "Killing in the Name..", which was frankly never even close to being the best RATM song anyway (stuff like "Bullet in the Head", "Testify" and "Bulls on Parade" are miles better)..

 

You would have a point about RATM being on Epic/Sony, but as the band put it at the time "Epic agreed to everything we asked for"... So, they had complete artistic freedom (You know those idiots that write for Popjustice could have found that out easily enough by doing a Google Search to look for quotes made by Tom Morello. I did....), which is a lot more than can be said for any of Cowell's puppets who are basically his "slaves" (better make sure I use quotation marks here lest the Chart Chat PC Brigade try and do me for racism.... :rolleyes: ) for their entire recording life, do you actually know how many pages, clauses and sub-clauses are in that X-Factor contract, anyone who signs up for that is a moron and deserves to be exploited. And since when did the label really make that much of difference... It's not who you sign to, it's about making sure you maintain artistic control and your own integrity, you try to make sure the record company works for YOU, and not the other way round.... RATM achieved this... Totally.... NO ONE told them what to do, simple as...

 

Popjustice is the baby of journalist Peter Robinson whose idealogy is that everything good started with Stock Aitken & Waterman.

 

Whilst the likes of music gods The Beatles; Rolling Stones; Led Zeppelin; David Bowie; Queen; Sex Pistols; The Smiths; etc are old fashioned and out of date.

 

This time last year he was in full support to Simon Cowell recieving a lifetime achievement award; and he also argued that Pete Waterman has made a greater and superior contribution to British music than Sir Paul McCartney. Recently he rubbished Queen's latest best of compilation and trashed The Beatles Remasters for its music content.

 

Peter Robinson is the same Peter Robinson as the journalist who keeps posting the irrelevent and frequently annoying NME column Peter Robinson Versus... that is an unfunny tribute to the days of Smash Hits.

why did they choose that awful song...

but couldn't it be something by a British band like Oasis, Coldplay or Blur, or artists like Mika, Little Bots or Kylie.... they deserve the number 1 more...

Edited December 7, 200915 yr by Big Mistake

Popjustice is the baby of journalist Peter Robinson whose idealogy is that everything good started with Stock Aitken & Waterman.

 

Whilst the likes of music gods The Beatles; Rolling Stones; Led Zeppelin; David Bowie; Queen; Sex Pistols; The Smiths; etc are old fashioned and out of date.

 

This time last year he was in full support to Simon Cowell recieving a lifetime achievement award; and he also argued that Pete Waterman has made a greater and superior contribution to British music than Sir Paul McCartney. Recently he rubbished Queen's latest best of compilation and trashed The Beatles Remasters for its music content.

 

Peter Robinson is the same Peter Robinson as the journalist who keeps posting the irrelevent and frequently annoying NME column Peter Robinson Versus... that is an unfunny tribute to the days of Smash Hits.

 

tragic, I think this is why everything popjustice say is automatically invalid, A.K.A they are morons.

 

why did they choose that awful song...

but couldn't it be something by a British band like Oasis, Coldplay or Blur, or artists like Mika, Little Bots or Kylie.... they deserve the number 1 more...

 

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

HOW MANY f***ING TIMES, can you not learn to read instead? Yes lets have a campaign for Kylie to get to number 1 instead of X Factor, because that sends a f***ign message to Cowell doesnt it, because Kylie is really uncommerical and wouldnt be able to get to number 1 without a facebook group. :rolleyes:

 

Seriously, we have some morons here (i am sick of pretending I dont think a lot of people here, particulary in chart chat arent complete idiots), and this post pretty much proves it. Honestly, what would be the point in challenging x factor with something that they probaly place their products (some people call them acts, that would be insulting to real musicians, anyone from x factor is a product).

 

As for it being an 'awful song', maybe if you werent so ignorant and close minded, maybe you could appreciate other genres of music rather than the $h!t that makes the top ten every week.

 

Would it really hurt so much for some people on this forum to branch out from chart music and listen to some real musical compositions (im not saying stop listening to chart music, im saying expand your taste a bit more rather than just listening to what the record companies want you to and keep Simon Cowell getting even more money).

It's a question of degree though isn't it? Goebbels was partly responsible for allowing a genocidal maniac to commit acts of mass murder across Europe. Simon Cowell is responsible in the opinion of many (including you and me) of damaging the music industry. As Bert for Lashes says, the English language is rich enough for such hyperbole to be unnecessary and lazy.

 

It's the same as describing defeat in a football match as a disaster. If that is a disaster, what words do we then use for the death of over 100 people in a fire in a Russian club at the weekend, not to mention many far worse events?

 

I completely disagree.

 

So a very popular Beatles website that I frequent that has its annual poll including one of the popular topics: "If Mark Chapman (the John Lennon assassin and not the Radio 1/5 broadcaster) was allowed out of jail to kill somebody who should it be?" is offensive, is it?

 

Likewise December's edition of Q Magazine where it posts its Top 10 villains of the noughties had Simon Cowell at #1; ahead of George W Bush at #2; with Osama Bin Laden/Al Qaeda languishing in 3rd spot; with an image of Simon Cowell as the devil is offensive is it?

 

Oh well in that case the entire journalist output of the brilliant caustic Charlie Brooker is offensive not least because he was the first to make the Simon Cowell=Adolf Hitler & Max Clifford=Josef Goebbels analogy which I borrowed/nicked.

 

Still nevermind go on believing Simon Cowell tells it as it is; and that We Can Work It Out is a Stevie Wonder song and not a Beatles song. Which has nothing to do with the rumour over the last 24 hours that Paul McCartney has pulled out of performing on the X-Factor finale to be replaced by Robbie Williams due to getting overwhelming hostile feedback from his fanbase on his own website; so putting Simon in a bad mood.

 

Just like Max Clifford is nothing like Josef Goebbels, after all this is the same Max Clifford who got the BBC to remove the BBC4 Charlie Brooker Newswipe episode which the Guardian journalist dissected all Max's contacts and power with regards to Public Relations basically implying that he is more powerful in Britain's society today than the Prime Minister. Yet despite this episode being pulled from BBC iPlayer inside 3 days there was minimal mention of it within the British tabloids and media, funny that!

 

I mean Max Clifford started his career with the "Freddie Starr ate my hamster story" which turned out to be a complete fabrication by Max himself; just as the first Nazi rally in Berlin which ended in a massive fight was reported as between Communists and Nazis yet it turned out that it was orchestrated by Goebbels himself between Nazis and Nazis wearing Communist gear and him contacting the German press to be on standby to witness the events ..... so they were nothing alike were they? -_-

I hate Cowell just as much as anyone else. I think his contribution to music has been almost entirely negative. And I certainly don't think We Can Work It Out is a Stevie Wonder song.

 

As for Charlie Brooker, I don't remember reading his article about Cowell but I assume that, like his other columns, it was done in a humorous way.

How did I know this place would react like this to the prospect of this happening? :rolleyes:

 

Unfortunately this is unlikely to happen but with the publicity it's getting now and fact that whoever wins this year it's looking like they'll have closer to Leon Jackson sales than Alexandra Burke sales so who knows eh? Rage Against The Machine are the PERFECT act for this imo. I.e. A band that anyone who eats the giant spoon that comes through the TV is elergic too! (By this I mean people who buy the same old bland ballads and half arsed up-tempos that are performed and released by acts who are on the show and the has-beens who come on for a leg-up (barring a few like Lady GaGa's fantastic performance last night)

 

My main point is that Rage Against The Machine are the OPPOSITE of any X Factor contestant or group because they're in the music businnes because they love making music and don't care about 'Selling millions!11!111ELEVEN!11!' meanwhile the majority of people who go onto the X Factor go on it because they want to make money and be famous and a lot of the time don't really have much passion for music like Rage do.

 

X Factor makes great TV but some of us sick and tired of it churning out rubbish excuses for 'pop stars' and ruining the christmas #1 so if the internet generation can stand against it then it'll be a great end to the final chapter of music in this decade. :D

Not really a great article though is it? it is highly ignorant to non-mainstream pop music and fails to see the point, as Grimly mentioned they were on that label for a reason, they wouldnt of been able to get their messages across to a big enough audience if they were not to on a label (this is pre-internet), and also, havent been on said label for 9 years now, so it's pretty irrelevant. You only think it is a great article because of your bias and ignorance against the band which I highly doubt you have even heard the band.

 

Spot on Chris... If RATM were around just now, they'd likely have used different tactics... Probably using the Internet I would imagine... At the end of the day, they made the record company work for them....

 

why did they choose that awful song...

but couldn't it be something by a British band like Oasis, Coldplay or Blur, or artists like Mika, Little Bots or Kylie.... they deserve the number 1 more...

 

Errr, none of that lot have exactly made particularly "sh"t-stirring" music mate..... Unless I've just missed Kylie's massive Political rant against, I dunno, the Iraq war or something..... :rolleyes:

 

The point is to release something which upsets the applecart a bit.... Ironically The Muppets would probably do that more.. It would be revenge on Cowell for releasing the bloody awful "Bob The Builder" crap.... So, he basically ends up being fukked over by a Novelty song himself.... I think there is a certain level of poetic justice in that..... :rolleyes:

Not really a great article though is it? it is highly ignorant to non-mainstream pop music and fails to see the point, as Grimly mentioned they were on that label for a reason, they wouldnt of been able to get their messages across to a big enough audience if they were not to on a label (this is pre-internet), and also, havent been on said label for 9 years now, so it's pretty irrelevant. You only think it is a great article because of your bias and ignorance against the band which I highly doubt you have even heard the band.

 

I thought the whole thing made sense. It wasn't a great article but the subject matter isn't great. It was a balanced article.

 

Now, saying that the band haven't been on Sony for 9 years so its irrelevant is the really stupid thing here. If getting Rage Against the Machine to number one is important to everyone then why not choose one of their more recent, more politically-relevant tracks that is not STILL OWNED BY SONY? The band don't take their back catalogue with you, you know - not unless they brokered one of the most unlikely deals in history.

 

No, what this is about is "hee hee heee....wouldn't it be funny if Christmas Top of the Pops caused Gran to cough her sprouts half way across the room because old video footage of an angry young man with dreads saying "f***" is broadcast?"

 

It's a question of degree though isn't it? Goebbels was partly responsible for allowing a genocidal maniac to commit acts of mass murder across Europe. Simon Cowell is responsible in the opinion of many (including you and me) of damaging the music industry. As Bert for Lashes says, the English language is rich enough for such hyperbole to be unnecessary and lazy.

 

*sigh* You truly disappoint me sometimes Suede.... Oft times you really get it, and other, like this time, you just completely miss the point.... So, pray tell me, who should I liken Cowell and Max Cliffort to.....? Nicky Chinn...? The blokes who manufactured The Monkees....? Charles Saatchi....? How many people under 30 and/or non-UK or US are gonna even know who/what the hell I'm referring to there.....? :rolleyes:

I thought the whole thing made sense. It wasn't a great article but the subject matter isn't great. It was a balanced article.

 

Now, saying that the band haven't been on Sony for 9 years so its irrelevant is the really stupid thing here. If getting Rage Against the Machine to number one is important to everyone then why not choose one of their more recent, more politically-relevant tracks that is not STILL OWNED BY SONY? The band don't take their back catalogue with you, you know - not unless they brokered one of the most unlikely deals in history.

 

No, what this is about is "hee hee heee....wouldn't it be funny if Christmas Top of the Pops caused Gran to cough her sprouts half way across the room because old video footage of an angry young man with dreads saying "f***" is broadcast?"

 

And you disappoint me too Rich.... Do you not think that perhaps the reason why Sony/Epic haven't released an RATM "Best Of" in these long nine years (and they've not exactly been shy in endlessly producing "Best Ofs" for any other artist) may actually have something to do with the deal that Morello actually brokered... Pretty sure to do that Sony have to obtain Rage's actual permission.....

 

And you're wrong about the article from Popjustice... It's written by a musically retarded idiot who wouldn't even get past the first interview stage for Smash Hits.....

And you're wrong about the article from Popjustice... It's written by a musically retarded idiot who wouldn't even get past the first interview stage for Smash Hits.....

 

That "musically retarded idiot" is called Peter Robinson and he has just has just won a major music industry award for his writing. He is one of the most funny and observant music journos around and is well respected by a good many people. I'd like to see you set up your own music website and make it last for nearly a decade. Also, I am very glad he wouldn't have made into Smash Hits, that magazine turned to sh*t in the 21th century. Why do you think it no longer exists?

 

And you disappoint me too Rich.... Do you not think that perhaps the reason why Sony/Epic haven't released an RATM "Best Of" in these long nine years (and they've not exactly been shy in endlessly producing "Best Ofs" for any other artist) may actually have something to do with the deal that Morello actually brokered... Pretty sure to do that Sony have to obtain Rage's actual permission.....

 

Well, to play Devil's advocate here, they already did release the Best of RATM. It was called Rage Against the Machine and came out in 1992.

 

The fact is, Sony will still make the lion's share of the cash out of this stunt.

How did I know this place would react like this to the prospect of this happening? :rolleyes:

 

Unfortunately this is unlikely to happen but with the publicity it's getting now and fact that whoever wins this year it's looking like they'll have closer to Leon Jackson sales than Alexandra Burke sales so who knows eh? Rage Against The Machine are the PERFECT act for this imo. I.e. A band that anyone who eats the giant spoon that comes through the TV is elergic too! (By this I mean people who buy the same old bland ballads and half arsed up-tempos that are performed and released by acts who are on the show and the has-beens who come on for a leg-up (barring a few like Lady GaGa's fantastic performance last night)

 

My main point is that Rage Against The Machine are the OPPOSITE of any X Factor contestant or group because they're in the music businnes because they love making music and don't care about 'Selling millions!11!111ELEVEN!11!' meanwhile the majority of people who go onto the X Factor go on it because they want to make money and be famous and a lot of the time don't really have much passion for music like Rage do.

 

X Factor makes great TV but some of us sick and tired of it churning out rubbish excuses for 'pop stars' and ruining the christmas #1 so if the internet generation can stand against it then it'll be a great end to the final chapter of music in this decade. :D

 

I agree with you.

 

But still, as much as I may admire their anti-establishment commitment, RATM music was never my cup of tea (the only song I can vaguely recognize is "Bulls on Parade") so I would hardly care enough to buy any song of theirs, as much I support the fact that the almighty X-Factor machine should stop ruining Christmas charts. Call me TV-spoonfed, but that's how I feel. And for sure I'm not the only one.

 

 

 

I personally think it's a plain cheek that a member (especially the member concerned) feels the need to 'warn' other members when the mods themselves obviously deem it to be OK. Maybe they should be less sensitive/less egotistical/less of a prat. I'm sure Grimly would agree.

 

The whole point is that they dont have mainstream appeal, if they did, it wouldnt be sticking 2 fingers up to the x factor would it? if it was like 'get Lady GaGa to xmas number 1' it wouldnt even say anything or be a challenge.

In true Rage spirit, fuck censorism, I remember a famous little protest they did against censorism...

 

This thread shows a very poor example being set to guests visiting this forum along with probably a number of members.(Swearing and personal attacks along with slightly un-PC metaphors that are open to mis-interpretation) Who is the mod for this thread ? If they cannot see anything wrong then maybe it should be referred to an Admin to review ? Will I get blocked for speaking out ? Am I in the minority here ?

Edited December 8, 200915 yr by Eighth Day

I just scrolled through and it seems we have 2 mods, 1 Global Mod and an Editor contributions in this thread.

 

me and my big mouth :huh: Nice knowing you all !

Edited December 8, 200915 yr by Eighth Day

This thread shows a very poor example being set to guests visiting this forum along with probably a number of members.(Swearing and personal attacks along with slightly un-PC metaphors that are open to mis-interpretation) Who is the mod for this thread ? If they cannot see anything wrong then maybe it should be referred to an Admin to review ? Will I get blocked for speaking out ? Am I in the minority here ?

 

I don't believe that you are in the minority, Eighth. I find it a sad reflection on someone's education when they feel the need to express their opinions on an internet forum with almost incessant swearing - moderator or not.

I just scrolled through and it seems we have 2 mods, 1 Global Mod and an Editor contributions in this thread.

 

me and my big mouth :huh: Nice knowing you all !

I think you'll find that my contributions are more on your side. I don't have the power to delete contributions (even though the editor tag might suggest I do) or to warn people.

I think you'll find that my contributions are more on your side. I don't have the power to delete contributions (even though the editor tag might suggest I do) or to warn people.

 

Sorry, I wasn't suggesting that you had submitted anything wrong, far from it. I think maybe I worded it badly :blush:

I was just worried with Mods and Editor in the thread I might get blocked for speaking out of turn as a mere 'loon' member