Next Sunday Bruce Springsteen will perform during halftime at the Super Bowl.  Fans will fawn, the press will recite hosannas, the new album’s sales will spike and tickets will fly.  But will it be a success?

Back in ’75, when Bruce appeared simultaneously on the covers of both "Time" and "Newsweek", it was seen as a disaster. Bruised by the perception of overhype, Springsteen retreated and didn’t release another album until three years later.  The dark, brooding "Darkness At The Edge Of Town", which many consider his best.  "Darkness" may not have contained "Born To Run", it certainly didn’t feature "Hungry Heart", but Bruce went back on the road and won fans over one by one, via his live shows.  There was an intimate connection between Springsteen and his fans, that bonded them to him.  Bruce became an icon.  It took the mainstream another half decade to realize it, with "Born In The U.S.A.", but in the world of rock, Bruce was a God, if not THE God.  And isn’t that all that matters?

Somehow we’ve equated ubiquity with success.  Sure, I can understand wanting enough fans and fame to pay your bills and give up your day job, but if you’re always swinging for the fences, playing to the press and the lowest common denominator, does this increase your cred, even your bank account on a long term basis?

Bruce has got a new album.  It’s been available online for weeks.  It sounds terrible.

Literally.  By time it’s been compressed for radio and squeezed down further as files it bounces right off of you.  It sounds lousy on satellite radio.  It doesn’t sound like music.  You’d think the Boss would take a stand.  If Tom Petty releases an audiophile EQ’ed CD, can’t Bruce?

No.  Because Bruce is so busy playing in the stadium, so worried about money, that music has become secondary.

This is a problem facing all recording artists, sound quality.  But we usually count on the leaders to break ground.  But not Springsteen.

Speaking of breaking ground, I’d like to tell you "Working On A Dream" tests limits, that it’s a new Bruce.  But it’s Bob Dylan that does that.  This new album sounds just like the same old guy.  With the big band.  It does not demand listening.

And then there’s the press.  Mostly fawning.  I was reading an article by the editor of the "Guardian" in the "New York Review Of Books".  He spoke of the press’ responsibility.  I can understand the financial community missing the mortgage crisis, but where were the writers?

Sucking at the tit.  Trying to become famous themselves.  Kissing the asses of the players.  Like Maria Bartiromo, flying on Citigroup’s private jet.  The journalists are just like Springsteen.  More concerned with the trappings than the essence.  They need to write good things about the Boss so they can be friends with him.  And his management.  So they can get perks.

The only negative review I’ve read is by the usually sunny Ann Powers in the "Los Angeles Times"

"Working on a Dream"

She said "Working On A Dream" was an album of singles in an era where no one has a hit single.  Funny how she knows the truth and Bruce doesn’t.  If you can’t have a hit single, isn’t now the time to make a statement?

And what kind of statement is selling in Wal-Mart?  My company paid me a lot of money so they can do whatever they want to make their money back?  What’s next, commercial endorsements?

But this is not really about the Boss.  This is about us.  Our culture.  If something generates revenue, one can’t say anything negative about it.  You can’t criticize "Paul Blart: Mall Cop", it was number one two weeks in a row!

But weren’t musicians supposed to be about more than money?  Didn’t they claim dollars didn’t keep you warm at night?  Who is spewing these falsehoods into their ears, making them scamp for every last buck?

Their handlers.  Their labels, managers and agents.  Used to be they got into the industry in order to be closer to the music.  Now they’re in it for the money.  They saw Tommy Mottola make all that cash, they want theirs too.  They want that rich and famous lifestyle.

So, just like with the financial crisis, we’ve got a business heading straight for a cliff and no one will blow the whistle.  BECAUSE EVERYBODY’S MAKING TOO MUCH FUCKING MONEY!

But "Working On A Dream" won’t even sell two million copies in the U.S.  And everybody who goes to the gig wants to hear the old tunes.  Just go and see.  Try visiting a bathroom while Bruce plays a new number, you’ll have to join the queue.

Used to be our musicians were leaders.  Now they’re sheep.  And we’re the poorer for it.

I was reading in "Advertising Age" that SNL parodied the "Whopper Virgins" commercial.

I’ve never seen it.  Not the original, not the comedic remake.  I could search them out on the Web, but that wasn’t why I was reading this "Advertising Age" article.  What had me Googling was an essay by Scott Perry, in his "New Music Tipsheet", raving about the agency’s creativity.

You can read about Crispin Porter & Bogusky’s exploits here:

Agency of the Year: Crispin Porter & Bogusky

But I never got past that SNL reference.  My neurons were firing.  I don’t watch SNL.  To say it’s sophomoric would be charitable.  And for those that rave about its parodies…  I don’t even watch them.  But I DID watch Tina Fey’s Sarah Palin takes.  Why?

Tina Fey first crossed my consciousness in the early part of this decade.  Maybe 2002, possibly earlier.  I pick that date because I just did a little research and found that’s when I wrote about her Hugh Hefner joke.  That’s what convinced me.

I’ll reprint it below.  I was looking for a YouTube clip, but the copyright police are making sure no violations are transpiring.  Keep your assets locked up, that’s the way to make money!  Worked for the music business, right?

This one joke was so good that I had to tell everybody I knew about it.  Sure, it was funny, but it was more than that.  You’ve got this girl (yes, I know we’re supposed to call them "women", but you call us "boys" and she looked GIRLISH!), who you might ask about the math homework but would never think of in a sexual way, talking trash, in the process skewering both Hugh Hefner and her sister females.  She was like Michael Jordan going to the hoop.  To watch her slice and dice was a thing of beauty.

Now I was a fan.  I recorded SNL every week just to fast-forward to Ms. Fey’s segment.  When she ultimately moved on, I continued to record, but then stopped, realizing it wasn’t about the segment, but her.  She was brilliant.

Tina got her own show, "30 Rock".  I watched an episode online.  It was too safe.  It didn’t have the edge of that Hefner joke.  The "cognoscenti" said it was great, but no one was watching.  Could it be that the show just wasn’t that good?

But then came the Sarah Palin impersonation…

First, Tina Fey was lucky that Sarah Palin was a dead ringer.  If the nominee was Hillary Clinton, or a  male, she’d have been shit out of luck.   And with this facial similarity, Ms. Fey used all the chops she’d honed for the better part of a decade to hit one SO far over the wall that the entire country tuned in.  And continued to tune in to watch her skewer the VP nominee.

It became a Web phenomenon.  Viewed by many more people than watched the show.  The "cognoscenti" said it was about SNL, but it wasn’t.  It was about Tina Fey, her time had come.

I liked the Palin parodies.  But not as much as the Hefner joke.  Once upon a time, she was mine.  This girl who could run with the boys, and beat them.  Now she was everybody’s.  But that was fine with me.  Because she DESERVED IT!

Kind of like Yes.  I had their first two albums before anybody had heard of them.  When they broke through on their fourth, I was proud.  Even though I liked the first record best.  This is the way it used to be in music.  You found an act and owned it.  You told everybody you knew about it.  And by time they finally broke through, you were happy.  And sometimes, burned out.  But you didn’t hate the act.  You could never hate the act.

Today, you become a fan of an act and then the label is so busy reaching every last customer that you hate the band before they’re even through working the first album.

And there’s no development.  Tina Fey could not have nailed Sarah Palin if she hadn’t put in all that hard work.  She was READY! As for the other "stars" on SNL…  Not one could have done the VP nominee justice.  They’re journeymen at best.  Whereas Tina Fey is a star.

Stars are not hatched overnight.  They’re developed, they grow.  But in the music business, everybody’s an instant supernova. But the public isn’t buying it.  People don’t want to see these wannabes.  They want to go see the acts that have proven themselves again and again, who they believe can truly play.

It takes years to get it right.  Which is why Death Cab For Cutie does great business and the "American Idol" winners appear in plays, if they’re lucky.  As for Ms. Clarkson…  If she truly had fans, if she truly had a career, her last album wouldn’t have stiffed. Fans support your every endeavor.  Kelly is only as good as her last hit.  It’s too much about the hits and not the acts.

As for the acts you love who can’t sing…  Or who can play but can’t write memorable material…  They’re like those indecipherable cast members on SNL.  You may like them, but the rest of us are not paying attention, they’re not quite good enough.

You’ve got to be great.  And greatness doesn’t happen overnight.  It doesn’t mean you’ve got to develop in public, although it helps, it just means you’ve got to focus on writing, singing and playing more than your look.

As for Whoppers…  Crispin Porter & Bogusky can always get a new client.  Just like a label can always get a new act.  But if you’re the burger, if you’re the talent, every decision is critical.  It’s your reputation, your career on the line.  If you’re willing to do anything to make it, you’re doing too much.  You’ve got to learn how to say no.

_____________________________________

The joke:

"Tonight, Playboy founder Hugh Hefner will celebrate his 75th birthday. At Hefner’s side will be his seven girlfriends – Stephanie, Tiffany, Regina, Cathy, Kimberly, Buffy and, of course, Tina. Because wherever two or more whores are gathered, there’s always a Tina.

Now, when I first saw these women, I thought the same thing we all did – what has happened to affirmative action in this country? Hefner’s dating seven blonde, white women – not a blonde pubic hair among them, might I add. Not a pubic hair among them. Come on, though – seven blondes? There’s not a hot Asian woman you can throw in there? A light-skinned black woman? A deaf brunette? Something? Where’s the diversity? When are we going to have a Hefner harem that looks like America? Am I really to believe that these women, each of them, offers you something unique? Let’s go over them, if you will…

This one is 19, okay. Two months ago she was working at Dairy Queen, now she goes clubbing every night with Bill Maher and Don Adams. Is she better off? It’s hard to say!

This one…this one isn’t even trying. I’m actually very disappointed in this one. What is that, a man’s shirt? You are the weakest link – goodbye!

This one doesn’t even have a name anymore.. she’s just ‘Girl.’ She’s basically just there because she knows CPR.

This one is always next to him, always holding his hand. (in Chinese accent) ‘She a numba one girlfriend!’

At 28, Tina is the oldest and has a two-year-old son. That must be a wonderful way to grow up, playing Fetch the Ashtray with James Caan in the Grotto, while your mom’s upstairs praying for the Viagra to wear off so she can get you to the orthodontist on time. Fantastic.

These two…(points to next two girlfriends)…these two right here, these two are like this…(crosses fingers) But sometimes they’re like this…(squeezes fingers)

And this one, clearly, this one is willing to do something the others will not do. Whatever the filthiest thing you can think of — it’s a little worse than that, and she’ll let you photograph her doing it. Gotta be the reason she’s there.

But you know what? You can’t condemn these women, because at least they work together, they support each other, and how many women can say that, right?

And these women aren’t doing it for the money. They’re doing it because they were molested by a family friend.

I salute you, Hefner ladies. You are making it work! Back to you Jimmy!"

Can Fox News Survive?

I’m not talking about Rachel Maddow and I’m not talking about Obama.  I’m speaking of the dreaded Internet, which has eviscerated the music business to the point where even Interscope is laying off staffers.

CNN.com rules online news.  And that’s a significant sphere.  By 3:30 on Tuesday, CNN.com had served 21.3 MILLION streams.  Far eclipsing the 5.3 million streams served up on Election Day. According to AdAge, 40 million unique visitors watched online versus 37.8 million who watched the inauguration on TV.

Can you see a trend?  Just like the one that occurred in the music business in the last decade?

I’m waiting for those TV ads.  Telling people to turn off their computers, to continue to pay for cable, not to access their media online.  Those thieves ruining the business model…  Americans must pay exorbitant rates for cable television, the networks depend on it!

Sure, cable has a foothold in Internet access, but even that is threatened.  Verizon Wireless has EV-DO on every tower in New England, and if you don’t know what this technology is, you’re probably still using a RAZR.  In other words, last fall in Vermont I didn’t have to worry about lack of cable Internet access or Wi-Fi, I just employed my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry!  And not only got my e-mail, but surfed the Web at high speed!

CNN.com triumphed on Tuesday.  The site had 11 million unique viewers.  MSNBC was a close second with 10 million.  Then came Yahoo with a bit over 9.  Fox had 4, AOL 3.95 and the "New York Times" 2.4.

There’s so much to learn here!  Fox did better than usual, because it was a special event.  AOL normally does better, because people go to that site to check their e-mail.  But, is this another nail in the coffin for Steve Case’s old service?

Newspapers, online for eons, still don’t get it.  That you’ve got to have video along with words.  People don’t think of going to the "Times" for breaking video news.  Nor the Tribune papers or the "Washington Post".  Maybe newspapers are truly dying, because they just can’t adjust that fast.  Not only are they losing classified ads to Craigslist.org, they don’t seem to be able to deliver what the public wants online.

The record business is still trying to claw the public into the past.  Wants people to pay exorbitant amounts for very little music.  And their dollar (now more!) per track offering is a solution geared to 2003, not 2009.  You can’t rest on your laurels.  To survive in the digital age you must be ONE STEP AHEAD of the curve.  Giving people what they don’t even know they want.  So when it comes to watching the inauguration, people don’t even think of staying home in front of the TV, but know they can watch online, at work, because they’ve seen all those other little, maybe irrelevant, news clips on your site already.

Train people to come to you.  Don’t yell for them to come back.

Facebook/MySpace

What happens when a major media company takes over the flavor of the moment.  No different from Time Warner buying AOL.

These sites are stored on servers.  Which can be wiped clean and covered over with the creation of a new company overnight.  What are you buying here?  Temporary eyeballs?

Sure, MySpace was a better Friendster.  But that’s like saying a Tesla is a better DeLorean.  Is the Tesla the electric car of the future?  Turns out the company is having a problem raising cash.

MySpace allowed people to hook up.  Literally.  Never underestimate the power of sex.  But the company didn’t make it easy.  The interface was slow, buggy and cluttered.  They tell me you can hear the history of recorded music on the site now.  Could be true, but I can’t FIND IT!

Then comes Facebook.  Which is really no different from an Apple product.  The iPod wasn’t the first MP3 player, just the best!  It worked!

We love efficiency.  Which is why the wii is burgeoning and the PS3 is dying.  Utilizing my PS3 is like launching the Space Shuttle, without a manual.  I’m stunned they can even sell a product like this. Then again, Stringer is steering Sony into the cesspool.

However, Facebook suffers from being run by Mark Zuckerberg, an anti-social brain looking to monetize at all costs.

Can social media ever be properly monetized?  Maybe not.  But people want to connect.  And right now, Facebook is the place.  In case you missed it, as of November, Facebook had 200 million unique users to MySpace’s 100 million.  Sure, MySpace is holding its own in the U.S., but it’s a worldwide business.

In other words, MySpace, if not completely toast, could soon be an also-ran.  Actually, usually only one site survives online.  There’s one Amazon.  One iTunes Store.  There might be only one social networking site.  You want to go where everybody else is.

How did Fox fuck up so bad?

By concentrating on money first and foremost.  You’ve got to have soul, then comes the money.

If the money comes at all.

Apple

Would be laughing hysterically if their leader weren’t so ill.

Even so…

While Facebook is figuring out how to make money, Apple has created a whole ecosystem around its iPhone, known as the App Store.  The iPhone is becoming the portable gaming platform of choice. Even if the Palm Pre survives Apple’s legal challenges, that doesn’t mean developers will write programs for it, and that people will download them in droves.  There’s an advantage to being first. Despite Roger McNamee’s Kanye West-type histrionics, there’s a distinct advantage to having a functioning device in the marketplace two years ahead of your competitor.  We’ve learned that not every OS can survive.  Otherwise, people would be computing using Gassee’s Be.

So the iPhone is great business.  Not only for voice, but games, services, etc.  And, the iPod Touch can employ almost all of these advantages.  Meaning that Apple is no longer dependent on the music business to sell its hand-held devices.

But more fascinating is the computer business.  Pundits said that Apple’s products were overpriced and the line was absent a netbook.

But Apple exceeded their projections.  In a nation where even Microsoft fires people, Apple had a stellar quarter.  It’s like the recession doesn’t exist in Cupertino.

But the great quarter has been built upon ten years of hard work.  Apple stands for innovation and quality.  People switching to Mac today may have been thinking about it for years.  Mac is not flavor of the month, it’s established.  And users know that a computer is often used for hours a day.  They’re willing to pay more for something that won’t break down, that they can rely on.  Which is the same reason that the Yugo failed in America and even now, it’s hard for car companies to sell their smallest, least equipped automobiles.

In other words, price is something, but it’s not EVERYTHING!  People will pay more if they believe they’re getting a quality product.

No one believes the new acts being promoted by the music industry are lasting quality products. Usually, they’re here today and gone tomorrow.  You don’t even have to pay attention to their quality, they’re already gone.  How can we get people to pay attention to acts, revere acts, the same way Steve Jobs gets casual computer users to watch his keynote addresses?

There must be honesty.  And trust.  And value.

Not sizzle and artifice.

The music business focuses on explosions.  Arena shows are spectaculars.  They’re like all those unusable features in Vista, or the craplets loaded on to a Dell machine.  The purveyor says they’re added value, to the end user, they’re a headache.

If you create quality products and have an honest relationship with the consumer you can profit in this recession.

Sony is closing plants.  Apple outsources production, so they don’t have this burden.  You’ve got see into the future, you’ve got to be nimble.  You can’t be focused solely on the bottom line.  You’ve got to make something people want.

Bob,

I usually sit on the sidelines and eat my popcorn as I enjoy the theater that is you and this wonderful newsletter.  You’re better than most movies and just about any music that’s out there right now for entertainment.  And even when I think you’re being a stick in the mud, you do it so artfully and passionately that it’s ok and I enjoy the performance for its own sake.

But this one has to be answered – with affection and the deepest respect of course.  You start this with the word "Quality" and then you proceed to counsel struggling musicians to contort themselves and what they do to fit the market so that they can "make it in this business".  But here’s the true bottom line: This business of exploiting art and entertainment is built from it’s very inception on creativity and quality, on special things made by special people that touch, inform, elevate, divert, soothe, numb, challenge or sometimes even drive other people enough so that they are drawn to it and want it to be a part of their lives – either for the moment or for a very long time.  When they want it, they sometimes pay for it in one way or another and this special stuff sometimes accrues a value beyond the ephemeral and actual makes money for its creator and for the folks who help to support and market it.  Sometimes it becomes more vaulable than gold and stars are born.

But unless it is especially touching in some way (even if it’s in a juvenile or prurient way), nobody will care and it will end up having no value at all.  Which then goes to your title "Quality".  If a thing lacks quality of some sort, it will not touch anyone.  It will simply be a not so special thing in a world of not so special things.  It will blend in and disappear. But if a work or performance is of high quality and special, then it has at least a shot at becoming valuable to someone – and the person who creates it has a shot at being appreciated and rewarded for it.  If I were talking to "struggling musicians" I would say:

First, be special.  Make something of such high quality that anyone would care.  And that’s not as easy as it sounds.  Just because you can use a sequencer and play an instrument doesn’t make you an artist.  You have to create something that is special – unique and capable of moving others in a meaningful way.  Once you are truly special, truly great at what you do, you may have a chance at finding an audience willing to reward you for your specialness.  More than likely you will not, because special – by definition – belongs to the very few.  But if you do, then someone somewhere might recognize that and show up to help you to take your creativity out to a wider audience.

How do you get recognized in the first place?  Play to people as much as you can.  They will let you know if and when you are truly special because they will either begin to pay you to do this, to be able to be close to you – or they will ignore you.  Play: in your town; at your school; in the next town over; on the web (but that’s a whole other and longer discussion); at parties – anywhere you can.  If you have created something truly special someone will recognize this and the ball will start rolling.

But whatever you do, DO NOT pick a market and try to create for it.  You may decide to do that later in life when you become so good at your craft that you can aim your creativity wherever you wish, even when it doesn’t please you.  But you cannot start there.  No one is born a hack.  Hacks are failed or jaded artists, each and every one.  First you must be able to create for yourself and find the way in which you may be special, and then you have to work on becoming really great at that.  Create from your heart and from your will. Your will is what you use to keep you practicing and trying and trying to get better at what you do.  Your heart is where the inspiration comes from to use that ability to make something really truly special.  But above all DO NOT listen to critics, pundits or "experts" who try to bend you to what is happening now.  By the time you get there, now will be long gone.

Dedicate yourself to quality, to being the very best at what you do and then use that quality to create or be something truly great.  Then you may have a shot at "making it".  But whether you become a star or not, you will have become and will forever be someone very special.  And others will know you for that.

End of lecture.

Thanks

Bob