2019 Headliners

[Rose-Colored Boy]

29 minutes ago, Bradders said:

Exactly this. People will continue looking at sales figures etc to back up whether he could or couldn’t headline but that’s not the point. Bradley Walsh sells a fuck load of albums too.

Bradley Walsh's album sold 100,000 to Sam Smith's 12 million, and there's no evidence Glastonbury would ever book Bradley Walsh whereas there's ample evidence they'd book Sam Smith. That comparison is silly lad. Other than his weird awkward personality - which is only a problem if you take it as one - there is literally no reason Sam Smith couldn't headline.

 

22 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

all you need to do now is say how it might be the fault of the wider industry. I'm struggling for LGBTQ, but not for women on a gender basis

It's roughly the same thing though isn't it? There are your outdated social barriers which hold back women in the music industry, and mean that - at least beyond the very top of the pyramid - there are few figures for potentially aspiring female musicians to be supported by and inspired by. And the same thing for LGBTQ musicians - there have been a couple of exceptions but on the whole there is these days a dirth of LGBTQ voices for kids to look up to. It's dominated by boorish lad rock made by c**ts who'd never dream of speaking out about LGBTQ issues. If an LGBTQ growing up today doesn't want to fulfil the stereotype of listening to Lady Gaga and similar, there are next to no voices encouraging them into the industry.

[dentalplan]

i think being gay in pop music is pretty relevant to their success, given that lots of males are packaged as pinups for young girls and females as idols. Where does Sam Smith fall into it? You don’t get many out pop stars succeeding at his level do you? It’s why the likes of Ricky Martin and dude from N*Sync weren’t out until their careers were over.

I don’t think it’s that relevant to Glastonbury (other than maybe why he isn’t a phenomenon like previous pop stars) but idk it’s always impressed me about the dude that he was out before his music was.

Edited October 10, 2017 by dentalplan

[Rose-Colored Boy]

30 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

i think being gay in pop music is pretty relevant to their success, given that lots of males are packaged as pinups for young girls and females as idols. Where does Sam Smith fall into it? You don’t get many out pop stars succeeding at his level do you? It’s why the likes of Ricky Martin and dude from N*Sync weren’t out until their careers were over.

Agree, look at George Michael - probably the biggest pop star in the country in the 80s, then he starts talking about his sexuality and voila his songs get played on the radio a lot less and the press drive him into a meltdown and then eventually he's dead at 53*. I think there's a lot more to it than popstars being discouraged from coming out for commercial reasons, but that's certainly a big part of the problem, and until more people like Sam Smith come along and prove that it needn't be a barrier to massive sales then that problem won't go away in a hurry either.

I'm talking more about the industry as a whole tho. Pop music has never and never will suffer a lack of notable female musicians, it's the genres beyond that where there's a problem, and the gender issues with the industry are in part reliant on people convincing themselves that the barriers to women in the industry don't exist because there are certain genres where women are prominent, without realising that the current situation where 'women have their place' in pop and RnB proves the whole point. In the same sort of way, even if there are a couple of genres where LGBTQs have a certain level of prominence, there is nothing remotely approaching a strong number of LGBTQ voices in rock, metal etc. And even in pop music, as you say, there's not exactly oceans of out LGBTQ singers, and then on top of that it's not like the 'straight' ones are driving home the issue either. The biggest male popster on the planet literally has a song on his latest album about why he refuses to get involved in social issues FFS.

*I realise this is a bit of a simplification and it wasn't as sudden as that but it might as well have been.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

It's roughly the same thing though isn't it? There are your outdated social barriers which hold back women in the music industry, and mean that - at least beyond the very top of the pyramid - there are few figures for potentially aspiring female musicians to be supported by and inspired by. And the same thing for LGBTQ musicians

I get the women thing.

But *is* it the same for LGBTQ? Just saying it is doesn't mean that it is.

21 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

on the whole there is these days a dirth of LGBTQ voices for kids to look up to.

Or alternatively, times have changed and it's not being flaunted &/or commented on as it was...?

It was a big thing for the tabloids in the 80s, was Elton gay or not? Today, no one gives a shit about whether he is or not, and the same for everyone else. Consequentially some will be going under the radar today that wouldn't have done in the past.

 

24 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

It's dominated by boorish lad rock made by c**ts who'd never dream of speaking out about LGBTQ issues.

Hmmm. People speak out about matters that concern them or that they experience.

They don't necessarily take on other people's issues but if they do they've got a whole world of issues to choose from, and where most have greater numbers &/or greater suffering (meaning that LGBTQ issues aren't too likely to be top of their lists).

And in the past there was no one really speaking out within music; coming out, but rarely speaking out (there were of course occasional exceptions, but there's that today too).

31 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

If an LGBTQ growing up today doesn't want to fulfil the stereotype of listening to Lady Gaga and similar, there are next to no voices encouraging them into the industry.

Nothing to discourage, either tho - or at least, nothing beyond the normal gender discouragement (meaning that Ls will be subject to the same discouragement as all other women).

Just because you're not seeing what you've decided you should be seeing doesn't mean you  should be seeing it.

2 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

Agree, look at George Michael - probably the biggest pop star in the country in the 80s, then he starts talking about his sexuality and voila his songs get played on the radio a lot less and the press drive him into a meltdown and then eventually he's dead at 53*.

You're talking 25+ YEARS AGO!!!!! The world has moved on, a lot - an awful lot - on these issues in that time. The tories legalised gay marriage, as the best example.

I'm not trying to claim there's perfection on every LGBTQ issue today, but i'm still struggling to see how there's discouragement in the specific direction of LGBTQs when the entertainment industry as a whole (and music is little different) has been a more-accepting doorway in their direction than just about all others.

Meanwhile, for every poor tortured George within music there's a just-as-tortured straight. You don't have to be gay to be dropped like a hot coal by the music biz - and I don't think that particularly happened with George anyway. There were a lot of his own choices that brought about at least some of any 'marginalisation' for radio play, etc.

[Bradders]

1 hour ago, Zac Quinn said:

Bradley Walsh's album sold 100,000 to Sam Smith's 12 million, and there's no evidence Glastonbury would ever book Bradley Walsh whereas there's ample evidence they'd book Sam Smith. That comparison is silly lad. Other than his weird awkward personality - which is only a problem if you take it as one - there is literally no reason Sam Smith couldn't headline.

That wasn’t the crux of my argument, I’d just read he sold a silly amount of albums. His popularity isn’t what’s holding him back, it’s his cultural irrelevance. People don’t talk about him much, he’s not even divisive really, just a standard inoffensive pop singer who happens to have sold a lot of records. The question isn’t why he couldn’t but why would they want him. I don’t think he’s much in demand as a Glastonbury headliner.

[dentalplan]

23 minutes ago, Bradders said:

That wasn’t the crux of my argument, I’d just read he sold a silly amount of albums. His popularity isn’t what’s holding him back, it’s his cultural irrelevance. People don’t talk about him much, he’s not even divisive really, just a standard inoffensive pop singer who happens to have sold a lot of records. The question isn’t why he couldn’t but why would they want him. I don’t think he’s much in demand as a Glastonbury headliner.

Why would they want someone who's not divisive?

There are plenty of rock bands that aren't culturally relevant nor divisive but they don't really get forced to jump through hoops so I don't get why it should differ. I take your argument on board as to why there wouldn't be a push for him to headline like years of people wishing Kendrick or something but if there's a young lad perhaps going onto headlining British stadiums, with enough clout with the youth and the middle aged then I don't see why he shouldn't.

[zahidf]

Times havent changed that much alas

This is what being gay is like for some people: watching the most worthless morally bankrupt people say it's dangerous for kids to know of your existence. And look at Trump in the US!

The music industry is def better, but for some artists, being gay would not help their career still.

[zahidf]

Will the Eavis's get any flak if they rebook openly bigoted Morrisey again i wonder? Or will the Smiths effect give him carte blanche?

 

One to ask next time there is a q and a i feel.

[Bradders]

6 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

Why would they want someone who's not divisive?

There are plenty of rock bands that aren't culturally relevant nor divisive but they don't really get forced to jump through hoops so I don't get why it should differ. I take your argument on board as to why there wouldn't be a push for him to headline like years of people wishing Kendrick or something but if there's a young lad perhaps going onto headlining British stadiums, with enough clout with the youth and the middle aged then I don't see why he shouldn't.

Being divisive at least shows that people care one way or the other. Just because he’s well known and sells records doesn’t mean people particularly want him to play.

It isn’t about genre either. Wouldn’t make the same point about Taylor Swift, for example.

[Steve1000]

Only about 4% of the population is openly gay so 1 in 2 decades is about a fair representation.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

This is what being gay is like for some people: watching the most worthless morally bankrupt people say it's dangerous for kids to know of your existence.

or alternatively, have the morally worthless* make a big thing of something none of those kids are paying attention to.
(* that might be you, as much as it might be Rod Liddle).

 

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

And look at Trump in the US!

I wish you would. Trump has less fake news than you.

 

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

The music industry is def better, but for some artists, being gay would not help their career still.

Being straight doesn't help anyone's career in the music biz (outside of where a sleaze might demand 'favours' for a contract, whatever - which is a different problem).

Playing up to a straight image might do, but no one is forced into that by today's circumstances of the music biz (tho might be because they're not comfortable to come out to wider society - not an issue the music biz can fix or change).

It's not 'help' that's needed, it's no barriers.

[Rose-Colored Boy]

Would go as far as to say Sam Smith is a fairly marmite figure anyway tbh. A fair number of people would have strong feelings either way about him headlining, which is more than can be said for the giant collective shrug of the shoulders some recent headliners have been met with.

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

I get the women thing.

But *is* it the same for LGBTQ? Just saying it is doesn't mean that it is.

Not exactly the same, obviously, there are nuances differentiating the two marginalisations and the debates fuelling them etc. But it's along the same lines.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Zac Quinn

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

or alternatively, have the morally worthless* make a big thing of something none of those kids are paying attention to.
(* that might be you, as much as it might be Rod Liddle).

 

I wish you would. Trump has less fake news than you.

 

Being straight doesn't help anyone's career in the music biz (outside of where a sleaze might demand 'favours' for a contract, whatever - which is a different problem).

Playing up to a straight image might do, but no one is forced into that by today's circumstances of the music biz (tho might be because they're not comfortable to come out to wider society - not an issue the music biz can fix or change).

It's not 'help' that's needed, it's no barriers.

Well depends on the fanbase. Id say being gay in the country, grime or brit pop lad rock scene could be problematic.

 

[dentalplan]

3 minutes ago, Bradders said:

Being divisive at least shows that people care one way or the other. Just because he’s well known and sells records doesn’t mean people particularly want him to play.

It isn’t about genre either. Wouldn’t make the same point about Taylor Swift, for example.

But would you make the same point about inoffensive rock bands? That was more my point.

Anyway I really can't see Emily getting contacted by his peeps or whatever and thinking to herself "Sam Smith is big and all over the radio and charts but fuck is he boring and this festival will not stand for milquetoast mewlers". She'll add him to basket and prepare to hype him up as much as possible to muster that deficit of interest.

[eFestivals]

Just now, Zac Quinn said:

there are different debates fuelling the two different marginalisations. 

so tell me how LGBTQs are marginalised by the music biz...?

I'm not being awkward, I just can't see where it happens specifically in that direction ... unless all people are meant to wear badges to display their sexual preferences?

[Bradders]

14 minutes ago, dentalplan said:

But would you make the same point about inoffensive rock bands? That was more my point.

Anyway I really can't see Emily getting contacted by his peeps or whatever and thinking to herself "Sam Smith is big and all over the radio and charts but fuck is he boring and this festival will not stand for milquetoast mewlers". She'll add him to basket and prepare to hype him up as much as possible to muster that deficit of interest.

I said Muse shouldn’t headline because nobody gave a shit and it was pointless, yeah. They’re established festival headliners though so a safer bet for the Eavis’. They still get shit for booking pop acts, and in the case of Sam Smith I don’t see there being enough of a positive side for them to bother.

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Well depends on the fanbase. Id say being gay in the country, grime or brit pop lad rock scene could be problematic.

i'd say you're displaying your own prejudices as much as you're pointing at other people's, particularly in respect to today's youngsters*.

(* I'm happy to accept there'd be bigger issues in older generations).

There's plenty of people on here who are fans of the "brit pop lad rock scene". I suspect they'd be offended by your hugely inaccurate generalisation.

There's an amount of tossers in all 'scenes', and then there's cultural issues within various cultures. They're not the same things, and they're not applicable to all within either grouping.

If Trump have delivered a similar line as that about (say) Muslims you'd be going mental right now.

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

i'd say you're displaying your own prejudices as much as you're pointing at other people's, particularly in respect to today's youngsters*.

(* I'm happy to accept there'd be bigger issues in older generations).

There's plenty of people on here who are fans of the "brit pop lad rock scene". I suspect they'd be offended by your hugely inaccurate generalisation.

There's an amount of tossers in all 'scenes', and then there's cultural issues within various cultures. They're not the same things, and they're not applicable to all within either grouping.

If Trump have delivered a similar line as that about (say) Muslims you'd be going mental right now.

Ive chosen a few genres were artists have themselves said they had problems being accepted.

i was wrong to say fanbase as a generalisation thouch, that was wrong of me. it is just elements of the fanbase ( and which attitude is dying out hopefully so it becomes a minority)

[ghostdancer1]

27 minutes ago, Zac Quinn said:

Would go as far as to say Sam Smith is a fairly marmite figure anyway tbh. A fair number of people would have strong feelings either way about him headlining, which is more than can be said for the giant collective shrug of the shoulders some recent headliners have been met with.

 

he'd be a marmite choice for Glastonbury headliner.

he's not a marmite figure whatsoever IMO. most people seem completely indifferent to him due to his bland as fuck music and his lack of personality.

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Ive chosen a few genres were artists have themselves said they had problems being accepted.

much more to do with the cultures those genres primarily exist within than attached to the genre itself, I'd say.

But whatever, I've seen you go mental at comments that have used the same basis as you have here.

[Steve1000]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

much more to do with the cultures those genres primarily exist within than attached to the genre itself, I'd say.

If these cultures cultural hero came out as gay they'd possibly become more accepting, I think

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Steve1000 said:

If these cultures cultural hero came out as gay they'd possibly become more accepting, I think

It would probably make a step in the right direction, but steps are happening anyway.

What's unlikely to happen is the big-leap-in-one-go. Cultural changes take time to work thru, as no one wakes up one day and says "from now on I'm OK with homosexuality".

(and unfortunately, trying to push cultural change too fast tends to cause the opposite reaction to the one that's wanted - so while it would be good if things moved faster, it doesn't necessarily mean things can move faster).

But anyway, the music biz has been well ahead of the curve on sexuality as a generalisation, so while there's still some darker corners I'd say overall it's one of the few areas of society where there isn't a negative issue for being LGBTQ. It's even a place where it can be used to a person's advantage if they're so inclined (Boy George as an easy example - and that was decades ago).

[jyoung]

Corrrrrr Sam Smith? Surely not. Lads not even tying Adele or Ed Sheeran's shoe laces let alone in the same bracket and I'm not assed about any of them. Can't see that one happening.

[Steve1000]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

It would probably make a step in the right direction, but steps are happening anyway.

What's unlikely to happen is the big-leap-in-one-go. Cultural changes take time to work thru, as no one wakes up one day and says "from now on I'm OK with homosexuality".

(and unfortunately, trying to push cultural change too fast tends to cause the opposite reaction to the one that's wanted - so while it would be good if things moved faster, it doesn't necessarily mean things can move faster).

But anyway, the music biz has been well ahead of the curve on sexuality as a generalisation, so while there's still some darker corners I'd say overall it's one of the few areas of society where there isn't a negative issue for being LGBTQ. It's even a place where it can be used to a person's advantage if they're so inclined (Boy George as an easy example - and that was decades ago).

May not convert outright homophobes, but say if LG came out, people who otherwise wouldn't give a shit might start taking an interest in gay rights and speaking out for the LGBT community, and may just reduce general pisstaking and the obsession with masculinity etc

[Rose-Colored Boy]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

so tell me how LGBTQs are marginalised by the music biz...?

I'm not being awkward, I just can't see where it happens specifically in that direction ... unless all people are meant to wear badges to display their sexual preferences?

there was some survey out a couple of years ago where ~50% of LGBs in the entertainment industry thought that CEOs thought 'out' people were less marketable. even if that's not true, when itt's a perception that exists, it's going to discourage sexual minorities from wanting to work in the industry. there are also things like that Macklemore song from a few years ago which basically went 'okay this is a song about marriage equality but DON'T WORRY I'M NOT ACTUALLY GAY PLEASE DON'T STOP BUYING MY RECORDS'. it may not be as bad as it once was - and thank fuck for that - but it is nevertheless incredibly obvious what still goes on behind the scenes when you actually pay attention.

and then you come back to my actual point - there are next to no out performers in pop music let alone other genres. it still makes headlines in rock communities when there's a band member who comes out, e.g. Laura from Against Me, and that wouldn't be the case if the music industry was as tolerant as it's nice to think it is. so it'd be a progressive moment if an out solo singer were to headline Glastonbury in terms of kids watching, even if I agree that there shouldn't be positive discrimination meaning that's a reason why he's booked etc etc.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Zac Quinn