From eric hill Sent Sun, Jun 6th 1999, 17:49
From eric hill Sent Sun, Jun 6th 1999, 17:49
the interesting thing about the article that rodney posted was that it describes the process from the advertiser's decision to use a form of music, not from the musician-being-used can o' worms. eric, who doesn't bring anything up that he wouldn't debate onnow: gerhard potuznik : concorde (cheap) On Sun, 6 Jun 1999 xxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx wrote: >Thanks Robert for pointing that piece out... > >Not to get into the whole debate about artists 'selling out' by having their >music used as beds for commercials. If the artist is okay about the usage >and who is requesting use of their music (artists have to approve the usage), >commercials are a way that an artist who may not sell loads of records can >make money or recoup their account, which can kickstart or rejuvenate their >careers. > >PW > > >In a message dated 6/6/99 10:46:08 AM, xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx writes: > ><<Today's New York Times has a Simon Reynolds penned article entitled >"Electronica Goes Straight to Ubiquity." It discusses the advertiser's trend >of using electronic music. > >http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/artleisure/electronica-ads.html > >username: cypherpunks >password: cypherpunks