The BBC have a habit of cocking up with the song. From Bruno Brookes unknowingly playing the unedited version live on the chart show when it first came out, to this week's slip up on 5 Live.
My favourite one though is recounted in the body of this post (sorry, it's friends locked).
What astonishes me is that anyone thought the final outcome might be in doubt. Sheeple don't usually bother making an effort and the idea of buying the same song 3 times is probably beyond their understanding anyway.
On the other hand, there are a lot of them. All you need is for the apathetic people on one side to outnumber the determined people on the other side by a larger factor than is gained back by the latter's greater determination, and you've lost. I certainly didn't think it was a shoe-in for the good guys, though I'm pleased to be wrong.
Yes, this - not least because the X-Factor has access to the majority of several entire generations that a Facebook campaign is unlikely to reach. And many members of said generations will buy whatever is popular, especially around Christmas, as an optimistic present for their younger relatives. That's a market Cowell's chart machine probably relies a lot on, and it's impressive that we managed to outweigh that.
(For the record, I didn't buy the song three times, I only bought it once, AND I didn't have a copy already. I am so legit it hurts AND WE STILL WON. *grins*)
Ah, but you've misinterpreted the scenario. We were not TOLD to buy it - some bright spark just said "wouldn't it be cool if?" and a ton of people AGREED with him. Bullet dodged!
Funny thing is, I can remember being around in the late nineties and everyone (admittedly, me included) being sick of hearing Killing in the Name. And I can remember everyone ranting about how this shouty stuff was a flash in the pan and only for kiddies, and all the jokes about "Fuck you, I won't tidy my bedroom". And yet now it comes easily to the fingers to call them veterans, and speak with admiration of the respect and status that they hold. I guess there's a lesson in that to us metalheads, too - don't diss the new stuff. No. I say diss the new stuff and diss it as hard as it looks like it deserves. If Rage had just released Killing In The Name and then faded from view, would we respect them now? Most likely not. Mock 'em when they're new; cheap plastic breaks fast.
There's a slight problem with that, though. It's one thing to do it based purely on musical ability, but I often see it done purely because a band have attracted a lot of sixteen year old fans - and worse than that, this spills over into older rockers being unsympathetic/unsupportive of the kids around them when those kids are at an age where they may badly need a bit of older, more experienced backup (you only have to look at what people say about emos to see it in action). And that is not a good thing, and it does us all a disservice...
I agree with this... artoo many people dismiss things because they're popular or because the kids like them; the current target appears to be deathcore (much of which is great), before that it was Slipknot. Almost all emo recorded after 1990 is crap though :-P
What is so impressive with RATM is that it was first released in 1992.
Comments 22
My favourite one though is recounted in the body of this post (sorry, it's friends locked).
Reply
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWaX8P1nqyg
Enjoy ;)
Reply
try this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfZGUdcBBLc&annotation_id=annotation_925279&feature=iv
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
(For the record, I didn't buy the song three times, I only bought it once, AND I didn't have a copy already. I am so legit it hurts AND WE STILL WON. *grins*)
Reply
"fuck you I won't do what you tell me"
"buy this song to get it number 1"
"okay"
*buy*
Still, brilliant example of people banding together to send a message that we don't want the shit polluting the charts at the moment!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
No. I say diss the new stuff and diss it as hard as it looks like it deserves. If Rage had just released Killing In The Name and then faded from view, would we respect them now? Most likely not. Mock 'em when they're new; cheap plastic breaks fast.
Reply
Reply
What is so impressive with RATM is that it was first released in 1992.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment