These campaigns are stupid, at least get a Christmas song to number 1 instead.
Even though she comes from X Factor and the people behind these campaigns will probably hate her for that, I'd like Leona to get the number 1, she has a brilliant new Christmas tune and it would be nice to have a festive tune as the Christmas number 1 instead.
I don't think any of these campaigns will work, it worked the last time because it was new, plus it was the only one really. After the success of that, multiple groups are set up with all different campaigns, so the X Factor detractors are split.
Leona's Christmas single One More Sleep is an original, catchy Christmas song. I would much prefer this to do well. It is refreshing to have some good Christmas original singles to choose from. I love the motown vibe it has too.
I hoped fairytale of NY would have been championed in 2012 as it was 25 years since the original was released. loved DC, hate facebook so what single is it? my fav is you shook my all night long.
did anyone see pete waterman talking about the last facebook campaign? he said the publicity helped cowell and xfactor
Same applies to AC/DC with the hordes of rock music journos too afraid to criticise an act considered legendary.
AC/DC have received plenty of criticism over the years, however it isn't the "hordes of rock music journos" who have put them where they are, it is their fans.
However fan loyalty to a band or artist is an alien concept to 99% of X-Factor fans.
Yes, instead of being mindless sheep and following the X Factor herd, lets instead be mindless sheep and follow the FB pack,
Spot on. There is nothing subversive about these campaigns. Supporting them does not make you a 'real' music fan. If you want to buy this single because you like it, I suspect it's right there in iTunes for you to buy already - so why not just buy it now?
I'd personally love for Lily Allen to get the Christmas Number 1 this year. Absolutely gorgeous cover of a gorgeous song, and it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
Do X Factor contestants singing a cover song with so much exposure getting to number1 get there on their own merits? If they just farted into a mic there would be mugs saying it's a good tune & would buy it, in fact it would probably have more soul than most of the crap dished out by this programme.
Actually, yes, they have to compete against tens of thousands of hopefuls, get shortlisted by leading lights in the music industry and then work their butts off for, however, many weeks, subjecting themselves to public judgement and censure with live performances that have to secure votes from millions of viewers in order to survive each week. Often having to find ways to shine even through themed weeks that don't suit them.
Anyone who can come out of that process as the winner has bloody well earned a number one single. Even then, they won't get one unless more people want to buy their single than anyone else currently available.
These campaigns are vindictive, spiteful and cruel and don't accomplish anything other than to foist a number one single on the public that the majority probably don't even like. You wouldn't catch me supporting a campaign like that in a million years :mad:
Spot on. There is nothing subversive about these campaigns. Supporting them does not make you a 'real' music fan. If you want to buy this single because you like it, I suspect it's right there in iTunes for you to buy already - so why not just buy it now?
I'd personally love for Lily Allen to get the Christmas Number 1 this year. Absolutely gorgeous cover of a gorgeous song, and it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
The original RATM campaign was, if not exactly subversive, at least cocking a snook at the unholy alliance between ITV and SyCo. The John Cage campaign was a witty extension of this - well "witty" if you're an over-educated fop like me. AC/DC is as commercial as 1Dimension and so this campaign is misguided.
What about Gary Glitter? He must have some Christmas songs in his back catalogue.
Actually, yes, they have to compete against tens of thousands of hopefuls, get shortlisted by leading lights in the music industry and then work their butts off for, however, many weeks, subjecting themselves to public judgement and censure with live performances that have to secure votes from millions of viewers in order to survive each week. Often having to find ways to shine even through themed weeks that don't suit them.
Anyone who can come out of that process as the winner has bloody well earned a number one single. Even then, they won't get one unless more people want to buy their single than anyone else currently available.
These campaigns are vindictive, spiteful and cruel and don't accomplish anything other than to foist a number one single on the public that the majority probably don't even like. You wouldn't catch me supporting a campaign like that in a million years :mad:
"foist" - they don't force you to listen to it. I haven't known what the No 1 single is for well over a decade, maybe two. Of course, I don't listen to Radio 1 or any commercial radio stations and keep missing Top of the Pops, as I'm busy on Thursday evenings.
The original RATM campaign was, if not exactly subversive, at least cocking a snook at the unholy alliance between ITV and SyCo. The John Cage campaign was a witty extension of this - well "witty" if you're an over-educated fop like me. AC/DC is as commercial as 1Dimension and so this campaign is misguided.
What about Gary Glitter? He must have some Christmas songs in his back catalogue.
I didn't disagree with the RATM as much as the subsequent ones simply because I feel they were within their rights to protest the dominance of an XF winner every year for the Christmas Number 1, and an organised campaign was probably the only way to do that. There was also a nice simplicity in them choosing RATM - for the band name alone, it worked on a base level which is why, IMO, it did so well.
Every campaign since then has smacked of bandwagon jumping and trading in on past glories. It is even more ridiculous as the XF single release hasn't been at the start of the Christmas number 1 new release week for a few years now. It reminds me of that exchange in Rebel Without A Cause ("But what are you rebelling against?" "What have you got?") Rebellion for the sake of rebellion really isn't rebellion at all, particularly not when it's been organised by a FB group! And as you said, AC/DC are hardly an obscure choice.
Actually, yes, they have to compete against tens of thousands of hopefuls, get shortlisted by leading lights in the music industry and then work their butts off for, however, many weeks, subjecting themselves to public judgement and censure with live performances that have to secure votes from millions of viewers in order to survive each week. Often having to find ways to shine even through themed weeks that don't suit them.
Anyone who can come out of that process as the winner has bloody well earned a number one single. Even then, they won't get one unless more people want to buy their single than anyone else currently available.
These campaigns are vindictive, spiteful and cruel and don't accomplish anything other than to foist a number one single on the public that the majority probably don't even like. You wouldn't catch me supporting a campaign like that in a million years :mad:
winning a talent show doesn't mean you've "earned a number one single" at all, although in general that is the peak of their "career".
As Bruce Dickinson said, people go on shows like X-Factor not to pursue a long singing career but simply to become famous.
I didn't disagree with the RATM as much as the subsequent ones simply because I feel they were within their rights to protest the dominance of an XF winner every year for the Christmas Number 1, and an organised campaign was probably the only way to do that. There was also a nice simplicity in them choosing RATM - for the band name alone, it worked on a base level which is why, IMO, it did so well.
Every campaign since then has smacked of bandwagon jumping and trading in on past glories. It is even more ridiculous as the XF single release hasn't been at the start of the Christmas number 1 new release week for a few years now. It reminds me of that exchange in Rebel Without A Cause ("But what are you rebelling against?" "What have you got?") Rebellion for the sake of rebellion really isn't rebellion at all, particularly not when it's been organised by a FB group! And as you said, AC/DC are hardly an obscure choice.
Not that they would have anything to do with it in the first place, but you can hardly say AC/DC are "trading on past glories" considering their last album and tour are arguably one of the most successful they have ever had.
Not that they would have anything to do with it in the first place, but you can hardly say AC/DC are "trading on past glories" considering their last album and tour are arguably one of the most successful they have ever had.
No I don't mean AC/DC, I mean the organisers of these campaigns trading in on the past glories of the RATM campaign.
"foist" - they don't force you to listen to it. I haven't known what the No 1 single is for well over a decade, maybe two. Of course, I don't listen to Radio 1 or any commercial radio stations and keep missing Top of the Pops, as I'm busy on Thursday evenings.
This is what you pick up on? Seems a pretty irrelevant exercise in semantics to me
Anyone who doesn't listen to the Christmas number one has even less business trying to influence it, IMO.
winning a talent show doesn't mean you've "earned a number one single" at all, although in general that is the peak of their "career".
As Bruce Dickinson said, people go on shows like X-Factor not to pursue a long singing career but simply to become famous.
Well Bruce Dickinson, whoever he is, is wrong. It's quite evident that the vast majority of contestants love music with a passion and want to devote their lives to it.
As for whether winning means you've earned a number one single, of course it doesn't!
The thing that should earn you a number one single is if more people want to buy your single than any other single currently on the market. These campaigns subvert that fundamental criteria. They attempt to force the most popular single from winning on the basis of who they don't want to win instead of who they do want. It's not even about which song you prefer - many people in these campaigns haven't even heard either song and don't care which is better.
It's like somebody sabotaging Jessica Ellis in the Olympics because they don't like Britain or its policies :rolleyes:
IMO, anyone contributing to these things should be ashamed of themselves.
At least people buy X Factor music because they like it. I think people who join in these "campaigns" are far more sheep-like than those who support X Factor artists.
I could understand it if the campaign was for Bob Geldof's
feed the world to be Christmas No1 with the proceeds going
to the charity.
I would not support a group proposed by a fan of that group
or singer as the case may be with the profits going into the
group or singers pocket.
:rolleyes:
Actually, yes, they have to compete against tens of thousands of hopefuls, get shortlisted by leading lights in the music industry and then work their butts off for, however, many weeks, subjecting themselves to public judgement and censure with live performances that have to secure votes from millions of viewers in order to survive each week. Often having to find ways to shine even through themed weeks that don't suit them.
Anyone who can come out of that process as the winner has bloody well earned a number one single. Even then, they won't get one unless more people want to buy their single than anyone else currently available.
These campaigns are vindictive, spiteful and cruel and don't accomplish anything other than to foist a number one single on the public that the majority probably don't even like. You wouldn't catch me supporting a campaign like that in a million years :mad:
If you believe all that...........would you like to buy some magic beans?
This is what you pick up on? Seems a pretty irrelevant exercise in semantics to me
Anyone who doesn't listen to the Christmas number one has even less business trying to influence it, IMO.
No, the word foist implies that this event is forced upon us and, as a result, adversely affects us. My point is - it's just the Crimbo number one; nobody over the age of 14 cares. Or should. Other than to pee-off Simon Cowell.
Well Bruce Dickinson, whoever he is, is wrong. It's quite evident that the vast majority of contestants love music with a passion and want to devote their lives to it.
As for whether winning means you've earned a number one single, of course it doesn't!
The thing that should earn you a number one single is if more people want to buy your single than any other single currently on the market. These campaigns subvert that fundamental criteria. They attempt to force the most popular single from winning on the basis of who they don't want to win instead of who they do want. It's not even about which song you prefer - many people in these campaigns haven't even heard either song and don't care which is better.
It's like somebody sabotaging Jessica Ellis in the Olympics because they don't like Britain or its policies :rolleyes:
IMO, anyone contributing to these things should be ashamed of themselves.
There is no coercion in these campaigns - just a lot of people who, quite rightly, hate Cowell and Sony and all they stand for. As for Jessica Ellis, whoever she is, the US government did just that in 1980 - pulling out of the Moscow games for political reasons.
Comments
Even though she comes from X Factor and the people behind these campaigns will probably hate her for that, I'd like Leona to get the number 1, she has a brilliant new Christmas tune and it would be nice to have a festive tune as the Christmas number 1 instead.
Leona Lewis - One More Sleep
Well then join this one.
https://www.facebook.com/leonalewischristmas
I don't think any of these campaigns will work, it worked the last time because it was new, plus it was the only one really. After the success of that, multiple groups are set up with all different campaigns, so the X Factor detractors are split.
I choose to be abrasive and argumentative - so yes
Actually, I gave up on FB a long while ago.
On topic - I like some AC/DC and I'd happily see them live.
did anyone see pete waterman talking about the last facebook campaign? he said the publicity helped cowell and xfactor
AC/DC have received plenty of criticism over the years, however it isn't the "hordes of rock music journos" who have put them where they are, it is their fans.
However fan loyalty to a band or artist is an alien concept to 99% of X-Factor fans.
Spot on. There is nothing subversive about these campaigns. Supporting them does not make you a 'real' music fan. If you want to buy this single because you like it, I suspect it's right there in iTunes for you to buy already - so why not just buy it now?
I'd personally love for Lily Allen to get the Christmas Number 1 this year. Absolutely gorgeous cover of a gorgeous song, and it makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
Actually, yes, they have to compete against tens of thousands of hopefuls, get shortlisted by leading lights in the music industry and then work their butts off for, however, many weeks, subjecting themselves to public judgement and censure with live performances that have to secure votes from millions of viewers in order to survive each week. Often having to find ways to shine even through themed weeks that don't suit them.
Anyone who can come out of that process as the winner has bloody well earned a number one single. Even then, they won't get one unless more people want to buy their single than anyone else currently available.
These campaigns are vindictive, spiteful and cruel and don't accomplish anything other than to foist a number one single on the public that the majority probably don't even like. You wouldn't catch me supporting a campaign like that in a million years :mad:
The original RATM campaign was, if not exactly subversive, at least cocking a snook at the unholy alliance between ITV and SyCo. The John Cage campaign was a witty extension of this - well "witty" if you're an over-educated fop like me. AC/DC is as commercial as 1Dimension and so this campaign is misguided.
What about Gary Glitter? He must have some Christmas songs in his back catalogue.
"foist" - they don't force you to listen to it. I haven't known what the No 1 single is for well over a decade, maybe two. Of course, I don't listen to Radio 1 or any commercial radio stations and keep missing Top of the Pops, as I'm busy on Thursday evenings.
I didn't disagree with the RATM as much as the subsequent ones simply because I feel they were within their rights to protest the dominance of an XF winner every year for the Christmas Number 1, and an organised campaign was probably the only way to do that. There was also a nice simplicity in them choosing RATM - for the band name alone, it worked on a base level which is why, IMO, it did so well.
Every campaign since then has smacked of bandwagon jumping and trading in on past glories. It is even more ridiculous as the XF single release hasn't been at the start of the Christmas number 1 new release week for a few years now. It reminds me of that exchange in Rebel Without A Cause ("But what are you rebelling against?" "What have you got?") Rebellion for the sake of rebellion really isn't rebellion at all, particularly not when it's been organised by a FB group! And as you said, AC/DC are hardly an obscure choice.
winning a talent show doesn't mean you've "earned a number one single" at all, although in general that is the peak of their "career".
As Bruce Dickinson said, people go on shows like X-Factor not to pursue a long singing career but simply to become famous.
Not that they would have anything to do with it in the first place, but you can hardly say AC/DC are "trading on past glories" considering their last album and tour are arguably one of the most successful they have ever had.
No I don't mean AC/DC, I mean the organisers of these campaigns trading in on the past glories of the RATM campaign.
This is what you pick up on? Seems a pretty irrelevant exercise in semantics to me
Anyone who doesn't listen to the Christmas number one has even less business trying to influence it, IMO.
Well Bruce Dickinson, whoever he is, is wrong. It's quite evident that the vast majority of contestants love music with a passion and want to devote their lives to it.
As for whether winning means you've earned a number one single, of course it doesn't!
The thing that should earn you a number one single is if more people want to buy your single than any other single currently on the market. These campaigns subvert that fundamental criteria. They attempt to force the most popular single from winning on the basis of who they don't want to win instead of who they do want. It's not even about which song you prefer - many people in these campaigns haven't even heard either song and don't care which is better.
It's like somebody sabotaging Jessica Ellis in the Olympics because they don't like Britain or its policies :rolleyes:
IMO, anyone contributing to these things should be ashamed of themselves.
feed the world to be Christmas No1 with the proceeds going
to the charity.
I would not support a group proposed by a fan of that group
or singer as the case may be with the profits going into the
group or singers pocket.
:rolleyes:
I am not a Geldof fan by the way.
If you believe all that...........would you like to buy some magic beans?
Will probably buy it.
Not just so I can mock X-Factor. as it's actually a pretty damn good song.
Then buy it now?
No, the word foist implies that this event is forced upon us and, as a result, adversely affects us. My point is - it's just the Crimbo number one; nobody over the age of 14 cares. Or should. Other than to pee-off Simon Cowell.
There is no coercion in these campaigns - just a lot of people who, quite rightly, hate Cowell and Sony and all they stand for. As for Jessica Ellis, whoever she is, the US government did just that in 1980 - pulling out of the Moscow games for political reasons.