M.I.A. honda civic ad - SOLD OUT?

It's pretty much common knowledge that a record deal is a forgiveable bank loan - you really have to be selling shitloads of CDs to get rich from your music these days. There's every chance that M.I.A.'s living completely on credit right now, just like every artist I know who's a had a brief taste of major label backing.

Can we really blame young artists for wanting to pick up a few bucks on the side? Do we have to parrot Bill Hicks (and, hey, I love Bill Hicks, but he wasn't always right) every time this kind of thing comes up?

I either forgot some hyphens or added an extra "a". Take your pick.

Thanks for the lesson, dad.

I don't give a shit about people selling out, but yeah, if she's going to trade on an anti-globo-capitalist chic, this is sort of stunningly hypocritical. Make all the money you want, but if you want to spout a bunch of pseudo post-colonial anticonsumerist revolution agit-prop in your lyrics and interviews, you better back that shit up and not take the easy way out.

Who pissed in your cornflakes? I'm just sick of the same old art-versus-commerce memes that surface in these kinds of discussions.

I don't give a shit about people selling out, but yeah, if she's going to trade on an anti-globo-capitalist chic, this is sort of stunningly hypocritical. Make all the money you want, but if you want to spout a bunch of pseudo post-colonial anticonsumerist revolution agit-prop in your lyrics and interviews, you better back that shit up and not take the easy way out.

Y'know, even proponents of pseudo post-colonial anticonsumerist revolution agit-prop need a vehicle to get around town in. Maybe she they comped her a sweet new ride. Maybe she wasn't making enough from touring or CD sales to maintain her current place of residence. Maybe she thought that licensing a track to a car ad might be a nicely subversive gesture, and a way to get her message out to people who wouldn't otherwise hear it. Maybe, just maybe, she's young and uncentred and hasn't quite worked out the correlation between her principles and her actions. Who the fuck knows? Go ask her, I'm not even a fan.

In LONDON? Yeah, you so need a car there.

For some reason I don't think M.I.A. is particularly concerned about appearing disingenuous.

dan totally totally otm here.

Isn't that what Moby thought? ;-)

(also not really a fan fwiw. The mixtape had some fairly incredible moments but I regretted burning it to CDR(!) after I found myself never ever wanting to listen to it barely a month later, and plain hating her incredible crappiness vocally).

Certainly possible. I'm not saying string her up, mind you.

I hope she doesn't get bitten too hard w/r/t this. Despite misgivings I'd kinda like her to stick around & get better.

what would people make of her label mate Dizzee if he had pulled this move?

Rappers in not making own beats ... SHOCKAH?

Yeah, not my point. My point is the beats are the best thing about the album, but no one talks about the producers. She's given all the credit like she did everything or something. Lazy.

Anyway, I have some classes to teach, so later haters.

uhhhh, if you wanna argue authenticity, then most rapper/hip hop artists could be outed as frauds merely because the sample other people's music rather than create their own.

im just saying to vilify her for something that is integral to her genre is kinda dumb.

for me, the issue with MIA is not her "selling out" but rather that honda would choose to fund someone who has ties to terrorism, as i snarkily pointed out previously.

Don't you people like to hear songs you like on commercials? I love the commercial with Kings of Convenience and don't resent them taking the money for the ad. That camera commercial with The Cure song? LOVE IT!

After Nike used Lennon, does anything surprise us anymore?

Maybe she's secretly funding the Tamils with her Honda checks ...

no one finds a clash between the politics of her record and promoting a major global corporation?

Not really, but then I don't have too many illusions about how influential those politics are. I liked Arular (I liked PFT better) but hell, it's a CD, it's packaged entertainment, not the Grundrisse.

most hip-hop ain't sample based anymore. which is why most of it sucks.

true dat, my homey. im just saying that criticizing the essence of the genre is pointless.

nonsense.

nah, not really. not because of a "sell out" thing but because i'd rather have my own associations with a song then have them forced on me, thanks.

also: i cant believe im arguing for a car company to be ethical.

again, honda's better than a lot of 'em!

xpost - yeah maria, tho i think my point was that samplin' aint the "essence of the genre" any more, but whatever, no worries.

im just saying to vilify her for something that is integral to her genre is kinda dumb.

Who taught you how to read? When did I say anything close to this? I wanted to make clear I'm NOT taking some art vs. commerce position.

I'm also against an arbitrary entertainment vs political dichotomy as well. If you're cynical, fine, don't waste your time mischaracterizing my arguments. I just don't think "artists" (for lack of a better word) should capitalize on a serious issue (and if you think no one cares about reforming the abuses of capitalism, you are wrong) and get a free pass when they take the easy way out. You act as if she has no choice in the matter! She has power to do things other than pick up paychecks like everyone else, but she doesn't actually care. Forgive me for being a bit put off!

Introduction to Popular Culture, so close enough.

(xpost: Who in their right mind would listen to the a capella of ANY rap????? FFS.)

For someone who isn't a stupid art vs commerce college kid, you sure have bought the ideology - hook, line & sinker.

You started it, teacher boy.

the new beetle campaign is awful.

I see your point now; I was thinking more in terms of listening to a capellas as an end listener, not as a remixer or producer. Even so, "Bucky Done Gun" seems like an odd choice to me because it feels so completely tied to that beat; I can't imagine that working with anything else. Conversely, "Sunshowers" was slammin' with the "Push It" beat and I could see that working really well with something like Blame's "Music Takes You".

DUDE YOU SHOULD TOTALLY CHECK OUT THE ZOO THEY HAVE THESE TURTLES THAT WOULD SOOOO LIKE TOTALLY WHIZZ RIGHT PAST YOU DUDE

I didn't like Mogwai's "Summer" on a Levi's ad because the ad sucked. I liked Autechre's "Clipper" on a New Beetle ad because the ad was sweet. Commercials as art.

Why does everyone have to say yes? Was there ever a moment when the Shins were offered a huge check to have their song in a McDonald's ad where they stopped and went "well, you know, McDonald's is pretty much the textbook definition of an evil corporation whose practices have made this world a worse place. Do we want to allow them to use our song to help sell their product?" Maybe not, but maybe they did, and maybe were able to justify the decision to themselves by saying they'd use the money to do something good, etc. We don't know. But it warrants discussion - why should they get a free pass? It's a complicated, weird decision that they made, and speculation is to be expected, even if the topic is seen as played out.

In the M.I.A. example, it goes a step further, with the artist having lyrics decrying the practice and then doing it. Does this not justify some legitimate discussion?

When was it agreed upon that everyone is fucked and we should all grab the money? I don't know - I'm 30, but I still have some tiny flicker of some Ian MacKaye type shit in me somewhere, and I hope it doesn't go away.

Actually I think it does, for all my snarkiness above. I also think that MIA is such a good example of a polarizing artist this year that trying to actually GET that discussion going will be a bit hard -- that the positions people (generally) agreed upon re: her lyrics and approach and how they should be interpreted are probably not going to budge all that much.

who gives a fucking fucking fuck fucking

i like hearing good music on adverts cos im like "oh good an adevert with good music as oppsoed to shit music". so mia exhorted the people not to sell out, then did so herself? well whatever. if mia was like, a prime minister, y'know that had some vague claim to requiring some sort of moral integrity, as opposed to beign a pop star, i might give a shit, but i probably wouldnt anyway.

The Shins received the offer from McDonald's, didn't take it seriously, doubled the price McDonald's had offered and sent it back. They were surprised that the company took them up on it. Keep in mind this was before their record sales were doing so well, and the band had been around for about 10 years.

Also keep in mind that they may or may not agree with your puritanical assessment of the company.

I think I've identified the problem...

(On a more serious note, why does an artist's persona have to match up with their real-life values? Why did authenticity become the most important value a musician can possess? Whatever happened to accessibility, narrative prowess, musical skill, rhythmic intensity, etc etc etc? Why does none of that seem to count if the musician "doesn't really mean it, man what a sellout, never trusting him/her again"? It seems to me that your moral code shouldn't be defined by the artists you like but maybe that's just cynical crazy talk.)

On a more serious note, why does an artist's persona have to match up with their real-life values?

they don't necessarily have to, at all. i'd argue, however, that when an artist injects what they purport to be their real-life values into their art, that's when there's a difference. no one really cares if an artist who doesn't espouse any serious moral values sells anything to anybody. clearly the difference in this discussion is between the types of values artists promote, and whether or not that means anything to their respective audiences. no one really gives a fuck about the rolling stones either selling cars or software and at the same time writing/performing "sweet neo con" because of where they are, who they are, what they've done, etc. when m.i.a. makes a very big deal of her background in not only her interviews/press, but as actual lyrics, i can see why some people would be concerned (though i'm not sure myself that it's not displaced - jay-z does a similar thing, though steeped in less revolutionary rhetoric) (what the hell, probably in m.i.a.'s case it has to do with the rhetoric itself).

Why did authenticity become the most important value a musician can possess?

i don't think that's true, though it definitely has importance to some people.

Whatever happened to accessibility, narrative prowess, musical skill, rhythmic intensity, etc etc etc?

they're still there, afaik.

Why does none of that seem to count if the musician "doesn't really mean it, man what a sellout, never trusting him/her again"? It seems to me that your moral code shouldn't be defined by the artists you like but maybe that's just cynical crazy talk.

i dunno, i'm not sure it's so easy to separate morals from aesthetics.

NEVER SELL OUT

TIGERS 4EVA

why? you'd think that people opposed to a supposedly anti-capitalist agenda (PULL UP THE PEOPLE PULL UP THE POOR, natch) would be, like, into cars.

Yeah, I'd be willing to bet that one of the people criticizing MIA for selling out has probably bought a car at some point in their life (or will at some point in the future). So for me it's T/S: Taking a big chunk of money from Honda or giving a big chunk of money to Honda.

I am not a big fan of MIA, but I like Galang.

i dunno man, i think she really wanted the promo posters for "arular" to just say "PULL UP THE PEOPLE PULL UP THE POOR" without even her name on it. like most people, though, she's probably too confused to have a consistent position

Funny you should say that!

A) she wanted to push a political agenda?
B) she wanted to create controversy?
C) it's an incredibly catchy hook from the first song off her album?
D) she wanted to create a radicalized media image to generate press?
E) she wanted a more mysterious ad campaign?
F) she thought the artwork on Arular is kind of ugly but kept getting overriden?

etc etc etc etc

But yeah, the whole thing about how being contradictory isn't necessarily a bad thing is pretty much what I was trying to say.

Not only that, the fuel is BLOOD FROM DEAD BABIES FROM VIETNAM.

That's not a problem! That's lunch at Del Taco!

Agreed - surely nobody could argue with that.

"Don't Save Us From the Flames" is in an ad?! Isn't he singing about pieces of brain from an exploded head landing in his hair?

Agreed - surely nobody could argue with that.

Well, technically, the problem is that the advertisements would still go out and potentially increase the market for said brand who might just open more sweatshops...

I am 33, but I don't look a day over 32.

Are the Civics gonna become trendy now? Is Spencer Chow going to buy one? :)

'trendsetters make things better / don't sell out to be product-pushers' was the MIA lyric that offended me the most of everything she's done (trendsetters make things better? bitch, please.), so I am very happy that she is not taking her own sickly-dull advice.

I would like more people to buy Arular and therefore I am glad if Galang gets more coverage; plus, car adverts are the best kind of ads! They can be so much more interesting/pretty/etc!

I heard that about the Rolling Stones and Microsoft. I have a feeling every band that sells music to a commercial says that.

(trendsetters make things better? bitch, please.)

I always thought there was an implied comma there: "Trendsetters, make things better/ Don't sell out to product pushers."

It's one thing to say "lyrics are fictional," but really, do you listen to music and not think the singer believes a word of what he or she is saying? Or exhorting other people to do or not do?

I dunno. She's young, and she can evolve and change her mind about things. Like I said, I'm not looking to string her up. But it is weird. I'm not ready to say hypocritical, but weird. If a line like "Don't sell out to product pushers" also appears on her next album, that's hypocritical.

...and renting a song to Honda ain't the same as if it were to Coke or M.C.Donalds.

I don't think Roger Waters actually wanted to put the queers and Jews up against that wall.

I don't think Robert Smith actually shot an Arab in the desert.

I don't think Bjork had a bubblebath with God.

I don't think Christina Amphlett actually touches herself everytime she thinks about her significant other.

I don't think Karl Hyde actually andalusia red yellow red yellow black car (whatever that means).

I think it's weird that she would be so obviously contradictory... Yeah, it's her music, but what's her shtick going to be from here? And it's not like she's just stealing money from Honda. It's not like Honda isn't benefitting from its acquisition. They are going to last way longer than Maya.

What should be in commercials? All-original music, or none at all? I'm lost as to what the horrible thing is here.

Obviously, music first and all that (I like some of her stuff, mostly the production as the rapping gets tired quickly), but it's not like this stuff is totally irrelevant.

Don't you see? You're talking about M.I.A. as product here, as a marketable commodity. We have to "buy into" her having a persona? She's a person, and one that makes all kinds of wacky statements! Maya the person is responsible for explaining whatever the hell her "public persona" says in music, but that doesn't mean it has to all be true. I mean, do friends go up to her and call her M.I.A.? At the end of the day, she's a person who's expressing some of her feelings via music for which she's crafted this pretty colorful public appearance, but I would hope at the end of the day she eats some food and does whatever it is everyone does.

She's not Bono, you know.

Appropriation of rhetoric to make an artistic statement does not automatically equal endorsement of said rhetoric. Like Mike says, she's not Bono.

You don't think she needs to address this? Come on! I don't see why everyone is totally unwilling to talk about this.

Gavin, all sarcasm aside, this is a non-issue to the majority of people here. Once you've made an internationally distributed CD, and you're getting video & radio play, then you're part of Big Business (tm) whether you like it or not. End of story.

On a more personal note, the reason I've been so adamant about the art-versus-commerce debate is that it's all too easy for any one of us to say "Well, if it was *ME* being offered loads of money..." I mean, it's a situation that 99.9% of people will never find themselves in, and no one can tell me that they wouldn't seriously consider it.

I very earnestly hypothesized some reasons for M.I.A. going through with this ad, and, ultimately it's her decision - record company & management notwithstanding - how she handles her career. She may be taken to task for it in the press, and guess what? She may not have an erudite explanation at hand. She may just say "that's none of your goddamned business".

This would also apply to Sleater-Kinney, and any other artist you can name.

-- hstencil (hstenc!...), September 30th, 2005.

I don't think Karl Hyde actually andalusia red yellow red yellow black car (whatever that means).

Yeah, I know, but isn't there a difference between lyrics that say "I do (fill in the blank)" and "You should (or shouldn't) do fill in the blank)?"

I'm not on a witch hunt here; I'm really not. I'm not going to take a torch to my MIA CD; I'm not going to tell other people not to buy it (in fact, I've told more than a few people to buy it). And I buy your point, Dan, that it's one lyric on a whole album. (And it's not from the song used in the commercial, although would you feel differently if it were the same song? Why?) If it's not a problem for you (and most people on this board), OK. Ultimately, it's not a major problem for me either. I'm just surprised that some folks seem incredulous that anyone could think it was a problem.

"well, you know, McDonald's is pretty much the textbook definition of an evil corporation whose practices have made this world a worse place. Do we want to allow them to use our song to help sell their product?"

How is making a lame burger ad where you're "lovin' it" or doing some cheesy Wal-Mart commercial any worse than constantly going on MTV and acting like an idiot? And if you took McDonalds away you'd have millions of people unemployed and millions more looking for new places to get a cheap hot meal. But the fact that you took away jobs and have robbed many people of the only restaurant they can afford to go to is irrelevant to the fact that big business is evil and that the only thing keeping us all from being sold to the highest corporate bidder is the power of indie-rock or some long abandoned Pete Townshend concept album. If only the Long Ryders were here to explain this to the Shins or M.I.A. we could all be spared this conversation!

And why do people still get shocked when rock lyrics and political stances turn out to be little more than posturing sometimes? Did many of you expect her to turn down the life of a pop star to become a suicide bomber or something?

I think I agree with Lex (if he's saying what I think he's saying) in that I think the meaning of this song is pretty ambiguous. Taken at face value it is pretty fucking stupid whether she sells out to Honda or not. But she sounds so particularly apathetic on this song that I always thought it was sort of like a litany of third party ideas and expectations. As in, the lyric should read:

"Trendsetters make things better"/"Don't sell out to the product pushers"

(these two lines are vaguely contradictory anyway - trendsetters almost always are product pushers)

Of course the song doesn't entirely follow this logic, but M.I.A.'s lyrics are mostly so vague that it's probably not wise to expect too much clarity from them

(I do wish she'd stick to fantastical storytelling though a la "Amazon")

Well, one set is written in the first person and the other set is written in the second person.

Then Galang came in and we forgot all about it.

Dan,

How do you always party like it's your birthday?

I'm the same age as you and I think you are *crazy*.

The crunchy girl in the Civic hybrid commercial makes me CRAZY. I LOVE her.

Heineken wanted to use a MIA track on a big ad, and she originally said 'no' because she is a Muslim (yes, Tamils can be muslim you know)

Her label were not very happy and guess what? she changed her mind- great principles.

BUT

then Heineken got the fear because of the current political climate that they would take a lot of flak and ditched the track.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with taking the money, but ONLY if you are honest with yourself and your fans.