Well I will buy a song that I want because I like it and not what some daft Facebook campaign tells me to.
Besides, I already have the RATM song so why the hell would I want to buy it again?

I have just heard this RATM song (if you can call it a song) for the first time. What a load of c*ap. I really hope this does not get the Xmas number one or it will go down in history as the worst Xmas number one of all time.

having seen Joe's single available to buy in records shops this morning, you might want to take that back....

Iain

There's quite an interesting debate on this on BBC 5 Live.

Each to their own, i guess.

A quality tune, by a quality band. But not worth buying again if you already own it. Unless, of course, you want to stick 2 fingers up to Simon Cowell and his rubbish song machine.

On the flip side, 'Killing in the name of' would go down as the best xmas number one.

i don't think anyone is questioning RATM's pedigree - but it does seem a random choice for a christmas number 1.

many have talked about Christmases of old, when the number ones were more special - was this really the sort of thing they have in mind?

Iain

Come down of your high horse for a minute eh?
Why would it matter what Jeff Buckley said the song was about considering it was written 'about an orgasm' by Leonard Cohen?

What alot of rubbish you have just posted.
If what you are saying is true then obviously the same should apply to every other song.

How do you know how everyone else interprets the lyrics to Killing in the name?

Simple answer is you don't.

I'm sorry but again.... Christmases of old?? Special number ones?
Mr Blobby, Bob the Builder, Zig and Zag(courtesy of Mr Cowell)

Or we have East 17, The Spice Girls, The millenium Prayer!?!?!

Christmas number ones have always ridiculous.

me? i'm not the one calling people morons.


OK - you've got me - i had a look on wiki, and it mentioned that thing about Buckley.

it didn't seem unreasonable to assume that that was Buckley's interpretation, otherwise why attribute it to him, rather than Cohen?

so if Cohen also described it as such, then i'll put my hand up and concede the point - but i'd be surprised if he didn't also say it was about more than just that.

either way, i don't think anyone not realising the song was only about an orgasm is actually a moron.


you might not agree with it, but nonetheless the song has been interpreted that way by many.


i'm not sure what you think it is that i'm saying?

all i am saying is that the song hallelujah can have different interpretations. that's the beauty of great poetry.


fortunately i never said they did.

Iain

so is that what people miss - stuff like mr blobby, bob the builder and zig and zag?

either way, RATM, however good they are, don't really sit well in that company i don't think.

Iain

And here lies the problem with alot of people posting on these threads.
So many people get involved in discussions when they have no idea what they are talking about.

You argued a point with someone over Hallelujah and then done a quick google search because you didn't really understand what it was you were saying.

I think my post has, to put it gently, 'went right over your head'

I'm simply saying, that you arguing a point that the song 'hallelujah' can be interpreted in different ways by different people. This means that the same must be so for every other song, including Killing in the name.

Just because you may hear one thing it doesn't mean myself or anyone else hears the same.

I never said people missed Mr Blobby et al. I was simply picking up on your ridiculous post about people missing ' christmases of old when number 1's were special.'

I was simply highlighting that Christmas number 1's have rarely been special and i don't see the problem with a band who have gained success through their own merit getting to number 1 this year.

Anyone saying that Christmas number 1 singles have always been crap is missing the point.

The real problem with the X Factor is that is has remove the race for the Xmas #1 spot, and that was always part of the fun.

Cowell has become accustomed to his show's winner being guaranteed top spot and it has pretty much stopped any serious competition.

He has released a very lazy song this year and a campaign is trying to stop his monotony over the #1 position.

OK, the RATM campaign may fail, and Cowell may get his 5th consecutive festive chart-topper, but hopefully this will be a big reminder to him not to take the British public for granted and could lead to him trying to come up with a better (and hopefully original) song for his winner next year.

Personally, I'm still pissed off about The Pogues& Kirsty falling short in 1987!

I think you may have misunderstood my point.
I am all for RATM being number 1.

I'm merely pointing out the the people that claim that it isn't a Christmas song, that Xmas number 1's have never been that.

nope - i think you've missed my point....


exactly - that was my whole point.

someone posted something about hallelujah, and someone else called them a moron for not realising the whole orgasm interpretation.

so my post wasn't meant to read as some fixed, definitive interpretation, but was to highlight that, as you say, songs can be interpreted differently by different people.

so it was a bit harsh to call someone a moron for interpreting the song differently, when it has commonly been interpreted differently.


well don't blame me - blame the people who have said as much in this and other threads.


again, i must have missed the whole point of all of this.

Iain

Iain, Iain, Iain.

I am slowly losing the will to live.

I actually quoted something you had said and you said don't blame me. Dear Lord.

I think you're right. You have missed the point of all this.
I am glad i wasn't around to witness the other 50 odd thousand of your other posts.

I never called you a moron. There is no need for me to do that.

There's nothing random about it at all. The song was chosen specifically because of the message in the lyrics about how people are being manipulated.

Exactly, how can people not understand that?!

It always disappoints and surprises me how mainstream and dull Digital Spy's user base is. This RATM campaign is exactly what the internet should be about!

Here here!

Isn't this facebook campaign doing exactly the same manipulation; most people buying the song aren't buying it for the song - but for the message.

I could understand if the song had a Music Video and the band did gigs/interviews/promos all around and then got no.1.

It's also a bad choice of song for X-Mas - X-Mas songs should be happier than this.

I agree with the comment earlier about buying songs on the merit you like them. I don't understand people who like RATM but look at the charts for what to buy; surely both can't be happening.

Who cares if RATM isn't a 'proper Christmas song'. Bob the Builder was hardly festive, and neither were any of the X Factor songs. You people are starting to sound like Louis Walsh and his rulebook. As far as I'm aware there are no rules as to what songs are allowed or forbidden to be in this No.1 race.

Last year X Factor sold 105k in 1st day. This year they've sold 110k in first 3 days. Not looking good for Cowell #ratm4xmas

rage now extend their lead to 60%

you're not the only one.


assuming this is the thing about Christmases of old - yes, i said that, but was repeating what others had already said.


no - you seem to have missed the point.


i know you didn't call me a moron, but you only think that because you missed my point.

it went like this :

1. another poster made a comment about hallelujah.

2. someone called them a moron for not realising the song was about having an orgasm.

3. i pointed out that the song could have, and commonly does have, different interpretations, so it was a bit harsh to call someone a moron for having interpreted the song differently.

follow?

Iain

Rage Against the Machine's Tom Morello is not taking a single penny in royalties from Killing In The Name Of:

http://www.nme.com/news/rage-against-the-machine/48901

ah, OK. fair enough.

you mean how people are being manipulated into buying a song they might not otherwise buy, just as a protest to stop another song getting to number one?

or are you saying that people who buy TXF single are buying it, not because they might actually like it, but have somehow been manipulated into buying it, even though they don't like it?

a little patronising, surely?

Iain