Deadlines/Brief

Music videos are so 80s/90s, right? They belong with the era when MTV screened wall-to-wall vids instead of 'reality' TV? Try telling that to the millions who bought Gangnam Style; were they really simply loving the music? 1.6bn (and still climbing) have viewed the video on YT, not to mention the many re-makes (school eg, eg2), viral ads + celeb link-ups (even political protest in Seoul) - and it doesn't matter how legit it is, this nightmare for daydream Beliebers is making a lot of money, even from the parodies + dislikes. All this for a simple dance track that wouldn't have sounded out of place in 1990 ... but had a fun vid. This meme itself was soon displaced by the Harlem Shake. Music vids even cause diseases it seems!
This blog explores every aspect of this most postmodern of media formats, including other print-based promo tools used by the industry, its fast-changing nature, + how fans/audiences create/interact. Posts are primarily written with Media students/educators in mind. Please acknowledge the blog author if using any resources from this blog - Mr Dave Burrowes

Monday 20 February 2012

AUD Rock's for 40+ folk?!

With key 60s icons still singing their songs of youth and youthful rebellion but hitting their 70s, and even punk icons like the Pistols' Johnny Rotten at 56 (and a band Paul McCartney picks out as representing today's kids, the Foo Fighters, having an average age of 43.6), John Harris puts forward the argument on the Guardian Music blog that rock is for the over-40's! He backs this up by pointing to the now quarter-century growing dominance of hip-hop and associated forms; none of the current top 40 singles are rock. He also writes of switching from NME to Mojo for his rock news, the latter now overtaking Q (itself centred on a mature, sophisticated audience) as the UK's biggest selling music mag.

What do you think? Is rock music no longer 'for the kids'?!

Read the full article here; and see links list on nostalgia in music, plus various posts (THEORY TIP: see Simon Reynolds' book...)

No comments: