Posts
Skinny singer, latte to go
You'd have thought that Thom Yorke, one of the most anti-corporate musicians, would have been the last person to be in the frame for a deal with Starbucks record label. But then, these are complicated times - is it better to be on EMI, a business which is part of the cartel crushing creativity in the music industry, or Starbucks, a business which is chasing independent cafes and coffee shops out of business and turning every bloody street in the developed world into an exact copy of the next street?
After all, Naomi Klein - whose No Logo inspired them in the first place - has said that she enjoys a Starbucks coffee from time to time. It's all very confusing.
3 comments:
Forget it... This false rumour seems to last forever, God help us...
http://www.greenplastic.com/news/archives/2007/03/radiohead_to_si_1.php
Well... Starbucks have only had a record label a fortnight, so not forever.
But more interesting than the rumour is the wider philosophical question: is it better to be on a multinational record label, or throw your lot in with a company that has the power to break the cartel?
Presumably, whichever corporation is ultimately the least unethical? It depends on the criteria you use to judge these things, tho...
(My gut reaction would be to stick with the record company, but only cos near me there used to be a bookshop with 200-odd years of history, and an *awesome* music section. It's a Starbucks now, of course.)
:(
Actually, surely Thom Yorke is in a position to release his stuff independently? If Mick Hucknall can do it, it can't be *that* hard...
Post a Comment
As a general rule, posts will only be deleted if they reek of spam.