john bodega
It's still a shit song.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
brENsKi
rhyeking wrote: .......By promoting their art in a "sleazy" tabloid, they are subverting the tabloid's standards.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
no they're not.
the "lack of standards" will always remain the same.....bottom line: newpapers make money thru circulation and advertising....queen had several products to sell.....so they compromised their principles for the bigger God....filthy lucre
it's ok for you to kid yourself...enjoy the fantasyland sterile vacuum...but please don't try and pass your beliefs off as facts...all you serve to do is confuse those who are easily impressioned
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
no they're not.
the "lack of standards" will always remain the same.....bottom line: newpapers make money thru circulation and advertising....queen had several products to sell.....so they compromised their principles for the bigger God....filthy lucre
it's ok for you to kid yourself...enjoy the fantasyland sterile vacuum...but please don't try and pass your beliefs off as facts...all you serve to do is confuse those who are easily impressioned
rhyeking
I'd rather pass on the possibility that the Roger and Queen are human, capable of compromise while still enlightening their audience, over passing on this bitter double-standard and misguided intolerance. A more positive perspective is far less poisonous to impressionable minds than the flawed totalitarian black and white view.
Distilling your opinion of Rupert's media outlets as: "Sleaze is what they do, that's the way it is, take it or leave" is not a defense for their irresponsible journalism. It absolves Murdoch's empire of any repercussions of their actions, by implying that they have no choice. By all accounts, they *choose* to take the low road.
However, if Queen/Roger/QPL choose to use what they see as a questionable source of information (say, The Sun) to promote what they feel is a little more high-brow, it most certainly subverts the standards of the paper. It attempts to transform the established social order. It undermines the base intentions of the medium be being of greater value to its audience. If the band uses the paper to draw new people to their art, allowing these newcomers to see that there is more to the world than the lowest common denominator, then it is a victory.
Oh, and when I qualify a thought as "possibility" or simply with "if," I'm not passing anything on as a fact. What I'm doing is far more insidious: offering up a idea.
Distilling your opinion of Rupert's media outlets as: "Sleaze is what they do, that's the way it is, take it or leave" is not a defense for their irresponsible journalism. It absolves Murdoch's empire of any repercussions of their actions, by implying that they have no choice. By all accounts, they *choose* to take the low road.
However, if Queen/Roger/QPL choose to use what they see as a questionable source of information (say, The Sun) to promote what they feel is a little more high-brow, it most certainly subverts the standards of the paper. It attempts to transform the established social order. It undermines the base intentions of the medium be being of greater value to its audience. If the band uses the paper to draw new people to their art, allowing these newcomers to see that there is more to the world than the lowest common denominator, then it is a victory.
Oh, and when I qualify a thought as "possibility" or simply with "if," I'm not passing anything on as a fact. What I'm doing is far more insidious: offering up a idea.
GratefulFan
The most generous spin I can put on it that perhaps the mistake was thinking of 'Dr. Mr. Murdoch' as a principled stance in the first place. Perhaps it was just a bunch of bitching set to music. One can certainly be part of a system and still find fault with it and make legitimate criticisms from within. Roger may have never anticipated or intended having the song juxtaposed with his business decisions years later, and he similarly could not have anticipated the scope of these current events that have made the song so immediately relevant when he gave that interview in February. Had he been able to see into the future he may have chosen to openly forgo the benefits of using The Sun for a chance to be a credible voice on it's negative effects on society.
That's the best I can do. But truthfully I don't know that reality supports that version all that well. The X-Factor and AI stuff so fast on the heels of C-lebrity was another pile of grist for the mill, both in it's actuality and in Roger's public comments. When he appeared on the Jools Holland show he appeared very much to want to have his cake and eat it too by not so subtly referencing shows "with real music" or something to that affect. One really shouldn't get down in the mud and then sit on a throne and bemoan the filth, not unless you're angling to breed cynicism and a degree of contempt. I think he's uncomfortable with some of his associations, but not uncomfortable enough to do anything meaningful about it. Which has kind of been Roger all along: he's well known for being motivated to social commentary through his music and he's well known for not really giving a crap about what the jabbering masses think. If the song catches on and makes him some money he'll have another chance to make it into something more meaningful than a slightly clumsy moan fest through relevant use of the profits or by allowing it to more closely guide his future decisions.
That's the best I can do. But truthfully I don't know that reality supports that version all that well. The X-Factor and AI stuff so fast on the heels of C-lebrity was another pile of grist for the mill, both in it's actuality and in Roger's public comments. When he appeared on the Jools Holland show he appeared very much to want to have his cake and eat it too by not so subtly referencing shows "with real music" or something to that affect. One really shouldn't get down in the mud and then sit on a throne and bemoan the filth, not unless you're angling to breed cynicism and a degree of contempt. I think he's uncomfortable with some of his associations, but not uncomfortable enough to do anything meaningful about it. Which has kind of been Roger all along: he's well known for being motivated to social commentary through his music and he's well known for not really giving a crap about what the jabbering masses think. If the song catches on and makes him some money he'll have another chance to make it into something more meaningful than a slightly clumsy moan fest through relevant use of the profits or by allowing it to more closely guide his future decisions.
Holly2003
Indeed. It's the same kind of logic that gives us songs like "everything is broken" by an artist who, I believe, left Britain to avoid paying income taxes. That's one of the reasons why everything is broken -- rich people avoiding taxes!
brENsKi
rhyeking wrote:
However, if Queen/Roger/QPL choose to use what they see as a questionable source of information (say, The Sun) to promote what they feel is a little more high-brow, it most certainly subverts the standards of the paper. It attempts to transform the established social order. It undermines the base intentions of the medium be being of greater value to its audience. If the band uses the paper to draw new people to their art, allowing these newcomers to see that there is more to the world than the lowest common denominator, then it is a victory.
Oh, and when I qualify a thought as "possibility" or simply with "if," I'm not passing anything on as a fact. What I'm doing is far more insidious: offering up a idea.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
i take your point about your "ifs" and "possibly".....but i think you should be a little more honest here.....
you and i BOTH know...(as does anyone but the most purile queen stepford) that what you state above is NOT and NEVER was Queen's intention. it's a businesscase nothing more, nothing less...there is NO moral crusade being performed by Rog and the Doctor.....they are not attempting to subvert any great evil......(it's not Luke and Hans vs Lord vader)
they are promoting their product whilst happily drowning in tits bums and jizz while they do it.....because every fool knows, that morals soon fly out the window when there is money to be grabbed....
it's a pity that the last few queen products have been of such a sub-standard, appalingly sh*t quality.......but then that makes queen (circa 2011) and the Sun perfect bedfellows
However, if Queen/Roger/QPL choose to use what they see as a questionable source of information (say, The Sun) to promote what they feel is a little more high-brow, it most certainly subverts the standards of the paper. It attempts to transform the established social order. It undermines the base intentions of the medium be being of greater value to its audience. If the band uses the paper to draw new people to their art, allowing these newcomers to see that there is more to the world than the lowest common denominator, then it is a victory.
Oh, and when I qualify a thought as "possibility" or simply with "if," I'm not passing anything on as a fact. What I'm doing is far more insidious: offering up a idea.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
i take your point about your "ifs" and "possibly".....but i think you should be a little more honest here.....
you and i BOTH know...(as does anyone but the most purile queen stepford) that what you state above is NOT and NEVER was Queen's intention. it's a businesscase nothing more, nothing less...there is NO moral crusade being performed by Rog and the Doctor.....they are not attempting to subvert any great evil......(it's not Luke and Hans vs Lord vader)
they are promoting their product whilst happily drowning in tits bums and jizz while they do it.....because every fool knows, that morals soon fly out the window when there is money to be grabbed....
it's a pity that the last few queen products have been of such a sub-standard, appalingly sh*t quality.......but then that makes queen (circa 2011) and the Sun perfect bedfellows
AlbaNo1
I have to say its totally unrealistic to expect Queen as a mainstream, commercial band to bypass the mass media, much of which appears to be under the ownership or influence of Murdoch. Morally its on a similar level to voting in a general election when you dont totally approve of the parties or political system . Pragmatically you have to work with it.
I dont for a second think that Roger is not fully sincere in expressing disdain for the tabloid press in the song and he has been consistent in his attitude. As for the song, I have always liked it and find it pretty amusing lyrically.
I dont for a second think that Roger is not fully sincere in expressing disdain for the tabloid press in the song and he has been consistent in his attitude. As for the song, I have always liked it and find it pretty amusing lyrically.
Major Tom
Ok song, great voice!
brENsKi
AlbaNo1 wrote: I have to say its totally unrealistic to expect Queen as a mainstream, commercial band to bypass the mass media, much of which appears to be under the ownership or influence of Murdoch. Morally its on a similar level to voting in a general election when you dont totally approve of the parties or political system . Pragmatically you have to work with it.
I dont for a second think that Roger is not fully sincere in expressing disdain for the tabloid press in the song and he has been consistent in his attitude. As for the song, I have always liked it and find it pretty amusing lyrically.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
your argument doesn't work. Roger had a pop at Murdoch because he disapproved of Murdoch's press juggernaut and the way it undertook its business. so he either disapproves or he doesn't. and if he does then he boycotts Murdoch's 37% share of UK press and uses the other 63% (mirror, mail, express, guardian, independent, telegraph etc)...there's plenty of other advertising outlets to explore than just NewsGroup Corp.
And as for TV...ITV channel 4 and Channel 5 all get higher viewing figures than sky, so there's bigger potential customers there if he wants to advertise on TV.
fact is simple, Roger ignored his "hatred" of murdoch the minute he decided he wanted to use the sun/notw for advertising/promotion purposes...someone needs to explain how that doesn't equal double-standards and hypocrisy
I dont for a second think that Roger is not fully sincere in expressing disdain for the tabloid press in the song and he has been consistent in his attitude. As for the song, I have always liked it and find it pretty amusing lyrically.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
your argument doesn't work. Roger had a pop at Murdoch because he disapproved of Murdoch's press juggernaut and the way it undertook its business. so he either disapproves or he doesn't. and if he does then he boycotts Murdoch's 37% share of UK press and uses the other 63% (mirror, mail, express, guardian, independent, telegraph etc)...there's plenty of other advertising outlets to explore than just NewsGroup Corp.
And as for TV...ITV channel 4 and Channel 5 all get higher viewing figures than sky, so there's bigger potential customers there if he wants to advertise on TV.
fact is simple, Roger ignored his "hatred" of murdoch the minute he decided he wanted to use the sun/notw for advertising/promotion purposes...someone needs to explain how that doesn't equal double-standards and hypocrisy
AlbaNo1
I think self-contradictory, or lacking in sufficient conviction might be fairer descriptions. You seem to be expecting Roger to behave with a pure morality . His solo songs are obviously more personal , but he clearly feels a duty to support whatever enterprise Queen are involved in. The fact is Queen are not going to cut off almost half their potential audience in their promotions - or even risk incurring a backlash from the tabloid media.