Options
The Dominance Of The X Factor...Good? Bad?
miles19740
Posts: 14,205 Forum Member
✭✭
The general direction of travel is that it is bad. Here is what established musicians say...
Damon Albarn..."The X Factor is a "karaoke colosseum" which is actually an advert "for one record label."
Mat Osman of Britpop band Suede..."The thing I find incredible is that Simon Cowell gets paid an enormous amount of money to promote his own acts. It just seems to be the greatest con of all time. He should surely be paying a fortune to put these crappy acts on primetime TV. But well done to him...It's a genius scam."
Seal..."it can homogenise the industry. I don't think you can have a superstar by committee. There has to be a healthy amount of mystique, if you like, or distance. Superstars represent dreams and aspirations for young people. I think, in order to maintain that, there has to be this feeling of reaching."
Madness frontman Suggs..."The charts are being filled up with people who haven't really understood what it is to be an artist. It leaves less room for people who are trying to struggle their way around pubs and clubs and make it to the top in a more organic fashion."
Alice Cooper..."The X Factor's apparent disinclination to nurture creative talent seems to be many people's chief concern."
Bernard Sumner of New Order..."I'm not interested in how well someone can sing, it's what you're singing that interests me...and what they're singing on X Factor is just other people's music. It's not creative."
Paul Weller..."musicians...primed by The X Factor, aren't prepared for the long, arduous slog of a career in music."
Albarn continues..."Anything could appear on Top of the Pops and it wasn't controlled by one group of people. It's become boring... brain-crippling”
Sir Elton John..."The eclecticism Top Of The Pops offered our culture was far more exciting and far more positive."
Suede lead singer Brett Anderson sees one positive in Cowell's dominance. "When you have a real, awful, stifling mainstream thing like The X Factor, there's always a really strong underground reaction. Lots of bands will grow up and make music almost as a reaction against that, and that's a really healthy thing."
Perhaps the most insightful - and damning - assessment of The X Factor comes from underground rap artist Dan Le Sac. "It simply doesn't matter...it's fun, it's entertainment. I know Joe McElderry won last year, but I couldn't tell you who won the year before. We get rid of it. It recycles itself within a year. It may be a horrific thing but if people enjoy it, they should be allowed to. You should be allowed to love the trash as well as the meaningful stuff."
Source: BBC News
I absolutely agree with the reference made to the lack of creativity and the fact that The X Factor is controlled by one group of people...which is more serious as there isn't an alternative mainstream pop show like Top Of The Pops. The X Factor and shows like it are doing more harm than good.
Damon Albarn..."The X Factor is a "karaoke colosseum" which is actually an advert "for one record label."
Mat Osman of Britpop band Suede..."The thing I find incredible is that Simon Cowell gets paid an enormous amount of money to promote his own acts. It just seems to be the greatest con of all time. He should surely be paying a fortune to put these crappy acts on primetime TV. But well done to him...It's a genius scam."
Seal..."it can homogenise the industry. I don't think you can have a superstar by committee. There has to be a healthy amount of mystique, if you like, or distance. Superstars represent dreams and aspirations for young people. I think, in order to maintain that, there has to be this feeling of reaching."
Madness frontman Suggs..."The charts are being filled up with people who haven't really understood what it is to be an artist. It leaves less room for people who are trying to struggle their way around pubs and clubs and make it to the top in a more organic fashion."
Alice Cooper..."The X Factor's apparent disinclination to nurture creative talent seems to be many people's chief concern."
Bernard Sumner of New Order..."I'm not interested in how well someone can sing, it's what you're singing that interests me...and what they're singing on X Factor is just other people's music. It's not creative."
Paul Weller..."musicians...primed by The X Factor, aren't prepared for the long, arduous slog of a career in music."
Albarn continues..."Anything could appear on Top of the Pops and it wasn't controlled by one group of people. It's become boring... brain-crippling”
Sir Elton John..."The eclecticism Top Of The Pops offered our culture was far more exciting and far more positive."
Suede lead singer Brett Anderson sees one positive in Cowell's dominance. "When you have a real, awful, stifling mainstream thing like The X Factor, there's always a really strong underground reaction. Lots of bands will grow up and make music almost as a reaction against that, and that's a really healthy thing."
Perhaps the most insightful - and damning - assessment of The X Factor comes from underground rap artist Dan Le Sac. "It simply doesn't matter...it's fun, it's entertainment. I know Joe McElderry won last year, but I couldn't tell you who won the year before. We get rid of it. It recycles itself within a year. It may be a horrific thing but if people enjoy it, they should be allowed to. You should be allowed to love the trash as well as the meaningful stuff."
Source: BBC News
I absolutely agree with the reference made to the lack of creativity and the fact that The X Factor is controlled by one group of people...which is more serious as there isn't an alternative mainstream pop show like Top Of The Pops. The X Factor and shows like it are doing more harm than good.
The Dominance Of The X Factor...Good or Bad? 106 votes
Good
17%
![[Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/54d4e98e6e4e5f1133c3fd8482625136.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/fd5de803a84b68eceaf6ea4bbb4f617e.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w2.vanillicon.com/v2/276f6d90e1489f0eb2bfbf58d0d7d5f1.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/05cb737ca0de928a0d850d7a9be211a4.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/175c517e3e3fa5edfd9f7be34aa37343.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w3.vanillicon.com/v2/37c6fba093073e387ba097cd723d3d93.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/cf9f8ad5a94edd677ed885455c488dd9.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/aab6b0160a41ff12055accfaab0dee51.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w3.vanillicon.com/v2/3090fabcaee972e2b3728c409e771fc4.svg)
19 votes
Bad
82%
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/197ce259a44be5380521a72c2c6dbac8.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/1420e014b4e9a0af876e384aa314e18e.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/fa1cd1cb5b160e3161b88cca41c08acf.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5c2adf7ebc7dfff526d4c42e668fd8bf.svg)
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b9224fc6156a2dea21b168c8a3097026.svg)
87 votes
0
Comments
However this happens very rarely and contestants just become Simons puppet if they win. Which really annoys me.
Diana Vickers to me iss the ONLY artist from X Factor that is worth anything,
So can you change the poll, so hteres an in between section. ecause i'm on the fence i think .
People don't HAVE to watch X Factor, people don't HAVE to download the contestants music once a series is finished. Their music does not affect the sales of other artists music, so I fail to understand the whole 'unfair' theme that seems to go on.
I do not think the X-Factor is either good or bad for the music industry, it's just another form, or access to music, in terms of watching, listening and purchasing.
Well as they are normally covers, the songwriter will do VERY well I'd imagine
Totally agree with you. I have always loved music...and that has nothing to do with Mr Cowell. I would actually say that the X Factor and the spin off acts have put me off the pop charts...because they are everywhere.
Mr Cowell's claims about his impact on music are wildly overplayed. As you imply, music on his show is just a by-product of a tacky, Saturday night, entertainment reality tv show. Music, is sadly not the star of the show.
However I do agree with the musicians view about it's impact.
Those who are successful on X-Factor aren't prepared for the realities of the music industry and, as they sing cover versions, I struggle to see where they can be viewed in any way but glorified Karaoke.
As for Cowell saying the show stimulates people's interest in music, then again I fail to see how that can be the case.
After all, Mr average X-Factor viewer is hardly likely to say to Mrs Average X-Factor viewer... " I see there are a couple of Thrash Metal bands playing in town tonight, fancy popping along to have a look?"!
What X-Factor does is push the bland to an audience who don't really like music, but who enjoy a talent show with an eventual winner with some "nice" songs thrown in.
Of course there is a market for it, there always will be - Cowell's bank balance is evidence of that. But to suggest it is a serious means of expanding music to a wider audience..... Well to me that simply isn't the case.
That's not necessarily true.
Firstly, the fact the winners single EP reached No. 5 on iTunes BEFORE EITHER THE WINNER OR SONG WAS ANNOUNCED seems to suggest that a large number of people will download whatever the hell the X-Factor throws out without a second thought.
Secondly, it's unfair because it discourages record companies from taking risks. Richard Branson made his fortune with Virgin Records by signing bands nobody else would touch, like The Sex Pistols. Could you imagine SyCo signing an edgy, alternative act?
People will say the music industry would be heading in this direction even without the X-Factor, and maybe there is a certain amount of truth in that, but even looking at the charts 7-10 years ago there is more variety than there is today. Bands like Linkin Park and Slipknot did something different and got huge record deals for it, as did Eminem, as did Blink-182.
Acts like that simply don't break through in the charts anymore, because they're a risk - and THAT is the problem with the X-Factor, because despite the name, it is producing absolutely an anti-risk product.
However, it's an entertainment show, and I have no problem with it in that context. If anything, I'm kind of glad that such a performance-based show is given so much attention.
In particular I think we all appreciate having big pop acts coming over to perform. It's something we severely lacked since Top of the Pops faded.
Of course there are the issues that their performances almost unanimously translate into dominating the chart, but their songs would be released and probably become successful irregardless of the X Factor. It merely acts as a promotional platform. If there was another large scale tv show option, it wouldn't appear so one-sided. But we don't.
I think there's a lot of truth in what was said about the show recycling itself. The vast majority of contestants do not achieve any success, those who do are more often than not - fleeting. The rare few who stick around will probably not survive as soon as the show ends. In the grand scheme of things, it's not much of a threat.
The biggest issue I have with it is that it really does cock-block struggling British acts trying to break through. When you are starting out, you really do need chart success to keep the label interested, and there is no space for them it seems.
I do agree though that it has created an almost sub-chart culture. Ellie Goulding, Florence, Biffy etc. are kind of like the leaders of what is becoming alternative pop in Britain. They may not chart well, but they're given a lot of exposure and live through festivals.
The music charts and the Christmas No 1 maybe??
The show makes millions for being a TV show, but then it has to invest some of that into the act who wins. Simon was distraught when Matt won it seems; probably because he knows he won't make a big enough return from him.
If you look in the top 20, then over half of the songs in there are directly related to the X-Factor or have been performed by the specific act appearing on the X-Factor.
The X-Factor lot are not taking over the chart, but the show has far too much influence. What's dull is that the same acts appear on the show time and time again :yawn:
I absolutely agree. Cowell has far, far too much control and influence on the charts and the pop music scene...and I don't care what anyone says...but the show does squeeze out those who rightly, in my opinion, want to follow the organic route.
Anyone who is anyone would not enter the X Factor process which, let's be honest, is the same show year after year. What frustrates me is the fact that the followers of the show cannot see/won't see that it is just a commercial conveyor belt for Cowell and ITV...and if the viewers did but know it...Cowell and ITV couldn't careless who wins so long as there is plenty of the ker-ching factor.
We are crying out for a new mainstream music show, produced independently, but without a hidden agenda by anyone involved. It is high time that the X Factor had some serious competition. Bring back Top of the Pops BBC. It is needed now more than ever before.
What is definitely more popular is the number of people who believe they can become pop stars :yawn:
It's not the chance to have a career in music, it's the chance to give up your soul to Simon Cowell; to be forced to not be creative; to essentially be just a "cash cow".
Well the Christmas number 1 is one chart week of 52, so hardly dominance.
Really the show has little dominance on the chart bar that one week. Yes, performers who go on it do chart high - but the key is they only let performers on who were going to chart high anyway!
Take that, Rihanna, etc. wouldn't have flopped without the show.
And songs performed by the contestants rarely go any higher than the top 20 and fall very fast
sorry but im not letting you get away with that, because thats the very argument 'we' (adults) levied against your beloved s/a/w crew back in the late 80's... again your being totally hypocritical by slagging off one karaoke manufacturing act whilst supporting another...
exactly.... miles is far too hung up on the commercial singles chart, in reality there plenty of 'real' music being created far from the charts... historically the singles chart has always been the 'kiddy' end of the musical spectrum with very little reprisentation by real musicians.
fully agree....
it is, as has been pointed out, a saturday night entertainment programme, which has pulled 20 million viewers! the people want to watch txf, but ultimately if they dont like the acts afterwards...theyll be dropped.
is txf any different to traditional saturday night entertainment programmes? there was cilla, lulu, tom jones, val doonican, engelbert humperdink...etc etc etc, they had songs written for them, they used tv to promote their music, 40 odd year on isnt txf just another tv show doing the same thing? ok its evolved, but so has everything to be more intense.
txf is NOT runing music, its feeding a need, there are people that like the music txf produces. would they turn to deeper 'proper' music if txf didnt exist?... hell NO! i dont like txf artists (except for matt) , im not keen on ANY manufactured act, its the cynically manufactured money making artists that have ruined creativity in the pop charts. unfortunately there is a market for that type of act popularised by waterman et al ....
Is the Christmas number 1 part of the prize?
I'll admit I've never actually watched the programme but from what I understand the prize is a £1million recording contract, but if they don't make the Christmas number 1 then they are judged to have failed.
Is the guaranteed Christmas number 1 position actually part of the prize or just seen as so as the winners single is rushed out to hit this peak shopping period?
Mind you, acts from XF were created with ZERO creativity in mind. As for Waterman, he made the songs, he needed people to sing them. (while XF recycles the old formula)
id argue that theres no difference between txf lot and similar acts from the past.... tom jones, elvis, frank sinatra, dusty springfeild, egs of great singers whos input into their songs were next to nothing/nothing. id suggest that txf lot are better then watermans pupets, look at the process, rounds of auditions, the public selecting their fav act... no one asked for sonia, lonnie gordon, jason donovan, reynolds girls...
and the only reason kylie became big was because she left pwl.
txf might recycle the same old formulae... (and i dont like it) but i dont think txf is any more culpable then the vast majority of pop acts nowdays.
oh look who founded this article, the BBC! not miffed that itv got 20 million viewers at all are they?
all of the above quotes could be equally attributed to ANY manufactured act, it would be very interesting to see what they all think of watermans output...
as for this rose tinted spectacles iew of totp... it died for a reason... it became outdated. just about everyone these days have more channels on their tv then terrestrial ones... theres loads more music on tv these days then ever before, plus in the past totp was one tv show...we got our music off the radio! not off tv... all totp did was show acts miming badly so we could see what they looked like. so the suggestion that totp alone was the scource for our music is absolutely incorrect. we got it from the radio.
The peak shopping period is the actual Christmas week, not the week before. But sales here wouldn't obtain an Xmas no.1.
Months and months of TV/media coverage on top of loads of pre-ordered sales should guarantee anyone a number 1.
So much for a recording contract and a tour with the X-factor, next year is a new show and a new star.