Tired of Simon Cowells pet karaoke project stealing the christmas number one?

[jim]

50,000 pre-orders before the song, or singer, were announced.

"liked it" eh?

Exactly. I saw a load of comments yesterday from people who basically said "We love Joe, he deserves it and those RATM idiots trying to piggyback on his success should sod off. I'll buy everything he ever releases."

Thing is, it's such a pathetic temporary platform that they're dumped onto. They might love Joe now, but in 6 months they won't give a toss about him. So we've got Will Young, Girls Aloud and Leona Lewis who in my mind have made a name for themselves, and the latter still has a lot of time to fail. Fallen by the wayside we've got Gareth Gates, Michelle McManus (Sam and Mark saw sense and got out, now they do kids' TV), One True Voice, Steve Brookstein (G4 did little either), Shayne Ward, and Leon Jackson. Steve notably credited X Factor with "not benefiting his life".

They give them so many stupid "challenges", i.e. sing a song by Queen, sing a song by Barry White, that all you can possibly get at the end of it is some generic crap. Imagine if, for the sake of argument, Oasis had never existed and they all went on to audition for X-Factor. They'd get laughed at when only one or two of them sang properly and the others just stood in the background. "You play instruments? No, we have a live orchestra for that." Then they'd be told that "singing is okay, you can go through to the next round and see how it goes, but no original material!". They'd then get nearly thrown out by Simon because "they've got the wrong attitude for this business - read "not subservient to label". Then they'd get chucked out because of their very poor attempt at covering Pavarotti.

So the only people who can succeed are people who: don't play instruments, don't write their own material, do everything they're told to by the label, and have a generic voice that can do an average impersonation of 54 different singing styles. And if they really expect to succeed when they're competing with 18 other winners of singing competitions with exactly the same attributes, then they're nutters.

[finlay666]

http://cymrufydd.tumblr.com/post/293...xfactors-forum

Some choice quotes from the Joe McElderry forum

[Rob_B]

I'm sorry but this one deserves an oh, emm, gee

“if rage r an old band y havent i herd of them. cuz i know most music from westlife to lady gaga to geri haliwel. if there an old band then y dont my mom or noone now them aswell??”

[scaryjim]

... I feel perhaps Christian Death has more to offer for a Christmas message!

I dunno, Killing in the name is effectively a rant against corruption and priviledge amongst an authoritarian ruling elite - I think Jesus would've had a lot of time for that viewpoint...

[TooNice]

[...] (I am not replying to any specific point, but sharing my views)

I note that a lot of people make a great deal out of being able to play instruments, and being able to write their own songs. Yes, I also have a tendency of admiring multi-talented individuals. However, I listen to my ears foremost: if I a song sounds good to me, it is not going to suddenly sound any worse if I find out that the singer of the track did not write the song, nor played any of the instruments in the track. I would much prefer that be the case, than the guy picking up a guitar but ending up playing less well than the guy allocated by the record company (and negatively affecting my enjoyment of the song).

Of course, if the person can play the guitar as well and still be able to sing the song, then more power to him, and I would probably view the person to an even higher regard. Yet, is it really unacceptable for someone who can 'only' sing [suitably well] to reach no1 position?

I don't know how good is this Joe guy when it comes to singing (maybe it really isn't that exceptional - being partial to female vocalists make me a poor judge for male singers). I'd be surprised if he singing skill is not beyond your typical karaoke singers, but then again, I am also wondering if some people here aren't just applying the karaoke label on anyone who can 'only' sing.

[Biscuit]

Gareth Gates, Michelle McManus (Sam and Mark saw sense and got out, now they do kids' TV), One True Voice, Steve Brookstein (G4 did little either), Shayne Ward, and Leon Jackson. Steve notably credited X Factor with "not benefiting his life".

Who?

http://cymrufydd.tumblr.com/post/293...xfactors-forum

Some choice quotes from the Joe McElderry forum

These guys are stupid on so many levels

[father smurf]

I am also wondering if some people here aren't just applying the karaoke label on anyone who can 'only' sing.

Better then most of them on the show.

I thought the song choice was aĉa. But compared to most of the singers, with a decent song, he may have some potential.

That's if he doesn't end up caught in another "i-don't-like-simon-cowell-so-i'm-going-to-mess-up-his-singers-releases" campaign next time.

As for RATM - good track.. but if they wanted a christmassy one - why not Cliff Richard or even the Wombles? Even more embarassing for Simon Cowell

[jim]

I note that a lot of people make a great deal out of being able to play instruments, and being able to write their own songs. Yes, I also have a tendency of admiring multi-talented individuals. However, I listen to my ears foremost: if I a song sounds good to me, it is not going to suddenly sound any worse if I find out that the singer of the track did not write the song, nor played any of the instruments in the track. I would much prefer that be the case, than the guy picking up a guitar but ending up playing less well than the guy allocated by the record company (and negatively affecting my enjoyment of the song).

Of course, if the person can play the guitar as well and still be able to sing the song, then more power to him, and I would probably view the person to an even higher regard. Yet, is it really unacceptable for someone who can 'only' sing [suitably well] to reach no1 position?

I don't know how good is this Joe guy when it comes to singing (maybe it really isn't that exceptional - being partial to female vocalists make me a poor judge for male singers). I'd be surprised if he singing skill is not beyond your typical karaoke singers, but then again, I am also wondering if some people here aren't just applying the karaoke label on anyone who can 'only' sing.

I don't disagree with people "just singing", I'm more saying that if someone did turn up and said "I write my own stuff" they'd get laughed off the X-Factor, which is ridiculous. A consequence of that (and the other things I listed) is my main gripe with X-Factor - the fact that it creates the same sound every year... no matter who wins, it's the same stuff.

If you look at some of today's artists, you've got people who are a little bit wacky like Lady GaGa/Scissor Sisters/Gwen Stefani, your rock/indie (whatever people call it) like Oasis, Blur, bit more unusual stuff with Muse, then you've got Papa Roach/System of a Down etc, then you've got rap, whether that's 50 Cent and Eminem or someone like Dizzee Rascal, then you've got Calvin Harris and those types, so on so forth with yet more genres. Then you've got your typical pop singer, which is where every single X-Factor/Pop Idol finalist lives. The only "different" act I remember is G4, who were shoe-horned into that role anyway.

This is where I disagree - they give such a preference to that type of singer, who generally doesn't write their own lyrics, generally can sing in any style, generally... (you get the picture), that every single winner is the same. If a promising rap artist auditioned, they'd have no chance. As a result, it's not really a talent show like there have been in the past (e.g. you have 10 minutes on stage, impress the audience), but a production line of generic winners with a different name each year.

People get attached to their story and their persona, and the record company makes a nice profit out of them for 12 months, before ditching them and moving on. The actual artists have virtually no hope of competing in the music industry, because they're already filling a small niche market of "generic pop artists doing mostly cover songs", and there's 15 of them in that niche already. If it was genuinely a musical talent show, I think it would be fairer on the contestants - the nation could discover a new Muse for example, and that group would have a big market that they could appeal to year after year. As things stand the winners are just a fad, Sony's pawn, and you're extremely lucky if you come out of it with anything other than the £200k prize money.

So yeah, that's why I disagree with it - not because I dislike "plain old singers", but because I think they've got false expectations, and are being misled. Their "fans" are buying their albums in the same way they probably bought a Furby and a Tamagotchi a few years back, and ultimately they'll all end up out in the rubbish.

Who?

Most of that credit goes to Wikipedia if I'm being honest

[Haiku32]

http://cymrufydd.tumblr.com/post/293...xfactors-forum

Some choice quotes from the Joe McElderry forum

Oh dear god, the ignorance and sheer stupidity of some people is mind blowing.

[midzt]

Who else is getting tired of this talk about the Rage and Joe battle?

It's incredible how many groups have sprung up now on Facebook trying to get other songs off/into the charts, I'm so glad the Jon and Tracey Morter have come out and said that they wouldn't do it again, and it was just done to prove a point.
Although its been great that another X-factor winner has not got Christmas No.1, pop music has always been in the charts, and thats why I'm a bit annoyed with Rage getting it. Its a good point made by people, but if the No1 spot was contested as it was pre-talent shows, then it would still be the same kind of music in it.

We've had:

2009 - RATM - a result of a Facebook campaign
2005-2008 - X-factor winners
2004 - BandAid
2003 - Gary Jules - Mad World - is this the latest one that wasn't part of some kind of forced advertising campaign?
2002- Girls Aloud - Popstars?
2001 - Robbie and Nicole Kidman - Pop....
2000 - Bob the Builder....
1999 - Westlife - cover
1996-1998 - Spice Girls

As much as it nice to see different genres in the charts, the charts have always been about Pop music. So, yes, KitN has gotten the Christmas Number 1 this year, but its going to go back to the 'generic Pop' sounds anyway. If not through X-factor, then Britains Got Talent or some other show, and if not through some show, it will be still be Pop.

[Bunjiweb]

I've been watching the whole thing unfold and after laughing/giggling/groaning a lot I feel I have to share this gem of "inteligence" that was posted on the digitalspy forums by some no-hope.

Simon owns shares in Sony (lots of them). So he did benefit (in a huge way) from the RATM campain. That's what makes all you RATM people massive FOOLS. Simon always gets the last laugh. While this campaign was going on I was also laughing because I knew Simon was sitting back with that huge smug smile on his face. And good luck to him. What a bunch of MUGS all you RATM plonkers are! Whenever Sony does well, Simon does well. End off. The people behind this campaign didn't even have the INTELIGENCE to do their research. I find it all so funny.

Yes those words were highlighted in bold and YES he doesnt have the the intelligence to spell the proceeding word correctly... lolz.

Ben

[Rave]

Gawd that sounds so passe. Was it written in the 1960's?

That's me pwnt by an invention of Coca-Cola inc.

Edit: FWIW, I love pop. Girls Aloud are, admittedly in the face of very little competition, my favourite band of the 2000s, mainly thanks to the fact that their songwriting team seemed to decide that everything in pop had already been done, and that the next wave is music that makes no bloody sense.

It makes no sense, but it works.

[Mike Fishcake]

The people behind this campaign didn't even have the INTELIGENCE to do their research.

*irony detector explodes*

[Betty_Swallocks]

The pop charts have always been full of manufactured bands. Mostly (but not all) crap.
Really, who honestly cares. I stopped listening to chart music when I was about 13 and discovered real music.

[Brucelles]

Of course, the competition made more people buy the X-Factor chap's single too, racking up more cash for Semen Cowbell.

And to be fair there have been some OK Christmas number 1's. The ones that spring to mind immediately are:

1973 Slade - "Merry Xmas Everybody"
1974 Mud - "Lonely This Christmas"
1975 Queen - "Bohemian Rhapsody"
1979 Pink Floyd - "Another Brick in the Wall (Part 2)"

And I quite liked the band Aid single, Mikey Jackson's Earth Song, Pet Shop Boys "Always on my Mind"

Mainly pop, yes, but at least not the 'blander than semolina' stuff we have had since the Spice Girls.

Though, do I sound not-very-metal when I say that I also quite liked Girls Aloud and "Sound of the Underground"?

[santa claus]

That's me pwnt by an invention of Coca-Cola inc.

Edit: FWIW, I love pop. Girls Aloud are, admittedly in the face of very little competition, my favourite band of the 2000s, mainly thanks to the fact that their songwriting team seemed to decide that everything in pop had already been done, and that the next wave is music that makes no bloody sense.

It makes no sense, but it works.

Sorry Rave, wasn't having a pop (no pun intended). I realise that every generation is entitled to its own rebelliousness before it grows up, gets a suit and has kids.

I'm disappointed for Joe. He's a young man who no doubt didn't for once consider who he might be offending in becoming associated with the apparently loathed Simon Cowell nor that the route to his success was 'too easy'. And he got bullied out of his dream by music snobbery.

Nineteen million people watch the entertainment that Simon Cowell produces. If people prefer other music then fair enough but this campaign was little more than a bloody nose for Simon, who could have bought the no. 1 slot if he'd wanted to.