Thursday, 29 August 2013
What Happened When I Complained To iTunes About Best Song Ever Not Being The Best Song Ever.
Some of you will know that I was irked by One Direction calling their latest track Best Song Ever. In fact I wrote a recent blog about it right here. The boys were on TV recently and they seemed fun, I felt I'd been a bit harsh on them so I listened to the track again (I had downloaded it for research purposes). And again. In fact the more I listened to it, the more it annoyed me. It simply is not the best song ever - not even close. There was only one thing for it. I complained to iTunes for false advertising…
Hi there iTeam,
I was recently on iTunes looking for some new music when I came across a track called Best Song Ever. That title made it a safe bet, I thought it must be up there with Bohemian Rhapsody and Ashes To Ashes. I was deeply disappointed on the first listen, it was devoid of any discernible melody. I thought I would give it another go, after all, the majesty of Hotel California didn't strike me until I'd heard it a few times, sometimes you've got to let a work of art settle and breathe.
I gave Best Song Ever a couple of weeks on my Shuffle but I just couldn't get into it. In fact, one time when it started, I jumped out of the way coz I thought there was a truck reversing. In all fairness, you have to agree that Best Song Ever is misleading advertising. Please could I have a refund so I can buy Wuthering Heights coz that really is the best song ever.
Thank you,
Brian Story.
I received a very timely reply...
Hello Brian,
My name is XXXX, and thank you for contacting the iTunes Customer Support.
I'm sorry to learn that this item did not meet the standard of quality you have come to expect from the iTunes Store. I can certainly feel your desire to have this sorted out. No worries, I can help you with the refund.
Brian, please be informed that the music studio provides their content to the iTunes Store and we endeavor to distribute the highest quality content possible. The issue you have reported has been noted and the vendor will be notified. I can't say when or if the vendor will correct the issue.
I have reversed the charge for "Best Song Ever". Within 10 business days, a credit of 0.99 GBP should be posted to the credit card that appears on the receipt for that purchase.
Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience this has caused. Your patience and understanding are greatly appreciated.
Sincerely ,
XXXX
iTunes Store/Mac Apps Store Customer Support
Result!
I got an apology and a full refund. I'm satisfied with this great customer service from iTunes though I realise they are only the portal through which teen pop spreads its evil and that got me thinking… I should complain directly to One Direction. Watch this space...
Also, if any of you are disappointed in it not being the Best Song Ever, why not ask for a refund too?
Mr Brian Story 'Getting to the heart of the consumer matters that really matter.'
Thursday, 22 August 2013
What's In A Buzzword?
While helping my eldest with her homework I said she stood a better chance of success if she broke it down into snackable content and identified her mission-critical paradigms. She looked at me like the idiot that I was (she gets more like her mother every day). It was then I realised I had unwittingly succumbed to something I thought I had skilfully dodged in my professional life - Business Schpeak.
At the peak of Britpop, I was a young intern at the Virgin Head Office. I was in the retail sector and shadowing a store manager. During an area meeting he said his main goal for the xmas period was to increase 'foot-traffic' in his store. I laughed out loud and the room turned to look at me. Sheepishly, I inquired 'Do you mean customers?' He shot back 'At Virgin we call it 'foot-traffic'. The serious tone of his voice and my eagerness to impress meant that I nodded approvingly but the absurdity of the term was not lost on me. I made a promise to myself that I would never fall foul of this unnecessary linguistic expression. But here we are, 20 years later, and I have just been admonished by a teenager for sounding like a pretentious candidate on The Apprentice.
I'm the man who would sit in business meetings and inwardly snigger as yet another facilitator extolled the virtues of deploying impactful functionalities. Sometimes I genuinely didn't know what they were going on about (did they?) but I didn't want to appear out of the loop so I didn't question anything. The back page of my notebook is littered with scribbles of words that I planned to look up later. I wonder how many other notebooks have similar appendices?
My recent favourites have been ' identifying the low-hanging fruit' (easiest options) and 'delivering a helicopter view' (an overview - why not just say overview???!!!) Helicopter view is utterly ridiculous. Why do these educated, professional people not realise how silly they sound? There appears to be no shame involved as they ridiculously discourse. But perhaps they don't realise, I hadn't realised how much I'd picked up. Frequenting different offices and regularly reading business articles had expanded my vocabulary too.
After a short period of self-loathing on behalf of my former Virgin intern self, I decided to have some fun with it. I created some buzzwords of my own. In a recent meeting with a client where I had been brought in to evaluate their new business proposal, I said their plan was a 'Monet' (looked good on paper but up close it was just a mess) and the delivery of their pitch was a bit 'Honey Boo Boo' (sweet but incomprehensible).
Nobody batted an upper-optical covering, in fact people were nodding in perceived affirmation. Honestly, it's all a load of bovine excretion.
Dear Reader, I set you a challenge. Invent your own business buzzword and drop it into your next meeting. I'm absolutely certain that's how some were created, people were being sarcastic and ironic and inexplicably some stuck. Tweet them to me and if I like them, I might use them in my next pitch. twitter.com/mrbrianstory
At the peak of Britpop, I was a young intern at the Virgin Head Office. I was in the retail sector and shadowing a store manager. During an area meeting he said his main goal for the xmas period was to increase 'foot-traffic' in his store. I laughed out loud and the room turned to look at me. Sheepishly, I inquired 'Do you mean customers?' He shot back 'At Virgin we call it 'foot-traffic'. The serious tone of his voice and my eagerness to impress meant that I nodded approvingly but the absurdity of the term was not lost on me. I made a promise to myself that I would never fall foul of this unnecessary linguistic expression. But here we are, 20 years later, and I have just been admonished by a teenager for sounding like a pretentious candidate on The Apprentice.
I'm the man who would sit in business meetings and inwardly snigger as yet another facilitator extolled the virtues of deploying impactful functionalities. Sometimes I genuinely didn't know what they were going on about (did they?) but I didn't want to appear out of the loop so I didn't question anything. The back page of my notebook is littered with scribbles of words that I planned to look up later. I wonder how many other notebooks have similar appendices?
My recent favourites have been ' identifying the low-hanging fruit' (easiest options) and 'delivering a helicopter view' (an overview - why not just say overview???!!!) Helicopter view is utterly ridiculous. Why do these educated, professional people not realise how silly they sound? There appears to be no shame involved as they ridiculously discourse. But perhaps they don't realise, I hadn't realised how much I'd picked up. Frequenting different offices and regularly reading business articles had expanded my vocabulary too.
After a short period of self-loathing on behalf of my former Virgin intern self, I decided to have some fun with it. I created some buzzwords of my own. In a recent meeting with a client where I had been brought in to evaluate their new business proposal, I said their plan was a 'Monet' (looked good on paper but up close it was just a mess) and the delivery of their pitch was a bit 'Honey Boo Boo' (sweet but incomprehensible).
Nobody batted an upper-optical covering, in fact people were nodding in perceived affirmation. Honestly, it's all a load of bovine excretion.
Dear Reader, I set you a challenge. Invent your own business buzzword and drop it into your next meeting. I'm absolutely certain that's how some were created, people were being sarcastic and ironic and inexplicably some stuck. Tweet them to me and if I like them, I might use them in my next pitch. twitter.com/mrbrianstory
Friday, 16 August 2013
How The Jesus Monkey Could Help The Chinese Zoo.
It seems that pop stars aren't the only ones faking it these days. A zoo in Luohe, China recently hit the headlines for trying to pass off a dog as a lion. Visitors to the zoo expecting a close-up encounter with the king of the jungle actually came face-to-face with a Tibetan mastiff dog instead. Now, there is a certain similarity between the beasts but when the 'lion' started barking, it confirmed the visitors' suspicions. Further reports claim the zoo are also masquerading a fox as a leopard and rats as snakes.
A spokesman said 'they were doing their best in tough economic times'. Who can deride that? Their creativity and determination should be applauded, the biggest mistake in business is giving up, they found a way to keep the zoo open and it has resulted in worldwide exposure. Maybe not the greatest kind of publicity, nobody likes to be a laughing stock, but there is a way they could turn this to their advantage. How? By taking a lesson from this 82-year-old Spanish lady.
Twelve months ago this week, in the small Spanish town of Borje, amateur artist Cecilia Gimenez attempted to restore a Jesus fresco on display in her local church. Her alterations to Ecce Homo, or 'Behold The Man', resulted in the Son of God looking more Kong than Christ, in fact, the piece has now been unofficially renamed Ecce Mono or 'Behold The Monkey'. The global derision levelled at Gimenez hurt her so much it brought on a panic attack and she took to her bed to recover. Then a steely Spanish resolve kicked in and she decided to face her critics down. She put on an art exhibition of her other work with Ecce Mono as the centrepiece. To date, it has brought 40,000 visitors to Borja boosting the local economy and raising over £50,000 for a local hospice. Gimenez has also signed a merchandising contract which will see her receiving a cut of profits from postcards, mugs and fridge magnets.
This is the time when the Chinese zoo should be painting donkeys to look like zebras and sticking kitchen-roll-inners to horse's foreheads so their menagerie could boast a herd of unicorns. Pigs with hosepipes can be elephants and spray-painted pigeons become parrots. Simple. Once word spreads, business will boom as every man and his dog flocks to see the shit zoo.
A spokesman said 'they were doing their best in tough economic times'. Who can deride that? Their creativity and determination should be applauded, the biggest mistake in business is giving up, they found a way to keep the zoo open and it has resulted in worldwide exposure. Maybe not the greatest kind of publicity, nobody likes to be a laughing stock, but there is a way they could turn this to their advantage. How? By taking a lesson from this 82-year-old Spanish lady.
Twelve months ago this week, in the small Spanish town of Borje, amateur artist Cecilia Gimenez attempted to restore a Jesus fresco on display in her local church. Her alterations to Ecce Homo, or 'Behold The Man', resulted in the Son of God looking more Kong than Christ, in fact, the piece has now been unofficially renamed Ecce Mono or 'Behold The Monkey'. The global derision levelled at Gimenez hurt her so much it brought on a panic attack and she took to her bed to recover. Then a steely Spanish resolve kicked in and she decided to face her critics down. She put on an art exhibition of her other work with Ecce Mono as the centrepiece. To date, it has brought 40,000 visitors to Borja boosting the local economy and raising over £50,000 for a local hospice. Gimenez has also signed a merchandising contract which will see her receiving a cut of profits from postcards, mugs and fridge magnets.
This is the time when the Chinese zoo should be painting donkeys to look like zebras and sticking kitchen-roll-inners to horse's foreheads so their menagerie could boast a herd of unicorns. Pigs with hosepipes can be elephants and spray-painted pigeons become parrots. Simple. Once word spreads, business will boom as every man and his dog flocks to see the shit zoo.
Wednesday, 14 August 2013
Everybody's Faking It These Days.
I noticed something when I was researching my blog about Bieber and Gaga. According to their Facebook pages, they both have the highest concentration of fans in Mexico. Now, I'm sure that the people of Mexico enjoy a bit of plastic pop as much as the rest of us but it struck me as strange that the one place in the whole world which was most crazy about Gaga was also the most bonkers about Bieber. Intrigued, I did a little bit of further investigation and guess what? Mexico is also the one place in the world which is most rampant for Rihanna.
Wacky for The Wanted...
Loony for Lana...
and nuts about One Direction...
When the Spice Girls ruled the world, each one had a territory in which they were most popular. Geri was Queen in the UK, Mel C was Spain's favourite Spice and so on... so which territories love each boy in 1D the most? Interesting findings below...
They are ALL loved the most... In Mexico!!!
An obvious pattern is in place… I checked the sales figures for each of these groups' latest releases in Mexico and they were modest to say the least. Also, the StatusPeople tool showed that all of these people had a percentage of fake Twitter followers and therefore open to falsifying Facebook fans.
Perhaps Mexico does have the most enthusiastic social media supporters of pop music in the world or, most likely, is home to some of the biggest click farms where you can buy yourself social media millions for a fistful of dollars.
If these fake accounts were culled, we would see who really were the pop music champions but I'm sure Twitter and Facebook aren't in any hurry to do this as they look equally magnificent having millions of customers too. What would be achieved by bursting the bubble anyway? Just remember how you felt when you were told the truth about Santa. Can you look your 6-year-old in the eye and tell her Justin Bieber is nothing more than the Easter Bunny? That One Direction are akin to the fairies at the bottom of the garden? If the truth came out, the music industry might well go pop.
FOOTNOTE: After publishing this blog, I tweeted about how Jedward were the most honest boys in pop as they had zero fake followers. Here's the proof:
Wacky for The Wanted...
Loony for Lana...
and nuts about One Direction...
When the Spice Girls ruled the world, each one had a territory in which they were most popular. Geri was Queen in the UK, Mel C was Spain's favourite Spice and so on... so which territories love each boy in 1D the most? Interesting findings below...
They are ALL loved the most... In Mexico!!!
An obvious pattern is in place… I checked the sales figures for each of these groups' latest releases in Mexico and they were modest to say the least. Also, the StatusPeople tool showed that all of these people had a percentage of fake Twitter followers and therefore open to falsifying Facebook fans.
Perhaps Mexico does have the most enthusiastic social media supporters of pop music in the world or, most likely, is home to some of the biggest click farms where you can buy yourself social media millions for a fistful of dollars.
If these fake accounts were culled, we would see who really were the pop music champions but I'm sure Twitter and Facebook aren't in any hurry to do this as they look equally magnificent having millions of customers too. What would be achieved by bursting the bubble anyway? Just remember how you felt when you were told the truth about Santa. Can you look your 6-year-old in the eye and tell her Justin Bieber is nothing more than the Easter Bunny? That One Direction are akin to the fairies at the bottom of the garden? If the truth came out, the music industry might well go pop.
FOOTNOTE: After publishing this blog, I tweeted about how Jedward were the most honest boys in pop as they had zero fake followers. Here's the proof:
Gaga Gives Us Something to Beliebe In.
Yesterday, #49millionbeliebers was the top trending topic on Twitter. If the hype machine is to be believed, Justin Bieber is the biggest male pop star on the planet right now, yet 49 million is an awful lot of people to have on side, especially as most of the things that trickle back to me about Bieber tend to be negative (and this is from my kids - his target audience.)
After the Dispatches programme last week concerning fake fans, I decided to run a little test on Bieber's extended harem - Interesting web tool StatusPeople allows you to run a check on any Twitter account - It takes a sample of data and assesses the validity of the account's followers. Justin Bieber doesn't fare too well. Only one quarter of his fans appear to be genuine.
Bieber and Gaga have been running a race to reign Twitter supreme and regularly overtake each other. Both camps can easily claim that it is their legions of fans who are buying the fake followers in an attempt to help their idols achieve pole position. That is probably partly true but with the numbers involved there has to be a fair deal of management manipulation too. In fact most top recording artists appear to have their millions of followers bolstered by dubious accounts but can any of them back up these big numbers? Back to Bieber.
Little Justin has never had a number one single in the UK or US and his last album Believe is yet to reach 2.5 millions sales worldwide more than one year after release - not such a great performance for the world's new pop Messiah with a supposed 49 million disciples.
Neo-Madonna, Lady Gaga has a similar number of fake followers:
Yet, in contrast, Gaga regularly hits the top spot worldwide and her last album has sold five times as many as Bieber's.
Just a little investigation and it's easy to see why. It's down to basics. Haus of Gaga have a better business model. As discussed in my last blog, social media is not about numbers but engagement. Gaga regularly interacts with her fans, her Little Monsters. Using her own website and linking to Twitter and Facebook, Gaga encourages the creativity of her fans and features their input. She is an all-inclusive polymath to Bieber's stand-offish monolith. Their Facebook stats show a similar story.
Bieber has over 56 million likes but only 243, 589 are active, Gaga has 58 million but with well over a million regularly engaging. Her new album Artpop promises to be the first album which is truly interactive. It will come with its own app which she describes as 'a musical and visual engineering system that combines music, art, fashion and technology, and a way to share in 'the adrenaline of fame.' Sounds like a load of old cobblers to me but you have to hand it to Gaga for making her fans feel part of the experience. She has built a loyal following through making them feel valued. Many businesses could learn from her terms of engagement, most of all, Bieber Inc. His fans usually have the privilege of waiting for 2 hours for him to come out and perform and then have to miss the encore in order to get the last train home. That's no way to treat the people who are keeping your business afloat. Any business that wants true social media success needs to stop Beliebing and go a little Gaga.
After the Dispatches programme last week concerning fake fans, I decided to run a little test on Bieber's extended harem - Interesting web tool StatusPeople allows you to run a check on any Twitter account - It takes a sample of data and assesses the validity of the account's followers. Justin Bieber doesn't fare too well. Only one quarter of his fans appear to be genuine.
Bieber and Gaga have been running a race to reign Twitter supreme and regularly overtake each other. Both camps can easily claim that it is their legions of fans who are buying the fake followers in an attempt to help their idols achieve pole position. That is probably partly true but with the numbers involved there has to be a fair deal of management manipulation too. In fact most top recording artists appear to have their millions of followers bolstered by dubious accounts but can any of them back up these big numbers? Back to Bieber.
Little Justin has never had a number one single in the UK or US and his last album Believe is yet to reach 2.5 millions sales worldwide more than one year after release - not such a great performance for the world's new pop Messiah with a supposed 49 million disciples.
Neo-Madonna, Lady Gaga has a similar number of fake followers:
Yet, in contrast, Gaga regularly hits the top spot worldwide and her last album has sold five times as many as Bieber's.
Just a little investigation and it's easy to see why. It's down to basics. Haus of Gaga have a better business model. As discussed in my last blog, social media is not about numbers but engagement. Gaga regularly interacts with her fans, her Little Monsters. Using her own website and linking to Twitter and Facebook, Gaga encourages the creativity of her fans and features their input. She is an all-inclusive polymath to Bieber's stand-offish monolith. Their Facebook stats show a similar story.
Bieber has over 56 million likes but only 243, 589 are active, Gaga has 58 million but with well over a million regularly engaging. Her new album Artpop promises to be the first album which is truly interactive. It will come with its own app which she describes as 'a musical and visual engineering system that combines music, art, fashion and technology, and a way to share in 'the adrenaline of fame.' Sounds like a load of old cobblers to me but you have to hand it to Gaga for making her fans feel part of the experience. She has built a loyal following through making them feel valued. Many businesses could learn from her terms of engagement, most of all, Bieber Inc. His fans usually have the privilege of waiting for 2 hours for him to come out and perform and then have to miss the encore in order to get the last train home. That's no way to treat the people who are keeping your business afloat. Any business that wants true social media success needs to stop Beliebing and go a little Gaga.
Thursday, 8 August 2013
Build It and They Will Come.
Our society has become increasingly fake. Some young girls now have more fake bits than real bits and reality TV comes with a disclaimer announcing that some scenes have been created for 'entertainment purposes'. This doesn't stop them from being popular, plenty of people are happy to invest in a genuine fake - if they are aware of what is going on.
This week's Dispatches on Channel 4 showed how some people were faking followers on Twitter and Facebook. For a small payment, a man in Bangladesh can get his team of clickers to create an illusion of social media success for your online profiles. Some of the Essex and Chelsea girls have been taking advantage of this, they're artificially inflating their followings as well as their appendages. But so what? It's all part of their game and who are they really hurting? It's just an extension of playground popularity, a bit of self-promotion in the blurred world of fact and fiction.
Businesses are also adopting this approach and it has divided opinion. Is this a harmless bit of advertising or is it deliberately misleading?
We place an importance on big numbers, if you have 50,000 'likes' on your Facebook page, you appear established and trustworthy. Your brand has integrity. It says a huge amount of people have liked your product enough to seek you out and make contact. A brilliant endorsement. From a new customer point of view, if you were booking a holiday and saw that one travel agency had 100,000 likes and the other had 465, you'd be more inclined to go with the higher number as you are in a larger pool of satisfied holidaymakers.
So your fruitful page has grabbed the consumers' attention but upon further investigation, the page picked appears barren.
Fake followers do not engage with your page. They will never comment or share because they just don't care - let me remind you - they are not real people. It's very clear, if your Facebook page is all 'likes' and no interaction, that your popularity has been bought. If you have 500 fans and 20 of them comment a day, that's a healthy percentage of engagement. If you inflate your followers to 50,000 - you will still only have 20 commenting a day - that's a terrible response rate. It will also become clear to these 20 people that your brand provokes little involvement and they too will tail off.
Ultimately, the only people a brand is misleading is themselves. Social Media is not about numbers, it's about interaction. Brands have to work hard, they have to make their customers feel valued. It's much easier to do this if the people come to you. They have 'liked' your page because they like what you do. That's how it works, folks. If you want 'likes', be likeable - Simple.
There is also this misnomer that social media is immediate, that things have to happen quickly. Allow your social media relationships to develop slowly. Much better to build up a fanbase over time with genuine content and interaction. You need to take time to evaluate your postings, to see which ones work, which ones provoked a response, which blog entries gained the most audience. If you are buying a constant stream of fake followers, this is impossible to keep track of. You are losing valuable market research and you will never understand how to make your online presence work for you.
Social media is just an extension of real life. Those Twitter and Facebook accounts that you want to follow you are - let me remind you - actual real people and that's how they should be courted. See your business as a community, don't keep everything business-centric, people like personality. If the grumpy cat pics make you laugh - pass them on. Interact and you will get a response. We are all sociable creatures. If you talk to someone, they will talk back, apart from the stuck-up woman on the train this morning. I didn't realise that men weren't allowed to speak to women in public anymore. Chill out, lady, I'm a poofter not a pervert. Unless you read the bible, in which case I am both of those things.
Your profile is your shop window, if all you have is fake followers, none of them are going to come in and buy anything. Cheating gets you nowhere. A couple of high-profile athletes have learnt that lesson the hard way recently. All their hard work and respect disappeared because of a silly decision for a short-term fix . The same thing can happen in business, if people see that you have a fake following, you will lose credibility and they will lose faith in your brand.
Have confidence in your brand. Believe that it can grow online on its own. Sing its praises, be infectious and you might go viral. If you have a larger workforce, do things that engage them, post hashtag games, jokes and competitions, this way you already have a core of people to share your message. Make it fun using your own original content. It's the only surefire way to social media success. If you're paying a man in Bangladesh $5 to increase your social status, social media is probably not for you. There are no quick fixes. Social media is a reflection of your success, amazing results do not happen without hard work and original creativity. Concentrate on being brilliant, make your brand exceptional and the followers will follow.
Thursday, 1 August 2013
Great Expectations
My little boy, Thomas, is a Directioner (that's a One Direction fan to the uninitiated). I've become familiar with the boys via parental osmosis and have to say that in the grand scheme of boybands they fare pretty well. Staying true to the original blueprint of The Monkees without any attempts to become credible like Another Level (Who? - exactly) they toe the boyband line and their huge international success shows how beautifully they are playing the game. These boys can do no wrong but I feel they have just made their first mistake.
They have called their new single Best Song Ever.
Now, if you're going to call your song Best Song Ever, you better make sure it's pretty darn good. It isn't.
I understand what One Direction are trying to achieve here. It's a fun, cheeky title but they've run the risk of appearing arrogant. You can't self-announce brilliance. Rather like Lady Gaga proclaiming herself a gay icon, it reeks of self-grandeur. You have to wait for the homos to herald you, you can't jump that gun. Likewise you can't call your song, Best Song Ever, you have to record the best song ever and wait for people to recognise its brilliance and then elevate it to classic status. Please see Bohemian Rhapsody, Hotel California and Good Vibrations.
Yet, occasionally someone can pull off the rare feat of a confident title.
When Holly Knight and Mike Chapman wrote a song called The Best, they were more intent on constructing a four-minute pop gem than any cheesy-title-gimmickry. When the song was first serviced to scratchy-voiced Welsh harpy Bonnie Tyler it didn't exactly set the world on fire but one year later when it was picked up by powerhouse pop legend, Tina Turner, it turned into a monumental transatlantic hit. Endless rotation on local radio may have numbed your ears to its brilliance but if you take the time to actively listen to it again you will notice how beautifully-crafted it is.
From its throbbing bass notes establishing the heartbeat of the song through to Tina's frustrated vocals at missing her betrothed, they both build beautifully until they unite in the crescendo that is the unmistakable anthemic chorus. Yes, this is the best song Holly Knight and Mike Chapman have written and the best song that Tina Turner has performed. It's prominence on playlists at weddings and funerals also shows that it has stood the test of time and is undeniably a pop classic. Now here's the simple lesson; You can get away with it if you deliver the goods.
My daughter, Jemima, is a Dickens Head (that's a Charles Dickens fan) and she was very quick to point out to Thomas that artists of true genius and standing can confidently bestow their work with a grand title. She used Dickens' 13th novel as the example. Great Expectations. She generously concluded that if One Direction reached their 13th album then they could give it a confident title. She's not silly.
One Direction's audience has an average age of 8 and those kids can smell a rat. If you hype up a song as the Best Song Ever then you better give them the best song ever. Perhaps the most telling proof in this whole misjudged marketing campaign is in the pudding. After weeks of endless hype and promotion The Best Song Ever entered the charts this week. At number two. So not the best song ever then. Actually 'Number Two' would have been a better title. Coz it stinks.
They have called their new single Best Song Ever.
Now, if you're going to call your song Best Song Ever, you better make sure it's pretty darn good. It isn't.
I understand what One Direction are trying to achieve here. It's a fun, cheeky title but they've run the risk of appearing arrogant. You can't self-announce brilliance. Rather like Lady Gaga proclaiming herself a gay icon, it reeks of self-grandeur. You have to wait for the homos to herald you, you can't jump that gun. Likewise you can't call your song, Best Song Ever, you have to record the best song ever and wait for people to recognise its brilliance and then elevate it to classic status. Please see Bohemian Rhapsody, Hotel California and Good Vibrations.
Yet, occasionally someone can pull off the rare feat of a confident title.
When Holly Knight and Mike Chapman wrote a song called The Best, they were more intent on constructing a four-minute pop gem than any cheesy-title-gimmickry. When the song was first serviced to scratchy-voiced Welsh harpy Bonnie Tyler it didn't exactly set the world on fire but one year later when it was picked up by powerhouse pop legend, Tina Turner, it turned into a monumental transatlantic hit. Endless rotation on local radio may have numbed your ears to its brilliance but if you take the time to actively listen to it again you will notice how beautifully-crafted it is.
From its throbbing bass notes establishing the heartbeat of the song through to Tina's frustrated vocals at missing her betrothed, they both build beautifully until they unite in the crescendo that is the unmistakable anthemic chorus. Yes, this is the best song Holly Knight and Mike Chapman have written and the best song that Tina Turner has performed. It's prominence on playlists at weddings and funerals also shows that it has stood the test of time and is undeniably a pop classic. Now here's the simple lesson; You can get away with it if you deliver the goods.
My daughter, Jemima, is a Dickens Head (that's a Charles Dickens fan) and she was very quick to point out to Thomas that artists of true genius and standing can confidently bestow their work with a grand title. She used Dickens' 13th novel as the example. Great Expectations. She generously concluded that if One Direction reached their 13th album then they could give it a confident title. She's not silly.
One Direction's audience has an average age of 8 and those kids can smell a rat. If you hype up a song as the Best Song Ever then you better give them the best song ever. Perhaps the most telling proof in this whole misjudged marketing campaign is in the pudding. After weeks of endless hype and promotion The Best Song Ever entered the charts this week. At number two. So not the best song ever then. Actually 'Number Two' would have been a better title. Coz it stinks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)