...by not stealing and paying for music downloads so that the artists could get their $20,000 gift bags.

Well, they did all get an iPod. Hopefully programmed by Apple to say "The music industry you support doesn't want you to be able to legally use this device. Thus, the ability to transfer music to this device is disabled"

ha ha ha - nice.

The ironic part of it to me was that they had a segment on how nice the gift bags were right after the speach from Neil Portnow about how much illegal downloads hurt the industry and his introduction of the new anti-piracy ad they're going to run.

Including presenters, performers, and winners, I totaled it all up at over $1.5million in crap given away. That sure doesn't drive home their point very well.

- trs

I never understood why companies like that want to give more to those who have the most. Why can't they make a charitable contribution on their behalf or something?

It's not like they need someone to buy them a mobile phone or a cowboy hat. I think they can afford that.

Not only that, but those people are already getting so much publicity just by showing up.

And the poor guys who engineered the latest Britney Spears CD are the ones really getting screwed.

whatevah.

i notice the date on that article is last year.
database error, or is it really from last year?

I never understood why companies like that want to give more to those who have the most.

Because it's like a free endorsement. A teenager sees Britney in a photo showing off her free iPod in an impromptu publicity photo while waiting to talk to Joan Rivers for E! before the Grammys. So the teen bugs mom and dad to get her an iPod just like Britney has. A more appealing image than a needy child with a Saks bag for a school bookbag.

Good point, maybe there were all donated items by sponsors?

notice the date on that article is last year.

You know, I guess that article actually was from last year. But they gave away basically the same gift bags this year. The segment they did during the Grammy's mentioned that the bags were actually $30,000. I just assumed that article was current when I googled the topic.

Good point, maybe there were all donated items by sponsors?

At the very least. It is not uncommon for companies to be asked to pay for the priviledge of giving away their goods.

I recall a certain 80's rap artist who, some years ago, made it known he would like a car player, which was to be accompanied by a substantial amount of cash. Funnily enough he never did get one.

Rob

=0. Oh come on... you HAVE to tell us... that's just not fair.

Chuck D

mrhjr, your avatar points to your c: drive
probably why we cant see it

Could this be the picture Link

thats a nice waterfall

Me? I don't care about any of this. I don't normally listen to the pablum that actually gets nominated for a Grammy.

Ok, I actually have the Tibetan monk album that won world music, but I doubt they would think much about a gift basket.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever thought about the fact that the RIAA doesn't care if you download music without paying? They care that you don't download music by their artists without paying....

Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever thought about the fact that the RIAA doesn't care if you download music without paying? They care that you don't download music by their artists without paying....

I have thought about it and I always wonder if when they come up with the numbers of how much money they are loosing are they only including RIAA members. I would guess they are. I have purchased many disks latley but non of them are from RIAA member labels.

I'm sure that's true in some way, but the RIAA is always listing labels as members of RIAA that are not. They want it all to be under their control.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone ever thought about the fact that the RIAA doesn't care if you download music without paying? They care that you don't download music by their artists without paying...

They care if you download music by their artists without paying. They care if music not by their artists exists at all. That's what fighting P2P is about, from the RIAA's point of view: fighting disintermediation, fighting loss of control.

Peter

They care if music not by their artists exists at all.

I think you're 100% right, Peter. The RIAA would like to have a perfect, under control, cookie cutter world of music.

How else can you explain Metallica winning "Best Metal Album"? Granted, they used to be metal, but I think their latest album puts them well into the world of "Boy Band".

How else can you explain Metallica winning "Best Metal Album"?

Really? I didn't watch so I have no clue, but wasn't that album supposed to be laughably bad? I haven't talked to a single person who liked it. I never even listened.

I forget if I've pointed it out before, but....

The Grammys reward, almost solely, record sales. There is very little quality judgement involved. In fact, there's not any real way for them to do anything else. There are so many albums released in any given year that even the person who listens to the most probably only hears 10% of the output. That being said, the only artists that get enough votes to be nominated are those that everyone has heard. That is, the ones that are already best sellers.

That being said, I don't really understand why the new Metallica album sold as well as it did (it truly is crap), but it did nonetheless. I know one person who liked it, though.

And, just to find out what the competition was like, I just tried to find a list of nominees. As a note to how well respected the Grammys (Grammies?) are, and how much influence they carry, I cannot find a list, despite the fact that the awards show was less than a week ago.

Just because someone bought it, doesnt mean they liked it!

I thought just the Billboard awards took sales into account, but your explaination makes sense...

hmph

I cannot find a list

Here's the complete list of nominees

And the complete list of winners

Metallica's competition was:

Best Metal Performance
(For solo, duo, group or collaborative performances, with vocals. Singles or Tracks only.)

Did My Time
Korn
[Epic/Immortal Records]

mOBSCENE
Marilyn Manson
Track from: The Golden Age Of Grotesque
[Nothing/Interscope Records]

St. Anger
Metallica
Track from: St. Anger
[Elektra Entertainment Group]

Smothered
Spineshank
Track from: Self-Destructive Pattern
[Roadrunner Records]

Inhale
Stone Sour
Track from: Stone Sour
[Roadrunner Records]

- trs

Well, the Billboard awards are, IIRC, explicit about it. But the Grammys pretend to be about artistic achivement, and it's just not so. If someone put out the perfect album, one so perfect that everyone who heard it thought it was the best thing ever, but it didn't sell well (presumably because it never achived the critical mass of popularity), it wouldn't even be mentioned at the Grammys.

At least there is a good story once in a blue moon like when Beck's Odelay was basically "discovered" by the general public after he won a Grammy... But it seems that if anything did win an award that isn't popular, the award would be given out prior to the live airing of the show.

I didn't watch the Grammy's (to quote Louis Black: "If I'm gonna be in that much pain, I'll just do it to myself"), but my girlfriend works at the newspaper. She filled me in on some of the winners...

I didn't watch the Grammy's (to quote Louis Black: "If I'm gonna be in that much pain, I'll just do it to myself")

Yeah, I don't think I bought an album that came out this year so I figured there wasn't much of a point.

On that note, I finally got a CD I really like that was put out in this century. I realize I'm late (as usual), but that Audioslave CD is fantastic! I can't believe I missed it the first time around (actually I can as I had no way of hearing about it other than this BBS). My only complaint is that this is a style of music that seems to necessitate language I'd rather not hear. Even at that, though, this is certainly a "disc" I'll be listening to a lot of in the coming weeks. Did they get a Grammy when this album came out?