Wednesday, November 08, 2006


Okay, in case you missed it, Faith Hill "apparently" lost it when Carrie Underwear was named Female Vocalist of the Year at this year's CMAs. Peep the link below to see it all in real time.

Now, I could harp on how I think country music is the biggest snooze and no one cares anyway or I could pick on the CMAs about how much a loser show this is or I could do both. Okay, I'll do both.

First off, it's my belief that this is an absolute joke like Faith Hill has come out and claimed. If that's true, Faith Hill pulled off one of the funniest things I've ever seen at an award show. I mean, as a prank, it's not that ingenius, but for Faith to stoop and actually do that with no explanation is hilarious. Props to Faith for that. I have a new respect for her, b'lee dat. But her music still sucks. B'lee dat doubly.

Okay, let's work under the assumption that it's not a joke and that was a genuine reaction. It would, in fact, be much funnier. A woman as composed and classy as Faith Hill finally cracking and going all T-Rex for all the world to see. I mean, you can't really blame Faith for expecting a win. The CMAs just recycle names for awards. It's a popularity contest. You hear the winners and you're thinking, "They haven't had a record in almost three years." It's not as timely as, say, the Grammys. I mean, Brooks and Dunn and Kenny Chesney win every year regardless of whether or not they're actually working a record. And regardless of whether or not they complete suck as "artists." Faith's just an animal of conditioned behavior. If the award has the word "female" in it, she's shifting in her seat ready to accept.

I question the credibility of an awards show that pulls from such a restricted pool of talent. I mean, it's like the Source Awards. You're really only talking about maybe fifteen total artists eligible for about ten different awards. Both are just drivers for advertising. There's no real importance to either of these awards show except that they prove that viewers are mindless zombies. This is why it makes more sense that it was joke, wait, I'll take you one further. It was arranged by the award show to spice up what is rather the dullest award show on earth. I'd rather watch the Nobel Prizes be handed out. At least the Source Awards are better at spicing things up when the performances and awards really begin to mean nothing. So what, Faith flips out. I need there to be a melee. I mean, someone needs to get slapped in the very least. The Source Awards have proved year after year that when it gets boring, someone brandish a knife or firearm and you can always end successfully.

That's not right. I don't condone violence.

Really though. Country music's still around? I forgot about it for some reason. If it weren't for the CMA's, CMT and the scattering of country stations across the US, would country be extinct? Everytime I read a radio report and I see a country artist getting spins, I'm thinking where? What's really funny is the Grammys when the country artists are mixed in with everyone else and you realize why they request to have their own show. Because they're completely outshined. When did you last see a country artist nominated for Album of the Year or Record of the Year? And when they do a pan of the Grammy audience, you see a smattering of cowboy hats and you're thinking, "Who the hell invited them?" And when they perform on the Grammys, it totally feels like, "Just let 'em perform. They'll raise a fuss if you don't." They usually pair someone up with a country artist just to validate it--a Tony Bennett, a Bono, an Elvis Costello. Otherwise, you'd go from 100% viewership to 30% faster than you can say, "Montgomery Gentry."

Alright, I'm travelling today. That's all you get. It's 5:45am. I got two cups of coffee in me and my flight leaves in an hour thirty.

Rory, I weigh 218. Let the fun begin.


K-Fleet-13 said...

Funny, J

As an "informed person" in the music marketing industry I would have thought you to be up-to-snuff with the listenership in the US and internationally.

To bash country, you would be alienating a huge amount of potential sales and a large part of the community/economy. Maybe not in your specific locality, but if you look at the Billboard top 200 this week, there are 4 country artists in the top 20. Based on genre, this represents 20% of the new record sales. The other artists in the top 20 are pretty evenly distributed amongs the other genres such as rap, hip-hop, indie pop, alternative, etc. There is no 1 dominant genre on the boards, and you are staunchly advocating boycotting 20% of the market because you believe toothless rednecks and country folks have no purchasing are misguided at best. If country is so backwards, why are so many country artists able to successfully pull off a crossover single or collaborate with other genres? Ever see Lil John kick it with a true music legend? Eminem doesn't count, as that was a publicity stunt to show he isn't a gaybasher (re: his performence with Elton John).

Open mind, dude. And this is Kris' brother BTW.

j3 said...

Hey Fleet.

My bashes alienate ALOT of people. Something I'm not too concerned about because I don't consider my reach to be broad enough to kill the sales of a genre of music. It's a nice thought, but unrealistic.

Two of those artists you mentioned in the Top 20 were on their second weeks (Urban and Sugarland). They're downtrending and by next week they'll be around 20-25. Rascal Flatts and Carrie Underwood, I'll be honest, always surprise me in the scans. Their dominance in the Top 200 depends largely on what week you look at. If you look at the entire Top 200, they only make up 12% of the artists represented. Plus you need to look at % of total scanned, not total artists. I would bet its even less than that. And close to 35-40% of that is sold at Wal Mart and you must know my feelings on Wal Mart.

However, knowing that even in categories I'm interested in there's crap I can't stand, to be fair I would never advocate the boycotting of the genre. Just because it sucks doesn't mean it won't sell. I'll never question why something sells--only when it DOESN'T sell will I start asking questions.

Being that I'm short on time, I'll address your last remark about collaborative efforts as this: simply put, there's more of a common line between country and, say, rock/classic rock than there is between hip hop and other forms of music thus making the ability to collaborate much easier. The connection between Kid Rock and Toby Keith is much easier to identify than James Blunt and Ghostface Killah. Culturally and musically, there's more common ground. It's not so much of a stretch. Of course, look at Linkin Park and Limp Bizkit and tell me they didn't sell some freakin units.