So,
Rage Against The Machine did make it to the Christmas No. 1 slot after all. I'm pleasantly surprised. Although I would argue that perhaps this isn't the great musical revolution that some are trying to make it into.
Sure, the news will have pissed off Simon Cowell. Even if, as a Sony shareholder, he does make money from RATM unexpected elevation to festive No. 1, I still think he'd rather have his protege as the festive chart-topper. Last night's results shows that the self-styled pop mogul can be over-turned by an amateur internet campaign promoting an old agit-rock anthem from the 1990's. It is hardly a ringing endorsement for him or his craptacular TV show.
Furthermore, this should create an interesting conundrum for the compilers of Christmas No. 1 albums. I'd imagine they'd struggle with making "
Mad World" part of their festive collections, what with its lyrical depiction of a deep depression. Quite what they are going to make of a song with
that refrain is beyond me; but I suspect that there aren't going to be very many complete collections of Christmas No. 1's moving forward because of RATM's success.
Yet,
as others have pointed out, this does make money for Cowell and his record company. Even if it was an actually a genuine grassroots campaign, it has that unpleasant whiff of
astroturfing to it. It seems ironic that a campaign that was in part a protest about cynical consumerism at Christmas is so easily made to appear cynical itself.
And the notion that this is in some way a groundbreaking thing is just plain nonsense. The charts are, to a large extent, a democracy. You can get the music you want to the top of the charts by buying it and getting your friends to buy it. You only have to look back across the history of popular music to see some great bands and artists hitting the No. 1 spot. David Bowie, The Jam, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, The Stones, Manic Street Preachers - all great groups, and all groups that have hit that coveted No. 1 spot. For the very simple reason that their fans went out and bought their records. Sure, you've always had shit hitting No. 1 in the charts - yes, Sir Cliff of Richard, I am directly talking about you - but it has been interspersed with worthwhile acts also sitting at the top of the charts. The difference these days is that a decent band hitting the top of the charts is the exception, rather than the rule. Because decent artists don't sell as many records as the pop pap relentlessly and ruthlessly promoted by the likes of the odious Simon Cowell.
Also, don't go thinking that the internet is the great salvation for the pop charts. It isn't. Firstly, bands have been using the internet for a while to get attention and to win success. If memory serves, both the Arctic Monkeys and the Editors were initially internet phenomena before having mainstream chart success. And you can bet your bottom dollar that Cowell and his terrible ilk will have noted the success of the RATM Facebook campaign, and will be factoring that into their next bid to be Christmas No. 1.
In short, there is nothing new in a good band using t'interweb to get to No 1. And if RATM's success shows anything, it is that the supposed monopoly of manufactured music on the charts is actually an ersatz domination. It just relies on the apathy and indolence of "real" music fans, endlessly intoning the facile and false idea that their sort of music just can't get to N0. 1 anymore. This campaign and RATM have shown that it can - as long as people are actually willing to buy, promote, and just plain enthuse about the music they like.
Labels: David Bowie, Manic Street Preachers, Music, Pink Floyd, Rage Against The Machine, Simon Bastard Cowell, The Editors, The Jam, TV
