Artists 'SELLING OUT' - can we discuss?

Kudos to Tom Waits for suing that car company for ripping off his singing style. But in the end it's really more a question of "when" rather than "if" almost any popular song will be used to sell soap, Starbucks, or maybe botox or motorized wheelchairs. If it doesn't happen in an artist's lifetime, then his estate will probably do it. Choice of placement can make a difference. Iggy Pop can probably smile at the irony of "Lust for Life" covering a cruise-line commercial, and "Happy Jack" as background to a bunch of kids riding around on toy Hummers is more acceptable than "Who Are You" as the CSI theme song. When the royalities keep the wolf at the door it's OK: it was painful to see Roger Daltry a few years back making ends meet by peddling Time/Life 60's compilations on 3AM infomercials. But Peter Noone belongs there. Like Kubla I suspect Neil Young never will.

There was an interesting program on NPR dealing with this issue. The upshot was that artists can no longer rely on traditional forums, such as radio to disseminate their music. Therefore, artists have become increasingly eager to get their music on car commercials and inserted into video games. It seems to be working, especially with regard to younger listeners.

John Densmore of the Doors had a great article in The Nation some years back in which he succintly laid out his rationale for not allowing the Doors music to be used as a selling "hook". His two bandmates were of a decidedly different mind. Of course, it was those same band members who thought a Doors reunion concert without Jim Morrison was a grand idea. I must admit that while I don't care at all what bands do with their music long after its expiration date (or at any time), I was a bit dismayed when I heard Peter Gabriel's Solsbury Hill on the telephone ad. Perhaps he donated all the proceeds from the licensing to Amnesty International or Doctors Without Borders or the Peter Gabriel Fund.

I think one needs to think of selling music through commercial endeavor as an extension of their profession and equate it with whatever job or profession you are employed.

A band may start off rehearsing in a basement, garage, loft etc... If they get gigs and eventually a record deal, and play to larger audiences it is equivalent of you or I getting a promotion or raise and being wooed by another company.

If you believe that artists who decide to license their music to a company or sell their catalog for compensation then I hope you turned down your promotion or raise because you have decided that you do not want any further economic rewards for your occupation because you just love doing your job and that is reward enough

Bianchi27, your argument is flawed in that you can't compare an "artists" work to that of most people's jobs. If you believe in "art" as something other than a commodity that is.