Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

"Don't post anything racist/misogynistic/pornographic, loli images, or any animated GIFs and you should be fine, haha!" The Raytownian

Moderator: xome

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:37 pm

melkobukva wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:24 am
jliat wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 9:14 am
Your point was "What is really being publicized is the musical brand, not the person behind it. "

So you have not made it.
I'm pretty sure I have. "In reality its often the case of band members being and names being dynamic", i.e. people still listen to Black Sabbath regardless of whether it's fronted by Ozzy or by Ronnie - it's still the Sabbath brand.
If you want to claim some victory - as others do here fine. I think you raised a point about a brand, and certainly in music you get orchestras which are effectively a brand. And they tried to resurrect Queen sans Freddie - but i dont think that worked.

I think its more a mix of personalities and brands. But you need a personality first - oh no - i remember The Monkeys. But they got some good song writers.

Ship of Theseus?

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by melkobukva » Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:44 am

jliat wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:37 pm
I think its more a mix of personalities and brands.
Yes, this is what I was saying. A mix, but relationships between brands and peronalities can vary. You can not take Taylor Swift out of 'Taylor Swift' and replace her with, say, Miley Cyrus, but you can take Mr. Red Eye out of 'The Residents' and replace him with Mr Skull without harming the brand.

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:04 am

melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 3:44 am
jliat wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:37 pm
I think its more a mix of personalities and brands.
Yes, this is what I was saying. A mix, but relationships between brands and peronalities can vary. You can not take Taylor Swift out of 'Taylor Swift' and replace her with, say, Miley Cyrus, but you can take Mr. Red Eye out of 'The Residents' and replace him with Mr Skull without harming the brand.
Well you were saying a little more than that, I'd say you cant take John, Paul, George and Ringo out of the Beatles and still have the Beatles.

Much to the sadness of the record companies...

"What is really being publicized is the musical brand, not the person behind it. " But the brand is the persons.

You can change ALL the players in Man City FC and still have Man City FC, you cant change all the various people who have played for the stones - including Mick and still have The Rolling Stones.

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by melkobukva » Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:17 am

jliat wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:04 am
you cant take John, Paul, George and Ringo out of the Beatles and still have the Beatles.
<...>
you cant change all the various people who have played for the stones - including Mick and still have The Rolling Stones.
But I never agrued otherwise! On the contrary, I started out with pointing out that some musical brands are inherently tied to particular personalities. However, this 'cult of personality' is just one particular marketing strategy. You can also publicize your music project doing the exact opposite - by presenting band members as anonymous ghouls, robots, cartoon characters, giant eyes, dead mice, balaclava-wearing thugs, etc, etc.

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:01 am

melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:17 am
jliat wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:04 am
you cant take John, Paul, George and Ringo out of the Beatles and still have the Beatles.
<...>
you cant change all the various people who have played for the stones - including Mick and still have The Rolling Stones.
But I never agrued otherwise! On the contrary, I started out with pointing out that some musical brands are inherently tied to particular personalities.
Taylor Swift. Other wise that "What is really being publicized is the musical brand, not the person behind it."
So unless the brand is a named artist - the brand is - you seem to say quite clearly above - NOT THE PERSONS IN REALITY.

So you DID argue otherwise, other than specific named artists (Taylor Swift) not the person behind it.

Your point. So my argument remains "you cant take John, Paul, George and Ringo out of the Beatles and still have the Beatles."

"What is really being publicized is the musical brand, not the person behind it." - would mean the "Beatles" brand is not " John, Paul, George and Ringo". From that one can argue that the brand "Beatles" has its followers - of the brand and not of "John, Paul, George and Ringo". Which is the case for football teams - not pop / rock bands.
melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:17 am
However, this 'cult of personality' is just one particular marketing strategy. You can also publicize your music project doing the exact opposite - by presenting band members as anonymous ghouls, robots, cartoon characters, giant eyes, dead mice, balaclava-wearing thugs, etc, etc.
No argument with that. But in the case of many pop/rock bands of the 60s and 70s at least, it was the abilities musically of the band members which created a following, such that players like Clapton in a band or not made little or no difference to those who followed the bands members. And so the relative short lived 'failure' of Blind Faith didn't end the Clapton 'brand', or his personae. So personalities make brands - Clapton, Baker, Bruce = Cream (with the exceptions of 'created' bands - which have 'created' personae - e,g. spice girls) - No Beatles without JPGR... You might lose Ringo, or Harrison or one of the two remaining.. I doubt - so how is it that bands contine - by virtue of some significant band member(s) - i.e. persons... no mothers of invention without Zappa... could you have a Rolling Stones without Mick. Despite the legal reality and validity? the Fleetwood Mac without Mick Fleetwood failed.

killing raven sun
Posts: 844
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by killing raven sun » Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:24 am

jliat wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:37 pm
melkobukva wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:24 am
jliat wrote:
Sun Oct 14, 2018 9:14 am
Your point was...

So you have not made it.
I'm pretty sure I have.
If you want to claim some victory - as others do here fine.
james, why do you need to deny your game playing? of course you come here to fight, your ego likes the attention, you dont post threads of your own, you are only here to argue with others regardless of the subject, you think you are clever and can point out where others have gone wrong, this is why i say you are full of yourself, get a life and start your own threads, and no i dont mean ones attacking other threads :roll:

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by melkobukva » Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:38 am

jliat wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:01 am
Taylor Swift. Other wise that "What is really being publicized is the musical brand, not the person behind it."
Yes, but there is no contradiction with what you say. The 'cult of personality' is a way to publicize the brand (probably invented by music publishers).

”From the very beginning, we said I’m the front man… and you’re the guitarist with mystique. That’s the dynamic we agreed on. Page, Plant, Mick, Keith–”
-Jeff Bebe, Almost Famous

The reason why there is no contradiction is that the 'cult of personality' is a sufficient, but not necessary way to publicize what is really being publicized, the brand.

Moby, Fatboy Slim, Skrillex, Deadmau5 - all very famous one man projects, you most likely heard about at least some of them. But what are the real names of people behind them? Does anybody even care? I think nobody does. When people go to see Deadmau5, they want 'Deadmau5', not 'Joel Zimmerman wearing an oversized mouse mask'.

In a more related field, not many people care about Brian Williams, but quite a lot of people dig Brian Lustmord. Despite the fact that both names refer to the same person.

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:23 am

melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:38 am
jliat wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:01 am
Taylor Swift. Other wise that "What is really being publicized is the musical brand, not the person behind it."
Yes, but there is no contradiction with what you say. The 'cult of personality' is a way to publicize the brand (probably invented by music publishers).

”From the very beginning, we said I’m the front man… and you’re the guitarist with mystique. That’s the dynamic we agreed on. Page, Plant, Mick, Keith–”
-Jeff Bebe, Almost Famous

The reason why there is no contradiction is that the 'cult of personality' is a sufficient, but not necessary way to publicize what is really being publicized, the brand.

Moby, Fatboy Slim, Skrillex, Deadmau5 - all very famous one man projects, you most likely heard about at least some of them. But what are the real names of people behind them? Does anybody even care? I think nobody does. When people go to see Deadmau5, they want 'Deadmau5', not 'Joel Zimmerman wearing an oversized mouse mask'.

In a more related field, not many people care about Brian Williams, but quite a lot of people dig Brian Lustmord. Despite the fact that both names refer to the same person.
But these are persons - not brands. And it was brands you argued that were publicized . As such the Rolling Stones brand could be purchased by a Chinese company, and it could replace the english guys with Chinese and continue to sell the brand.

Like what happens in other industries. BMW bought BL for the Mini "Brand"... other industies where the brand name is important sell just that, the brand name - and nothing else.
MG Motor UK Limited (MG Motor) is a British automotive company headquartered in Longbridge, Birmingham, United Kingdom, and a subsidiary of SAIC Motor UK, which in turn is owned by the Shanghai-based SAIC Motor. MG Motor designs, develops and markets cars sold under the MG marque. MG Motor is the largest importer of Chinese made cars into the United Kingdom.

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by melkobukva » Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:41 am

Joel Zimmerman is a person. Deadmau5 is a brand. Joel Zimmerman publicizes 'Deadmau5', not 'Joel Zimmerman'.

The reason behind that is also relevant to the topic. Joel Zimmerman has extreme stage fright, so he started to wear the mouse mask to insulate himself from the crowd and get some privacy during his live shows.

Maybe Zimmerman doesn't understand the music business as deeply as you do, but he is still one of the most successful EDM producers.

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:06 am

melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:41 am
Joel Zimmerman is a person. Deadmau5 is a brand. Joel Zimmerman publicizes 'Deadmau5', not 'Joel Zimmerman'.

The reason behind that is also relevant to the topic. Joel Zimmerman has extreme stage fright, so he started to wear the mouse mask to insulate himself from the crowd and get some privacy during his live shows.

Maybe Zimmerman doesn't understand the music business as deeply as you do, but he is still one of the most successful EDM producers.
I make no claims to understand the music business.

I did claim that take John, Paul, George & Ringo from the band The Beatles - you have no Beatles.


Well if "Deadmau5 is a brand" Joel Zimmerman could sell it, or franchise it! If he does you will have one example of the brand being more important than the person. However wiki gets it wrong "known professionally as Deadmau5". (BTW Ringo Star isn't his real name - lots of examples in entertainment... )



I like the idea of putting on a mask to get "privacy" in front of an audience. If he really was a brand he could get someone else to go on stage, rather than draw more attention...

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:13 am

More examples of Stage Fright....

Image


Image


Image

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by melkobukva » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:28 am

The Beatles is a band that consists of John, Paul, George & Ringo. But not every band that consists of John, Paul, George & Ringo has to be The Beatles. John, Paul, George & Ringo are necessary to sustain the Beatles brand, but not sufficient.

Not every brand has to be a person, but a person could be a brand (Taylor Swift) - or closely tied to a brand (John, Paul, George & Ringo). In this case what could be transfered is the trademark, but transfering it would ruin the brand.

On the other hand, in USSR there was a very popular boy band Laskovyi Mai. It had several lineups that toured simultaneously, and nobody had a problem with that.

User avatar
melkobukva
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by melkobukva » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:36 am

What if KFC fires Colonel Sanders? :chin:


User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2692
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Censorship in China/EU/UK/US is a Nightmare

Post by jliat » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:21 am

melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:28 am
The Beatles is a band that consists of John, Paul, George & Ringo. But not every band that consists of John, Paul, George & Ringo has to be The Beatles. John, Paul, George & Ringo are necessary to sustain the Beatles brand, but not sufficient.
Nice bit of logic, so if back when possible (they were alive) sure John, Paul, George and Ringo could form a band which wasn't the Beatles, so the logic seems OK, it isn't sufficient for John, Paul, George and Ringo being in a band to make it the Beatles. ……But they did just that! …. Oh! Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band - "McCartney suggested that the Beatles should release an entire album representing a performance by the fictional Sgt. Pepper band. This alter ego group would give them the freedom to experiment musically. " So it wasn't a Beatles LP. Errr - well yes it was. It was sufficient for them - even given disguising themselves in uniforms as an Edwardian military band …
melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:28 am
Not every brand has to be a person, but a person could be a brand (Taylor Swift)
Nope - she cant sell or franchise herself. People are not brands.
melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:28 am
- or closely tied to a brand (John, Paul, George & Ringo). In this case what could be transfered is the trademark, but transfering it would ruin the brand.
Nope. This was tried with Fleetwood Mac. The 'brand' would be ruined as you say - why? People wouldn't buy it. Which proves they buy the Band not Brand for its members.
melkobukva wrote:
Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:28 am
On the other hand, in USSR there was a very popular boy band Laskovyi Mai. It had several lineups that toured simultaneously, and nobody had a problem with that.
I think you are pushing it a bit far resorting to a USSR boy band. You would do better to cite the Wombles. Wiki gives Sergei Kuznetsov as its creator. Again its slightly different - one doesn't expect Beethoven to play at a Beethoven concert. But one does expect to hear a Beethoven work. Not the franchise 'Beethoven' sold to China where symphonies 10, 11, 12, 13... are now produced.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests