Slate PJ Article (negative view of the Target deal)

Brain of JFK

http://www.slate.com/id/2227096/

The Last Sellouts
Pearl Jam's brilliant new single, brought to you by Target.

Title pretty much says it all in terms of the article. A very positive review of The Fixer, but a very negative (and to me, kind of lazy and oversimplified) condemnation of the Target deal.

I disagree with most of it, but thought others might find it an interesting read anyway.

saveyou22

Definatly an igrorant moron. I think it's fanfuckingtastic that a band can release an album without a label, it's not like they made a deal with Wal-Mart, and Target is no where near the mega corporation that they were signed to for all those years at Sony. That whole article was just the uninformed ranting from a music writer that couldn't make it in music himself. He should be hung from his heels and bleed like a stuck pig. Selah.

arq

What a piece of crap:

"The three albums that followed Vitalogy—No Code, Yield, and Binaural—were full of left-field experiments into sun-baked spiritualism ("Who You Are," "Given to Fly"), long, scorched dirges masquerading as singles ("Nothing as It Seems"), and ugly, rambling blues-jams ("Red Mosquito"). "

"rambling blues jams (red mosquito)"
That song is a master piece! Ignorant good for nothing! :evil:

YetAnotherFiasco

If this guy can really write this article about Target, without mentioning the fact that Pearl Jam is releasing Backspacer on their own, without a label in the US, then he is a pathetic reporter. I wish he drowned when he jumped ship after Vitalogy.

blacknapkins

I'm taking any negative press with a grain (or a pound) of salt.

Everything in the music business is experimental right now, and it's worth it to pay attention to the nuances as bands try to tweak the old ways to come up with some new ones. I don't really get what he's trying to say here. So "The Fixer" is a good, positive song and they shouldn't sell it through Target? Who cares?

I'll just slap Jonah Weiner with a "cranky little man" label and move on.

mr_canada

the guys last name is "weiner"...wouldn't you be pissed off too?

Danimal

Ehhh, not too bad. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

CranMalReign

I tell you what... as much as I love Pearl Jam, I really enjoy when reviews and articles are posted with negative spin, no matter how minute.

It brings out the best in the board! The class shines and shines.

Hatfield78

arq wrote:

What a piece of crap:

"The three albums that followed Vitalogy—No Code, Yield, and Binaural—were full of left-field experiments into sun-baked spiritualism ("Who You Are," "Given to Fly"), long, scorched dirges masquerading as singles ("Nothing as It Seems"), and ugly, rambling blues-jams ("Red Mosquito"). "

"rambling blues jams (red mosquito)"
That song is a master piece! Ignorant good for nothing! :evil:

I didn't read the article but just from what you pulled out, this guy doesn't even LIKE music!

dreamweaver

poor judgement

Zoso

of course people are going to see this as a sellout move... are you surprised?

dreamweaver

Zoso wrote:

of course people are going to see this as a sellout move... are you surprised?

why? there's no reason to. the only kind of person I see veiwing this wrong are kids who don't understand the business. that's all. It's actually a pretty cool deal. Bottom line is, Pearl Jam isn't hurting anyone.

NewJPage

saveyou22 wrote:

Definatly an igrorant moron. I think it's fanfuckingtastic that a band can release an album without a label, it's not like they made a deal with Wal-Mart, and Target is no where near the mega corporation that they were signed to for all those years at Sony. That whole article was just the uninformed ranting from a music writer that couldn't make it in music himself. He should be hung from his heels and bleed like a stuck pig. Selah.

it does mention they were with sony, and it asks the question, "are they sellouts because they used to be with sony"

the deal sucks, IMHO, mostly because the band is actively telling people to shop at target, a store that has huge moral issues for me, a consumer. but this has been covered to death on the board. lets move on.

dreamweaver

NewJPage wrote:

saveyou22 wrote:

Definatly an igrorant moron. I think it's fanfuckingtastic that a band can release an album without a label, it's not like they made a deal with Wal-Mart, and Target is no where near the mega corporation that they were signed to for all those years at Sony. That whole article was just the uninformed ranting from a music writer that couldn't make it in music himself. He should be hung from his heels and bleed like a stuck pig. Selah.

it does mention they were with sony, and it asks the question, "are they sellouts because they used to be with sony"

the deal sucks, IMHO, mostly because the band is actively telling people to shop at target, a store that has huge moral issues for me, a consumer. but this has been covered to death on the board. lets move on.

You have to realize Target is a place for a mojority of Americans to bring their families on a saturday to get out of the house. You can't have an a moral opinion of this because they probably wouldn't have much else and it's affordable. Sure it seems like it sucks, but only to those who have had more.

Zoso

dreamweaver wrote:

Zoso wrote:

of course people are going to see this as a sellout move... are you surprised?

why? there's no reason to. the only kind of person I see veiwing this wrong are kids who don't understand the business. that's all. It's actually a pretty cool deal. Bottom line is, Pearl Jam isn't hurting anyone.

I did have an issue with this at first but when explained I'm fine with it... Exactly in it's simplest form if people don;t understand it they could misunderstand it for selling out. I think the fact that it's available in independent stores is a good sign for the guys

reflectedfromafar

This negativity just makes me stronger, we will not retreat, this band is unstoppable! And this weekend, we rock Portland!

NewJPage

dreamweaver wrote:

NewJPage wrote:

saveyou22 wrote:

Definatly an igrorant moron. I think it's fanfuckingtastic that a band can release an album without a label, it's not like they made a deal with Wal-Mart, and Target is no where near the mega corporation that they were signed to for all those years at Sony. That whole article was just the uninformed ranting from a music writer that couldn't make it in music himself. He should be hung from his heels and bleed like a stuck pig. Selah.

it does mention they were with sony, and it asks the question, "are they sellouts because they used to be with sony"

the deal sucks, IMHO, mostly because the band is actively telling people to shop at target, a store that has huge moral issues for me, a consumer. but this has been covered to death on the board. lets move on.

You have to realize Target is a place for a mojority of Americans to bring their families on a saturday to get out of the house. You can't have an a moral opinion of this because they probably wouldn't have much else and it's affordable. Sure it seems like it sucks, but only to those who have had more.

I know what you are saying, and i think you are right. it is, unfortunately, the current state that we live in as a society. I just with the band would do something to try and change it, because they have that option.

And I hope you aren't referring to me as someone who has "had more," because i'm a dirt poor grad student.

slightofjeff

NewJPage wrote:

saveyou22 wrote:

Definatly an igrorant moron. I think it's fanfuckingtastic that a band can release an album without a label, it's not like they made a deal with Wal-Mart, and Target is no where near the mega corporation that they were signed to for all those years at Sony. That whole article was just the uninformed ranting from a music writer that couldn't make it in music himself. He should be hung from his heels and bleed like a stuck pig. Selah.

it does mention they were with sony, and it asks the question, "are they sellouts because they used to be with sony"

the deal sucks, IMHO, mostly because the band is actively telling people to shop at target, a store that has huge moral issues for me, a consumer. but this has been covered to death on the board. lets move on.

Actually, I think the band is actively telling people to shop their independent record stores. I think that would be their druthers. Or pre-order it off this site.

Based on this band's history, I don't know what more they have to do to prove they have their fans' best interests at heart. Or, at the very least, their fans' best interest plays into the calculus whenever there is a major decision to make.

Based on their track record, I trust them. The world will not end, and the music will not change, if I choose to purchase the record at Target.

O_G_D

Anyone critical of Pearl Jam is absolutely crazy. The same can be said about anyone critical of Obama. I mean the nerve. How dare you??????? Go ride the back of the bus!!!!

RiotAct10

I think the only thing wrong here, is people's perception of what Target is. For this situation, Target is essentially, the record company. What I mean is, would anyone be calling Pearl Jam sellouts if for this album they had signed a 1-album deal with Atlantic Records, or Warner or whoever? It is essentially the exact same thing, EXCEPT, they cut out everyone that comes between the band and the distributor, and it now pretty much goes straight from the band to the distributor.

This is 2009, not 1969, or 1989, or even 1999. Maybe it is going to take people awhile to get used to how releasing new music will work now, but come on, the sale of albums is a dying breed, and bands need to find creative ways to remain relevant when it comes to selling new music. Perhaps in 5 or so years, you can go back and read a review of this album that mentions the Target deal, and think to yourself, "whats so big about that, everyone does that."

I just cannot read this as a sellout move at all. Sorry.

cippociappo

I think it's great that they decided to release it on their own, and in indie stores as well...

... but let's be realistic, that alone would not allow them to reach a big chunck of americans... With the
target deal, they can actually sell Backspacer to the casual listener that goes to Target to spend the Saturday (what a horrible perspective!!). Those are the guys that don't follow this board, and that most probably don't go to independent stores to buy their music.

Instead of buying Britney Spears albums at Target, this time around they might check out the latest record from Pearl Jam... and that's a good thing, IMHO
(if they don't sign on here and compete for tickets, obviously :twisted: )

Ledbetterman10

Brain of JFK wrote:

http://www.slate.com/id/2227096/

The Last Sellouts
Pearl Jam's brilliant new single, brought to you by Target.

Title pretty much says it all in terms of the article. A very positive review of The Fixer, but a very negative (and to me, kind of lazy and oversimplified) condemnation of the Target deal.

I disagree with most of it, but thought others might find it an interesting read anyway.

well anyone who calls The Fixer "brilliant" and calls Red Mosquito "an ugly, rambling blues-jam" is pretty insane in my view. But Stone said in an interview that the Target deal was meant to put more money in their pockets (they'll get $5 for every copy sold rather than $2 like they have in the past) so it's not like there isn't some monetary gain in this whole Target deal.

Brain of JFK

How is selling through Target any different really than selling through ITunes? No one calls them sellouts for cutting a deal with Apple. These are all just different ways of distributing their music in the ever shifting scenery of the music industry. I have no problem with it at all.

Mortality

NewJPage wrote:

And I hope you aren't referring to me as someone who has "had more," because i'm a dirt poor grad student.

Just think about that for a second. You are a grad student. Anyone who takes time to think Target is a problem in this world, doesnt have any legitimate problems. Call it racist all you want, but this is the most effective way to describe it: you have "white people problems."

White people have problems with whales dying, trees being cut down, gas guzzlers, and Target.

African people have problems staying alive past 5 years old.

NewJPage

Mortality wrote:

NewJPage wrote:

And I hope you aren't referring to me as someone who has "had more," because i'm a dirt poor grad student.

Just think about that for a second. You are a grad student. Anyone who takes time to think Target is a problem in this world, doesnt have any legitimate problems. Call it racist all you want, but this is the most effective way to describe it: you have "white people problems."

White people have problems with whales dying, trees being cut down, gas guzzlers, and Target.

African people have problems staying alive past 5 years old.

as a white person with "white person problems," i am fully aware that the things I face in life are nothing compared to 80% of the world. That being said, I don't think the OP was referring to the potential market of Pearl Jam buyers in Zimbabwe. He was referring to middle-class Americans that buy shit made buy the 80% of the world that is shat upon daily at Target. That is what he was referring to, and that is what I was referring to.

All I am saying is the Pearl Jam knows better and should be part of the solution instead of the problem. who gives a shit if less people might hear the record?? No one (relatively speaking, that is) is actually gonna buy this thing either way. it will debut in the top 5, then disappear from the charts, as all of their post-Vitalogy albums have. but thank you for the lecture either way.

darthvedder81

I wouldn't pay much attention to that article—Slate is staffed by a bunch of neo-Marxist, pretentious, self-satisfied prigs. If Pearl Jam wants to market themselves stronger and sell records at a retail chain more power to them. I hope they make loads of cash doing so. This is America.

P.S. The SuperTarget down the block from me is a God send. It's convienently located, well staffed, clean, and sells everything from light bulbs to hamburger to boxer shorts to iPods all at reasonable prices.

darthvedder81

Brain of JFK wrote:

How is selling through Target any different really than selling through ITunes? No one calls them sellouts for cutting a deal with Apple. These are all just different ways of distributing their music in the ever shifting scenery of the music industry. I have no problem with it at all.

Exactly. The problem is there's a big portion of the PJ fanbase that is as in love (if not more) with Pearl Jam's image as progressive greenpeace anti-corporate warriors as they are with their, you know, music.

NHiding

my only reply to this guy and his article is, utter douchebaggery.

Jeanwah

darthvedder81 wrote:

Brain of JFK wrote:

How is selling through Target any different really than selling through ITunes? No one calls them sellouts for cutting a deal with Apple. These are all just different ways of distributing their music in the ever shifting scenery of the music industry. I have no problem with it at all.

Exactly. The problem is there's a big portion of the PJ fanbase that is as in love (if not more) with Pearl Jam's image as progressive greenpeace anti-corporate warriors as they are with their, you know, music.

The integrity and devotion the band had in the past for "being true to themselves" and "standing up for what they believe in" is a complete 180 on today's band that is making deals with Corporate America. They were slaves to Sony because they wanted to put out records, and you need a label to get your music out when you're an unknown. They proclaimed their social issues from their hearts so strongly and adamantly, the fans could feel it. They really lived it. But, as everyone does, they've changed and are different now.

I, for one, will buy Backspacer from an independent, and will not support Target. I've yet to hear of anyone else on the board doing the same. If the band is still interested in keeping the little guys alive, what fans will be willing to support their local music store? Anyone?

jubilairesjl

Pearl Jam really needed to make the album available at a major store so that people who arent fans of the band have access to the new album. Most people dont go to indie record stores anymore. It is not selling out to do that. It is just smart. Do they want to continue to sell out their concerts or just become a band where there fanclub follows them around to their concerts and then ultimately see their fan base dwindle because their new stuff doesn't sound like Ten or Vs. anymore?

Jeanwah

jubilairesjl wrote:

Pearl Jam really needed to make the album available at a major store so that people who arent fans of the band have access to the new album. Most people dont go to indie record stores anymore. It is not selling out to do that. It is just smart. Do they want to continue to sell out their concerts or just become a band where there fanclub follows them around to their concerts and then ultimately see their fan base dwindle because their new stuff doesn't sound like Ten or Vs. anymore?

Ok, that makes sense, but what loyal fans are willing to support their local independent music retailer? I see many loyals on here OK with Target yet also proclaim that PJ is decent enough to still let independent stores sell the new album. But no one's mentioned that they will actually support these stores on the forum...