Indie music and advertising.

sarahjordan · 03-08-2014 04:05PM #1

Hey, fellow indie music lovers. I have a favour to ask… (Please don’t throw your computer at the wall and run screaming yet. Hear me out.)
I’m working on my masters thesis at the moment, and it’s about the whole sell-out concept, and advertising’s commodification of indie music.

I really want to do a quality piece of research here, so I was hoping some of you could help me out with your opinions.

Do you think that it’s possible for bands to sell out anymore by licensing their music for ads, or is the concept outdated?

Does the use of an indie song in an ad colour how you feel about the musician?

Does it colour how you feel about the brand who used the song? Like, what does McDonald’s using New Slang, or VW using Pink Moon make you think of them?
Are they hip, down with the kids etc, or more try hard, uncool, silly?

Would the use of an indie song in an ad be enough to make you avoid that brand? Or would it do the opposite, and actually engage you?

Does the context matter? Like would it be more acceptable to here an indie song where the lyrics really match the product? As opposed to, for instance, Apple using Pixies’ Gigantic in an iPhone ad, where the song’s original context is lost.

I guess what I’m ultimately trying to find out is does that anti-commercial ideology that indie music subculture is based upon still exist today.

I realise I am not providing any incentive to help me out here, but any thoughts you have would be so appreciated! I really want this work to be good. I also really do not want to fail my masters. It would be a super good deed.

Feel free to answer any or all of the above questions, or if you have any other feelings about the topic just throw them in! Anything helps!

Thanks so much ☺
Sarah

pastorbarrett · 04-08-2014 01:25PM

It's not uncommon to still hear of bands making moral stands against having their music used in commercials etc, though for the most part I'd hazard a guess that these are bands that can afford to.

Considering how music is consumed these days, and presuming it's not wholly morally reprehensible, I wouldn't begrudge any band/musician licensing their music for commercial use - we've all got to pay the bills.

You also have to consider that certain companies will just employ some two-bit jingle act to plagarise your style if necessary; I know this has happened to Grizzly Bear, Beach House, White Stripes, and probably countless others.

In the case of The Pixies and Nick Drake examples, I'd argue from a commercial point of view they were totally apt and context correct, despite the seeming misappropriation of song meaning etc. Generally speaking, if you consider the predominant demographic (age, employment status, economic means and so on) of people who listen/listened to The Pixies and Nick Drake, they're probably the same folks buying these products, or at least part of the key demographic the products are aimed at.

maccored · 07-08-2014 12:25PM

considering the genre 'indie' is itself a commercial term, I cant see how it's 'anti-commercial ideology that indie music subculture is based upon'. 'Indie' was invented to sell music to people attempting to be cool. The pixies arent 'independent'. Neither is Nick Drake. The subculture of liking underground music and the term 'indie' are two completely different things.

seachto7 · 07-08-2014 08:04PM

It depends on the song. There seems to be a trend for these twee little indie songs, or ironic covers with plinky plinky little pianos and glocks, and a feeble voice and nice chorus.

You would see it on bank ads or insurance ads, as if to make the bank seem nice and twee, when in reality it should be someone like Cannibal Corpse or Deicide in the background.

You also have what I would call "vodafone music", bland indie pop with an uplifting happy chorus that kicks in during the unique selling point.

It wouldn't change m opinion as such. It would depend on what the ad is for though. It's a reality that this is how musicians can make money. Licence tracks to ads or tv programmes.

Every original band wants to be commercial in terms of selling albums or selling tickets to gigs, or to be able to earn money.

sarahjordan · 13-08-2014 09:49AM

Thanks so much for getting back to me, I really appreciate it! Sending good karma your way. If anyone else would like to chime in feel free, I'm still collecting data

(I will apparently forever be collecting data)
Sarah

karaokeman · 13-08-2014 10:50AM

Well if a song was advertised in the right context that's fine, it would look odd otherwise. For example, an add for sleeping tablets could use Walken by Wilco because its a catchy tune and it would be liked by the masses if given enough airplay, but it doesn't fit the theme of the commercial so in that respect it would seem unnecessary as a way of promoting that particular act, however a song like If Only Tonight We Could Sleep by The Cure would be fine.

At the end of the day if an artist is making quality music they deserve royalties for it, and media outlets should be willing to invest in that.

seachto7 · 13-08-2014 11:26AM

Would the ad be reluctant to use a *really* good track in the background?

Everlong1 · 13-08-2014 11:36AM

I'm a songwriter myself and would be more than happy to have one of my tunes used by some mega corporation in return for shedloads of moolah.

I'm a huge fan of Aimee Mann and was pleasantly surprised to hear a cover of one of her songs used in the most recent Lynx ad. Anything that increases her exposure to the public would please me as I think she's very under rated.

I will confess though that I was not happy with Love Will Tear Us Apart being used in an ad for either Carlsberg or Heineken years ago, so like a few previous posters I'm not opposed to the idea in general but I'd prefer if it's done in a reasonable tasteful fashion.

iomega · 15-08-2014 04:44PM

I think time puts things into perspective and the hardline principles people have when they are young can soften.

Indie music and advertising.

Comments