NME Awards 2016: What the pop papers say

This week, the NME awards were doled out; this week's print edition of the magazine tries to make sense of them.

The awards are possibly a transitional moment, covering a period where the weekly went free, and took on an editorial direction ever less about music; moving closer to the mainstream. Last year, prizes went to Royal Blood, Foo Fighters, Alex Turner and Kasabian. There was a clear sense of what an NME band sounded like.

This year's winners... well, they're a little different:

Best British Band: The Maccabees
Best International Band: Run The Jewels
Best New Artist: Rat Boy
Best British Solo Artist: Charli XCX
Best International Solo Artist: Taylor Swift
Best Live Band: Wolf Alice
Best Album: What Went Down - Foals
Best Track: Giant Peach - Wolf Alice
Best TV: This Is England '90
Best Film: Beasts Of No Nation
Best Music Film: Blur: New World Towers
Best Music Video: Cheer Up London - Slaves
Best Actor: Idris Elba
Best Actress: Vicky McClure
Best Reissue: Five Years - David Bowie
Best Book - M Train - Patti Smith
Best Festival - Glastonbury
Best Small Festival - End Of The Road
Music Moment Of The Year - The Libertines "secret" Glastonbury set
Best Fan Community - The Libertines
Worst Bad: 5 Seconds Of Summer
Villain Of The Year: Donald Trump
Hero Of The Year: Dave Grohl
Vlogger Of The Year: KSI

(Just in passing, how come actors are split into categories based on gender and solo artists aren't?)

It's the solo artists who stick out - in a month where NME's covers have run through James Bay, Kanye West and Coldplay, Charli and Taylor seem much more in keeping with where the title is heading than Wolf Alice and Foals. They feel like an echo of where the title was before, when it charged an entry fee that few were interested in paying.

This makes for difficulties for the awards, though - remember, these used to be styled the Brats and positioned themselves as an alternative to the Brits. Even before NME became the sort of magazine which would put James Bay on the cover, the distinction was blurred, but if the endeavour survives another twelve months it's likely the NME Awards/Brits relationship will become more like the BAFTAs/Oscars one - the former a lower budget version of the latter, taking place a couple of weeks before, and serving no real purpose other than letting bookies set the odds for the main events.

This year, though, we find ourselves in the awkward position of the magazine having to send a prize designed for rebellious shouty rock upstarts to Taylor Swift. Her reaction:

I got the award in the mail and I gotta be honest with you about this, when you first open up the box this feels a little aggressive.

Yeah. That's the sound of worlds colliding.

Coldplay picked up the Godlike Genius award - I know, I know - and in the accompanying interview, Chris Martin shares his favourite moment of being a popstar. This was playing Michael J Fox's Parkinson Benefit, and getting Fox to join them onstage to recreate the moment from Back To The Future when Marty plays guitar at the 1950s prom.

That's telling. The worst part of the entire Back To The Future trilogy is the point where the invention of the boisterous, brilliant cacophony of rock is taken away from Chuck Berry and reassigned to a pasty-faced white kid from the suburbs. And the peak of Chris Martin's musical career has been recreating the creation myth of a deracinated rock music.

Grammys 2016: Nothing takes the shine off an award like knowing they're voted for by a team who think Ed Sheeran made the best song

The Grammys took place last night - yeah, on a Monday for some reason. I suppose that makes it unlikely that the night would clash with any other awards ceremony, because who holds an awards ceremony on a Monday night?

Taylor Swift's 1989 took best album, a reminder of just how bloody slow the Grammys awards are in the modern world (it came out in October 2014).

Ed Sheeran's Thinking Out Loud was judged to have been the best song of the year, and no amount of crowd-pleasing attempts to balance that out by prizes for Uptown Funk can disguise that prize alone shows Grammy judges don't really like music at all.

Here's all the winners:

Album of the Year

1989, Taylor Swift

Song of the Year

"Thinking Out Loud," Ed Sheeran and Amy Wadge

Record of the Year

"Uptown Funk," Mark Ronson featuring Bruno Mars

Best Rap Album

To Pimp a Butterfly, Kendrick Lamar

Best Country Album

Traveler, Chris Stapleton

Best Musical Theater Album

Hamilton

Best Rap Performance

"Alright," Kendrick Lamar

Best Rap Song

"Alright," Kendrick Lamar

Best Rap/Sung Collaboration

"These Walls," Kendrick Lamar featuring Bilal, Anna Wise, and Thundercat

Best Rock Performance

"Don't Wanna Fight," Alabama Shakes

Best Music Video

"Bad Blood," Taylor Swift featuring Kendrick Lamar

Best New Artist

Meghan Trainor

Producer of the Year, Non-Classical

Jeff Bhasker

Best Country Song

"Girl Crush," Hillary Lindsey, Lori McKenna, and Liz Rose (Little Big Town)

Best Country Solo Performance

"Traveller," Chris Stapleton

Best Country Duo/Group Performance

"Girl Crush," Little Big Town

Best Pop Vocal Album

Taylor Swift, 1989

Best Pop Solo Performance

"Thinking Out Loud," Ed Sheeran

Best Rock Album

Drones, Muse

Best Alternative Album

Sound & Color, Alabama Shakes

Best Rock Performance

"Don't Wanna Fight," Alabama Shakes

Best Rock Song

"Don't Wanna Fight," Alabama Shakes

Best Pop Duo/Group Performance

"Uptown Funk," Mark Ronson featuring Bruno Mars

Best Metal Performance

"Cirice," Ghost

Best Traditional Pop Vocal Album

"The Silver Lining: The Songs of Jerome Kern," Tony Bennett and Bill Charlap

Best Traditional R&B Performance

"Little Ghetto Boy," Lalah Hathaway

Best Dance/Electronic Album

Skrillex and Diplo Present Jack Ü, Skrillex and Diplo

Best Dance Recording

"Where Are Ü Now," Skrillex and Diplo with Justin Bieber

Remixed Recording, Non-Classical

"Uptown Funk (Dave Audé Remix)," Dave Audé (Mark Ronson featuring Bruno Mars)

Best Urban Contemporary Album

Beauty Behind the Madness, the Weeknd

Best Comedy Album

Live at Madison Square Garden, Louis CK

Best R&B Album

Black Messiah, D'Angelo and the Vanguard

Best R&B Song

"Really Love," D'Angelo and Kendra Foster

Best R&B Performance

"Earned It (Fifty Shades of Grey)," the Weeknd

Best Blues Album

Born to Play Guitar, Buddy Guy

Best Folk Album

Béla Fleck and Abigail Washburn, Béla Fleck and Abigail Washburn

Best Reggae Album

Strictly Roots, Morgan Heritage

Best New Age Album

"Grace," Paul Avgerinos

Best Surround Sound Album

"Amused to Death," James Guthrie and Joel Plante (Roger Waters)

Best Score Soundtrack for Visual Media

Birdman, Antonio Sanchez

Best Song Written for Visual Media

"Glory," performed by Common and John Legend

Best Music Film

Amy, Amy Winehouse; Asif Kapadia, video director; James Gay-Rees, video producer

Best Compilation Soundtrack for Visual Media

Glen Campbell: I'll Be Me

Best Spoken Word Album

A Full Life: Reflections at Ninety, Jimmy Carter

Contemporary Instrumental Album

"Sylva," Snarky Puppy and Metropole Orkest

Best Improvised Jazz Solo

"Cherokee," Christian McBride

Best Jazz Vocal Album

"For One to Love," Cécile McLorin Salvant

Best Jazz Instrumental Album

"Past Present," John Scofield

Best Large Jazz Ensemble Album

"The Thompson Fields," Maria Schneider Orchestra

Best Children's Album

"Home," Tim Kubart

Best World Music Album

"Sings," Angelique Kidjo

Best Regional Roots Music Album

"Go Go Juice," Jon Cleary

Best Bluegrass Album

"The Muscle Shoals Recordings," The Steeldrivers

Best Americana Album

"Something More Than Free," Jason Isbell

Best American Roots Song

"24 Frames," Jason Isbell

Best American Roots Performance

"See That My Grave Is Kept Clean," Mavis Staples

Best Latin Pop Album

"A Quien Quiera Escuchar (Deluxe Edition)," Ricky Martin

Best Tropical Latin Album

"Son De Panamá," Rubén Blades with Roberto Delgado and Orchestra


Best Latin Rock, Urban or Alternative Album

TIE: "Hasta la Raíz," Natalia Lafourcade and "Dale," Pitbull

Best Regional Mexican Music Album

"Realidades, Deluxe Edition," Los Tigres Del Norte

Best Roots Gospel Album

"Still Rockin' My Soul," the Fairfield Four

Best Contemporary Christian Album

"This Is Not a Test," Tobymac

Best Gospel Album

"Covered: Alive in Asia [Live] (Deluxe)," Israel & Newbreed

Best Historical Album

"The Basement Tapes Complete: The Bootleg Series Vol. 11," Bob Dylan and the Band

Best Contemporary Christian Music Performance/Song

"Holy Spirit," Francesca Battistelli

Best Engineered Album, Classical

"Ask Your Mama," Leslie Ann Jones, John Kilgore, Nora Kroll-Rosenbaum, and Justin Merrill, engineers; Patricia Sullivan, mastering engineer (George Manahan and San Francisco Ballet Orchestra)

Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical

"Sound & Color," Shawn Everett, engineer; Bob Ludwig, mastering engineer (Alabama Shakes)

Best Producer, Classical

Judith Sherman

Best Album Notes

"Love Has Many Faces: A Quartet, A Ballet, Waiting to Be Danced," Joni Mitchell, (Joni Mitchell)

Best Orchestral Performance

"Shostakovich: Under Stalin's Shadow — Symphony No. 10," Andris Nelsons, conductor (Boston Symphony Orchestra)

Best Opera Recording

"Ravel: L'Enfant Et Les Sortilèges; Shéhérazade," Seiji Ozawa, conductor; Isabel Leonard; Dominic Fyfe, producer (Saito Kinen Orchestra; SKF Matsumoto Chorus and SKF Matsumoto Children's Chorus)

Best Choral Performance

"Beethoven: Missa Solemnis," Bernard Haitink, conductor; Peter Dijkstra, chorus master (Anton Barachovsky, Genia Kühmeier, Elisabeth Kulman, Hanno Müller-Brachmann, and Mark Padmore; Symphonieorchester Des Bayerischen Rundfunks; Chor Des Bayerischen Rundfunks)

Best Chamber Music/Small Ensemble Performance

"Brahms: The Piano Trios," Tanja Tetzlaff, Christian Tetzlaff, and Lars Vogt

Best Classical Instrumental Solo

"Dutilleux: Violin Concerto, L'Arbre Des Songes," Augustin Hadelich; Ludovic Morlot, conductor (Seattle Symphony)

Best Classical Solo Vocal Album

"Joyce & Tony — Live From Wigmore Hall," Joyce DiDonato; Antonio Pappano, accompanist

Best Classical Compendium

"Paulus: Three Places of Enlightenment; Veil of Tears & Grand Concerto," Giancarlo Guerrero, conductor; Tim Handley, producer

Best Contemporary Classical Composition

"Paulus: Prayers & Remembrances," Stephen Paulus, composer (Eric Holtan, True Concord Voices, and Orchestra)

Best Boxed or Limited Edition Package

"The Rise & Fall of Paramount Records, Volume Two (1928-32)," Susan Archie, Dean Blackwood & Jack White (Various Artists)

Best Recording Package

"Still the King: Celebrating the Music of Bob Wills and His Texas Playboys," Sarah Dodds, Shauna Dodds and Dick Reeves (Asleep at the Wheel)

Best Arrangement, Instruments and Vocals

"Sue (Or In a Season of Crime)," Maria Schneider (David Bowie)

Best Arrangement, Instrumental or A Cappella

"Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy," Ben Bram, Mitch Grassi, Scott Hoying, Avi Kaplan, Kirstin Maldonado and Kevin Olusola (Pentatonix)

Best Instrumental Composition

"The Afro Latin Jazz Suite," Arturo O'Farrill (Arturo O'Farrill and the Afro Latin Jazz Orchestra featuring Rudresh Mahanthappa)

That free Rihanna album redux

Last weekend I was in Amsterdam, so this is the first opportunity to react to the question why did Rihanna give her album away for free on Tidal?

To which there are two, interconnected answers:

Number one: because it's effectively patting Taylor Swift on the head and saying 'shush now about streaming sites only making you a tiny, tiny bit richer';

Number two: because when was the last time you even remembered Tidal even existed?

Hats off to her for coming up with an advertising campaign for a dying platform in which she's invested while making it look like she doesn't care about money. It's evil, but stylishly evil.

Annexing a year is a rare Swift misstep

There's a couple of reasons why Taylor Swift trying to own 1989 is disappointing.

First of all: you can't trademark a number. You can't trademark a year. To be fair, Swift wasn't quite trying to claim ownership of that, just 1989 scribbled down, but it's the same thing. Even at his worst, Billy Corgan never tried to command how people might use 1979, even in his favourite font.

Secondly, and what's more strange: Taylor Swift (or Corporate Taylor Swift Inc.) knew 1989 was going to be a big deal; didn't it occur to them that the best time to try and trademark something might be before signing the exclusive special edition deals with Target and launching the product?

In other odd Taylor Swift news, somehow I Knew You Were Trouble appeared on Spotify but credited to Lostprophets. Yeah. Lostprophets. In terms of 'making a prank as uncomfortable as possible' that's up there

Spotify's response was "someone gave us it like that" and a swift (ho-ho) pulling of the track.

Taylor Swift shakes it off, rakes it in

Ever wondered what Taylor Swift takes home from a live appearance? Quite a bit:

One thing that is clear is that the concert appears to have made money for everyone involved.

The show earned $843,947 that will be split between the authority — hence taxpayers — and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The Bucs get half of the profit under the team's stadium agreement with the authority.

Swift's fans bought $40,784 in merchandise during the show. They sipped and gobbled $244,626 in drinks and food at concession stands. The parents of fans and those old enough to drive paid $124,798 in parking.

That's what everyone else made, of course. Swift would have made at least four million dollars by pocketing the full revenue from the tickets - or, at least, the Corporate Taylor Swift.

It's quite a distance from Suede's current run of dates, which - as Mat Osman explained to a fan hoping for US dates - aren't quite as economically viable:

@texalese I doubt it Alese. TBH we're losing money on every show we do this way so we have to keep the tour shortish.

— Mat Osman (@matosman) November 14, 2015

Via @jamesthegill & Hypebot

Gene Simmons doesn't hold with all this modern stuff

Gene Simmons took time out from shouting at clouds to have a little rage at file sharing for killing rock. Let's hear him out, shall we?:

"The next KISS of the next BEATLES or whoever it is is not gonna come along, because there is no infrastructure. Here… Let's play a game. From 1958 until 1988 is thirty years. What have we got? Well, let's see… We have Elvis Presley, THE BEATLES, THE [ROLLING] STONES, Jimi Hendrix… the biggest bands of all time. And then in disco, you had Madonna, Donna Summer… all that. The biggest of all. And then in pop, you had Michael Jackson, THE JACKSON 5… all that stuff… and U2. And in heavy metal, you had METALLICA and IRON MAIDEN and all that stuff. Okay. And Prince and all that… From 1988 until today… give me the new BEATLES and the new STONES. Give me just one. You can't. Rock is dead. And the reason for that? Downloading and filesharing. When you stop charging for things, it becomes worthless. And there's gonna have to be a business model that's gonna have to change.

I suppose it's hard to argue that if you don't charge for something, it becomes worthless in a strict financial sense, but I'd have really liked to have heard from Simmons how filesharing stopped bands generating during the 1990s, before it became a thing. Maybe it's just such an evil force that it travels out in time in all directions.

Or, perhaps, rock started to look tired because people who had made some records ten, twenty, thirty years previously stuck around flogging branded merchandise off their reputation and strangled a lot of the creativity in the scene. What do you think, Gene?

Or, maybe, if you're looking for a 21st Century Madonna, and don't immediately think Beyonce, you're just too far from what's going on. Maybe discounting the whole R&B scene, maybe not thinking Kanye or Jay-Z are as culturally relevant as deep-reaching... maybe the problem is that you don't really recognise what the heirs of Presley look like, Gene.

'Cause there are great bands out there, but there's no support system." He continued: "You know, there's a ten-thousand-hour principle [the principle which holds that 10,000 hours of 'deliberate practice' are needed to become world-class in any field]. There's a book about that. Before THE BEATLES went into the studio to become THE BEATLES, they played clubs for ten thousand hours. That's years. You have to do something for thousands and thousands of hours before you get any good on it.

You're right, Gene, there is a book about the 10,000 hours theory. There's also - far more significantly - a study into it. It's bollocks.

Nowadays, instant gratification means you can hum in your shower, then wind up on 'The X Factor' and you're on television and you get a recording contract. But almost none of these singers who get recording contracts become huge. And that's because the taller the tree, the deeper the root that needs to be in the ground to hold up all that weight. So if you have a tree with no roots [makes falling hand motion]." Simmons added: "I love the new pop singers. I love Taylor Swift and Katy Perry. I've met them both. They're all great and talented… What's gonna happen when you're 40 and 50? Will it still work? That's the test of time."

What's beautiful here is Simmons suddenly realising that he's completely undermined his own argument by remembering Taylor Swift, so decides that she doesn't count as we don't known what she'll be doing in twenty years. Swift has been a jobbing musician for eleven years already, which means she's already been going for a year longer than The Beatles managed. Despite her career having happened entirely post-Napster.

But, still, always interesting to hear from you Gene. Good to know the opinions of the leader in the Branded Rock Merchandise Market.

"I never touched her bottom" claims ex-radio host

Over two years ago, a breakfast show host on Denver's KYGO was accused of touching Taylor Swift's bottom, and was dumped from his job.

Now, just twenty seven short months later, David Mueller - known professionally as Jackson before the incident, and 'that guy fired for touching Swift's arse' afterwards - has filed a lawsuit.

The crux of his case is that it was a case of mistaken identity:

According to the suit, Mueller posed with Swift and his girlfriend, Shannon Melcher.

After some small talk, "Swift suddenly announced it was picture time" and "quickly put her right arm" around Melcher. Mueller jumped into the photo "at the last second."

Swift cordially thanked the couple and they left, the suit said.

After the photograph, Mueller, in the suit, said he met a co-worker who "excitedly told him about his experience meeting Ms. Swift earlier that night."

The co-worker "described and demonstrated how he had put his arms around her, hands on her bottom," according to the filing.

The lawsuit also makes reference to his lifetime ban from Taylor Swift concerts, but it's unclear from reports if he is seeking to have this overturned.

The VMAs happened, and we'd be better off if we try and pretend it didn't

The VMAs - the bit on the calendar when everyone remembers MTV still broadcast - happened yesterday, in a series of events in which pop music finally broke.

Miley Cyrus was on hosting duties, and couldn't decide what to wear. So in the end she wore everything:

Every single one of Miley's VMA stage looks. Which one is your favorite? #VMA #MileyVMAs pic.twitter.com/ThvbZxU3mT

— Miley Cyrus Fashion (@StylishCyrus) August 31, 2015

Seven outfits. Seven outfits, and not one of them worked. The one with the giant Smarties on, clearly, was sold to her by a designer trying to keep a straight face while insisting that he had GaGa on the other line putting in a bid for it. But that was just the worst of a very, very bad bunch.

Somewhere this morning Billy Ray Cyrus is saying "when I said there's no way you're going on stage dressed like that", I wasn't being an overprotective father; I was talking on behalf of Vogue."

It's not just Miley's dresses which had most of America thinking it was time for an intervention, though. She's now got dreads.

Of course, there's no reason why Miley Cyrus can't have dreads - even ones that are so obviously fake that they look like they've recently been used to stop trawlers drifting off to sea - but it came across as a somewhat insensitive thing to do after her recent dis on Nicki:

Miley Cyrus berated Nicki for speaking out on issues that affect black women in the music industry,& is also wearing dreads rn. The audacity

— hot ebony mom (@egbaprincess) August 31, 2015

It shows something of a deaf ear, or poor advice, to spend a chunk of the week telling a black woman she doesn't know how to campaign on behalf of under-represented black women, only to turn up with a head full of shoddy cultural appropriation. It's fair to say it didn't go down well.

And that wasn't the end of the racial insensitivity for the night:

MTV: racism is bad! MTV: allows miley cyrus onstage in dreads, allows rebel wilson to dress up as a cop introducing the hip hop category

— spock kirk (@mrtrohman) August 31, 2015

In case you're not sure that having someone introduce the hip hop awards dressed as a cop making jokes about "injustice" is that much of a dick move, even the Daily Mail noticed.

Kanye was also there. He made reference to that time he was on before and gatecrashed Taylor Swift picking up an award:

He spoke of the aftermath of interrupting Swift lo those many years ago. He bit the hand that was feeding him by saying, "You know how many times MTV ran that footage again, 'cause it got them more ratings?"

It must have been galling that when you tried to make a gallant gesture in order to put the focus firmly on yourself, only for the awards show you're at to make hay from it, eh.

West also used the occasion to announce his plans for the next decade:

"And yes, as you probably could have guessed by this moment, I have decided, in 2020, to run for president."

Cyrus's reaction to this - which came after a break, which means not only did she have time to think of a response, but other people could have, too, was:

“Trump, you had my vote. But now? Kanye West for president!”

Even in jest, to tell Donald Trump you were going to vote for him is deadly. Perhaps there was some metajoke being made about how, if you're going to vote for some guy off a reality TV show, it doesn't matter which one you go for, but somehow, I doubt it.

In happier news, Nicki and Taylor made up their beef. But Nicki wasn't done with Miley:

Minaj thanked her pastor while taking the award for Anaconda, then turned to Cyrus, who was on a nearby stage. “And now back to this bitch that had a lot to say about me the other day in the press – Miley, what’s good?” said Minaj.

Miley was forced to go off script for a moment. Like a pro, she blamed the press:

Cyrus responded to the confrontation, with a brief comment about interview responses being twisted from their intended message. “We’re all in the industry, we all do interviews, and we all know how they manipulate shit,” Cyrus said, before continuing with her script for the night.

Or maybe she didn't, as obviously that was on The Guardian website and you know how the press manipulate shit.

You do wonder, though, why she didn't contact Minaj directly and explain what she really meant when the interview came out, don't you?

In case you've forgotten, there were awards being given out as well, and here's the closest thing to winners in full:

Best Rock Video: Fall Out Boy, "Uma Thurman"

Best Pop Video: Taylor Swift, "Blank Space"

Best Male Video: Mark Ronson featuring Bruno Mars, "Uptown Funk"

Best Hip-Hop Video: Nicki Minaj, "Anaconda"

Best Female Video: Taylor Swift, "Blank Space"

Best Video With a Social Message: Big Sean featuring Kanye West & John Legend, "One Man Can Change the World"

Song of the Summer: 5 Seconds of Summer, "She's Kinda Hot"

Best Collaboration: Taylor Swift ft. Kendrick Lamar, "Bad Blood"

Best Direction: Kendrick Lamar, "Alright" (Colin Tilley & the Little Homies)

Best Choreography: OK Go, "I Won’t Let You Down" (OK Go, air:man and Mori Harano)

Best Cinematography: Flying Lotus feat. Kendrick Lamar, "Never Catch Me" (Larkin Sieple)

Best Art Direction: Snoop Dogg, "So Many Pros" (François Rousselet, Jason Fijal)

Best Editing: Beyoncé, "7/11" (Beyoncé, Ed Burke, Jonathan Wing)

Best Visual Effects: Skrillex and Diplo feat. Justin Bieber, "Where Are U Now" (Brewer, Gloria FX, and Max Chyzhevskyy)

Artist to Watch: Fetty Wap

Video of the Year: Taylor Swift featuring Kendrick Lamar, "Bad Blood"

Kathleen Hanna is relaxed about pop star feminism

When Taylor Swift, or similar, talks about feminism, it might not be your mother's feminism, or your elder sister's. But is that a problem?

Kathleen Hanna isn't sure that it is:

I remember back in the Nineties being like, “We’re being commodified,” so I understand people being like, “We don’t want feminism to become this fashion that has nothing behind it.” But I’m not really worried about that. When somebody that’s a huge megastar that has so many young fans, like Taylor Swift or Miley Cyrus or Beyoncé, comes out and says, “I’m a feminist,” I mean, that’s the sound of hundreds of thousands of girls typing the word into the Internet.

In other words: Taylor Swift Feminism is a gateway. And any entry point is to be welcomed.

Ryan Adams has a plan

It's been a while since Ryan Adams recorded something memorable. I'm sure there's been something this century, but nothing springs to m... actually, that means it wasn't memorable, doesn't it?

Still, all that's about to change as about to release an album full of top quality material.

One hitch, though. Not his songs:

Adams is covering a singer with a country past of her own: Taylor Swift. Today Adams announced on Twitter and Instagram that he’s recording a cover of her hit 2014 album 1989. The 28-second clip of “Welcome to New York” that Adams shared sounds like a big improvement over the original: With heavy guitar backing and Springsteenian vocal harmonies, Adams makes 1989’s weakest track sound like a bona-fide rock anthem.

It's not actually better, but it's better than anything else Adams has done recently.

Taylor Swift makes amends. A bit.

Shortly after Taylor Swift called out Apple on their attempts to make artists cover the costs of the three month Apple Music trials, Jason Sheldon pointed out that the terms she imposed on photographers weren't entirely fair, either.

While Apple crumbled overnight in the face of Swift's attacks, Swift has taken longer to respond to Sheldon but her people have just launched a new contract which goes some way to addressing Sheldon's worries.

The new contract does make clear that the camera people keep copyright on the pictures and will be credited if Swift or her team choose to use them on social media but it's still pretty restrictive.

65daysofstatic won't be your project

Catching up with a couple of stories from earlier in the week. First, the mighty 65daysofstatic were surprised to see themselves being named on a government press release:

So recently 65days received some funding from the British Phonographic Industry (BPI). This is no doubt a good thing for us. It’s appreciated and will be put to good use.

The funding was announced yesterday in a press release over at gov.uk, in which we are named along with 18 other bands or artists, as beneficiaries of this public funding to help “export [our] music abroad”.

Sometimes when you list things alphabetically, numbers appear before ‘A’, and so 65daysofstatic is at the top of the list of bands and artists, and not far below a quote from Business Secretary Sajid Javid declaring that this Music Export Growth Scheme is the government “banging the drum” (see what he did there?) for music and the UK’s culture industries.

The idea of 65daysofstatic being held up in any way as evidence that this hyper-Dickensian, fucking nightmare of a Tory government is apparently supporting the arts, when in actual fact they are destroying any kind of infrastructure for future creativity at the grassroots level and plunging the most vulnerable parts of society into further misery, leaves a bad taste in our mouths. So here are some notes from us, just for the record:

• Spending public money on the arts is clearly not a bad thing. It’s better than spending it on Trident, bailing out banks, subsidising sketchy right-to-buy tactics to help private landlords get richer, and so on.

• Arts-based public spending is so often justified, as it is again in today’s BPI press release, as being ‘good for the British economy’ (“an approximate return on investment of £8.50 for every £1 invested”). This entirely misses the point of why we need to support arts and creativity in the first place.

• The press release mentions that this public funding will be matched by the music companies behind the acts. This is the first we have heard of this. Either this is accurate, which seems unlikely at least in our case because if any of the music companies we work with were actually giving us money for nothing, they’d presumably have told us about it. On the other hand, it could be that the idea is music companies ‘match’ the funding figure, but then that money is actually added to the band’s ‘recoup’ with them via a record deal or whatever. This also seems unlikely, as it would mean that, on paper, if it is ultimately the artist that is required to match whatever funding they get, then actually they’re not getting any help at all. (Unlikely, but this is the music industry we’re talking about). The third option would be that this ‘matching’ is entirely fabricated for the purposes of the press release, which would suggest that somebody, somewhere, is so scared of the wrath of the Daily Mail, or whoever, for having wasted money on something as frivolous as the arts, that they literally invented non-existent extra funds from The Music Business to give the illusion of an industry that is growing in rude, capitalist health. To make it clear that this is A Sensible Business Decision and not Commie-Liberal Hippy Indulgence. No idea which of these, if any, is true. But it is odd.

• Similarly, if they think that they’re gonna get 65 to “attend writing camps overseas to help boost the revenues that come from publishing and sync deals” they’ve got another thing coming. Presumably this is more empty press release wrangling; a well-intentioned arts-funding-proposal-writer somewhere knew what business-friendly buzzwords were needed to catch the ear of a business secretary who might understand that ‘publishing and syncs’ as opposed to ‘record sales and touring’ are the remaining deposits of wealth that need pillaging mining in the world of music. But how patronising and wrong-brained this patronage is, whereby acts are given song-writing classes about how to better grow and focus their ‘product’ in order to help grow the British economy. WHO THINKS LIKE THIS? Probably Mumford & Sons. In fact they probably run the writing camps on the grounds of their L.A mansions or something.

• The proposal that 65daysofstatic put in for this funding was based on a hypothetical budget for a hypothetical American tour. It is very expensive to tour in America, but we’ll be eventually be putting out a new album in the shape of our No Man’s Sky soundtrack and we would like to be able to afford to play shows in a country where that game appears to be receiving a huge amount of attention. (To ‘grow our brand’, in music industry parlance). This BPI funding covers maybe a third of the deficit of the budget. Meaning that this hypothetical tour still costs, rather than makes, a lot of money. Furthermore, the majority of these costs are travel-related, so almost all this ‘music’ funding will actually be going to airlines and oil companies. The rest will go to pay our crew (which is obviously right and proper) and to musical equipment hire companies. The only part of it that would come to 65 is what are called ‘PDs’ (per diems), a daily allowance for each of us to be able to buy food, coffee and sometimes, debauched rockstars that we are, extra beer and wine.

They also bring Taylor Swift into it:

But still, until musicians do start getting paid fairly (which will be never), you fear that the conversation will never move on. Thanks to Taylor Swift, 65daysofstatic will now collectively earn approximately £40 for the three months of free Apple Music streaming than we would have earned otherwise. And really, thanks Taylor, that’s cool, it’s honestly better than not-having £40, but did you know Apple only paid £12 million in tax in the UK last year instead of the estimated £400 million that they should have? If you could take that up with them next time you fancy fixing things for struggling artists, it’d be really appreciated. We’ll even do you a remix for cheap in return.

In passing, I think we'd all love 65daysofstatic doing a Taylor Swift remix. I'm not sure we'll get Apple to invest £360million for it to happen, though.

The music industry stands behind Taylor Swift

Funniest sight of yesterday was a spokesperson from UK Music popping up on BBC News to praise the actions of Taylor Swift.

Almost as if they weren't representing the very music business companies who, when Apple demanded the three month free trial deal in the first place, just nodded and signed the paperwork.

Photographers versus Taylor Swift

After Taylor Swift won the battle with Apple to ensure that artists get to make money from their work, a photographer asked why her photographer contracts were okay, then:

“You say in your letter to Apple that ‘Three months is a long time to go unpaid,'” Sheldon writes. “But you seem happy to restrict us to being paid once, and never being able to earn from our work ever again, while granting you the rights to exploit our work for your benefit for all eternity…”

He goes on to say, “How are you any different to Apple? If you don’t like being exploited, that’s great… make a huge statement about it, and you’ll have my support. But how about making sure you’re not guilty of the very same tactic before you have a pop at someone else?”

Some people have been quick to defend Swift, saying it's unlikely that she's written the photographer contract. Which is true, but a person who is clearly in control of their career would at least have signed off on it.

The most egregious part of the Swift contract (itself not uncommon in the modern music industry) is that it gives Swift's management the right to smash people's cameras and equipment for non-compliance.

Now, the idea that a minor fracas over copyright could result in anyone deliberately destroying cameras might seem extreme, but it's not unusual. For example, if you purchase a ticket to a gig at, say, Southend's Cliffs Pavilion, the terms and conditions are written to allow staff to destroy your stuff:

The use of equipment to record or transmit audio and/or visual material inside the Venue is strictly forbidden. Unauthorised recordings, tapes, films or similar items may be confiscated and destroyed. Any recording made in breach of these conditions shall belong to the Venue and/or Promoter of the Event. Neither the Promoter nor the Venue will be liable for the loss, theft or damage to confiscated items.

As, increasingly, video and audio is being published to the web as it is consumed, either the Pavilion intends to march on Periscope servers with bats and torches; or else this is just basically a way to punish transgressors by smashing their stuff without any comeback.

Is Swift a hypocrite? Probably not - there's a wide difference between making musicians subsidise a major multinational's promotional campaigns and a photography landgrab, but it would be nice to see her take a lead in the question of photographer's rights in the same way she's taken on Apple.

In which Taylor Swift has a point, and wins the day

You'll have read this elesewhere, by now, but Taylor Swift's gentle-but-firm open letter to Apple (alright, open Tumblog) does gently nail Apple and leave them hung out looking like greedy butt-danglers:

I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months. I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.

The historically generous company which, for example, could have quite happily offered a discount on iMacs to educational institutions but chose instead to create a lower-spec model.

But could a flattering approach, even from Taylor Swift, work?

Actually, yes. It worked:

Now Apple says it will pay artists for music streamed during trial periods.
"We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists. Love, Apple," tweeted executive Eddy @Cue.

Of course, it's not so much the candy coating of Swift's letter that worked. It was the greed-shaming of putting right in the front of people the idea that it was musicians and songwriters who were actually paying for that three month free trial, not the cash-rich Apple.

Being shamed by a popstar. Thank god that can still happen - but it's still shabby it took Taylor Swift for Apple to understand they were pulling a shit move.

Taylor Swift goes into reverse

So apparently, when faced with paparazzi and not in the mood, Taylor Swift does this:

There's two problems with this approach: firstly, as the video shows, the paps don't exactly stop taking photos. Secondly, it just means your arse is getting all the attention.

On the other hand, maybe she's just thinking of releasing a cover of this come December:

Taylor Swift is the best pop star

No, she really is. She really is:

She said: ''I've always been an easily excitable person and I'm also easily hurt. Let's say I'm easily moved.

''A few years ago, I realised being moved isn't necessarily normal in my line of work, or this cynical world we live in.

''There are viral videos of all the times I'd won awards and how shocked I'd looked. At first, I didn't know how to process being made fun of for being stoked about really exciting accomplishments.

''It seems like people become jaded faster than ever these days and in an effort to appear 'cool', people in my profession and everywhere else I look have taken to trying to seem bored all the time. Unmoved, unfazed, chic, edgy.

''Let me just clarify something, being a pop artist is a very exciting, incredibly fun thing to do.''

Yes, it must be, mustn't it? If you're a pop star, and not going 'bloody hell, I'm a pop star' the whole time, you should probably be seeing a careers advisor rather than a stylist.

Salon seems thrown by the idea of a nice pop star

Does not compute... does not compute... does not compute

We know what you're doing, Rihanna

Really, Ri-Ri?:

According to an interview [she] did with Buzzfeed, where they played a game of Never Have I Ever, Rihanna revealed that she’s a huge fan of the baby animals and has been since she was a little girl.

She said, “I used to save these kittens — we had stray kittens in the street but they weren’t really stray, they belonged to a home they were just never at that home. So they were just like community cats kind of, and they would go in the gutters to have their babies and I would hear them crying, go rescue them, give them a little shower with my hair conditioner, keep ‘em in a bucket, feed them.”

We know what you're doing, Rihanna. It's like when Madonna started to hang out with Vanilla Ice. Trying to keep up with the next wave of artists, right?

There's only one Pop Kitten Queen, Rihanna, and the THRONE IS NOT EMPTY.

Taylor Swift porn site shows the problem with dot porn

From Taylor Swift's perspective, you can see the justification for her (or her management colossus) lashing out to buy taylorswift.porn and taylorswift.adult.

Because if she doesn't, someone else will.

When the .porn and .adult top level domains were announced, some voices suggested that these might be problematic as some brands or people might feel they have to buy their own names in the spaces to stop other organisations snapping them up.

And that's what's happened here.

In other words, Taylor Swift has been approached by an organisation and offered the opportunity to hand over thousands of dollars, in order to protect her image.

That's a shakedown, surely?