I Am Better Than You – Extra Dry Is A Shitty Beer
Written by Jesse Hayward
A problem every indie music promoter faces at one time, or all the time, is capital. Where to get the money to pay the bands and the crew. Where to get the money for decorations or fliers or the myriad of other expenses that crop up when trying to organise a fun night for all. It’d be nice if we all had lots of money to spend on entry fees, so that promoters could charge more to cover these expenses. Unfortunately we don’t, so they can’t.
Related Posts
-
♫ Art + Culture
I Am Better Than You – This Quiet Musical Cul De Sac -
♫ Art + Culture
I Am Better Than You – The Past Is Better Than You Too -
♫ Features
I Am Better Than You – A Brief History of The Exoskeleton -
♫ Art + Culture
I Am Better Than You – Butthurt Beggars Belief -
♫ Art + Culture
Uncle Sam Could Be The Sweetest Sugar Daddy
And so looms the spectre of corporate advertising. Last week I wrote about a shift in power from large corporations to independent music makers and punters, a shift I think is coming soon. In thinking about this issue I failed to take into account some basic evolutionary principles that apply to economic systems, which I will explain in a moment.
First I just want to reiterate an argument from last week. Because of the internet, traditional power structures in the music industry are destabilising. As technology provides essentially free distribution, large record companies find their roles becoming obsolete – or at least harder to maintain. Independent artists have always been around but now they have access to so many more people around the world.
So promoters are now left with hard choices to make. Do they grab the cash from wherever they can? Accept money from Smirnoff, Jagermeister or Extra Dry to keep their parties going, to keep these bands playing? Many do, though whether they have ethical concerns regarding the fact is another question. Extra Dry truly is a terrible, terrible beer. That should be enough of an ethical issue right there.
So where, besides promoting beer that tastes like shit, are the ethical issues? As record companies lose their grip on artists and independent promoters, other companies will start to move in to take up the slack. This is the evolutionary principle I referred to earlier: if an organism inhabiting a profitable niche is removed from the ecology due to environmental factors, it is likely that some other organism will move in to take its place.
As record companies fail, alcohol companies succeed. Be wary of large corporations and their involvement in local scenes, of whatever kind. Corporations are beholden only to their shareholders – nothing and nobody else. Ignore any mission statements, or funkily-worded press releases explaining Beercorp’s newfound love for electro, or whatever. They are, simply, lies. These companies just want the slices of pie that the record companies can’t get their hands on.
It’d be nice to be able to take principled, righteous stands on ethical issues. Unfortunately the world is arranged so this is very difficult. If promoters don’t take the money from large corporations, then where will they get it? There are no immediately easy answers. It may be that local businesses are willing to support local music scenes. Perhaps sponsorship could come from smaller companies, like independent breweries instead of Beercorp.
As this power shift occurs we want to regain most of the power ourselves, not watch it slip straight into the hands of more men in suits. Think about this: Who cares more about music? Universal Music? Or Tooheys Extra Dry?
as a former promoter of events what you wrote is very real, though with new alcohol laws coming into effect and the advent of clubs and venues having to limit their sales of alcohol after midnight, sustain the crippling “2am lock out” and club owners having to sell their children to keep the doors open I wonder if alcohol sponsorship really will hold muster or whether some other greedy corporate will step in… “Microsoft Bake”? “AppleWave”?
It’ll be interesting to see how it pans out anyway.
What you are saying is here is relevant but you have underestimated the alcohol companies. They are well aware that if they just stick there brand on an event that people may see it as same lame attempt to seem ‘cool’ or relevant in the music industry. That is why they have dedicated out-sourced marketing teams working on concepts like Tooheys Uncharted and Jagermeister uprising. Yeah it is blatant branding but they have stepped in to support these bands when so many other companies will not.
I honestly do not see how it is an ethical concern for promoters to take the money off a sponser, if it providing them the capital to put on a show that might potentially help a bands career, it should not even be an issue.
Lastly your statement ‘As record companies fail, alcohol companies succeed. Be wary of large corporations and their involvement in local scenes’
That is ridiculous, you need to embrace their involvement because without funding from them venues like the Annandale hotel would be struggling, and bands like the Deer Republic would still be saving all their money to record an EP.
Hey dude, really really interesting article.
To be honest i don’t think its necessarily bad that alcohol companies are wanting to engage with cultural areas like music. But it needs to be done well with someone who knows the scene/music from the inside out, not looking at it from the outside in. Some brands are doing an amazing job of it and i would go so far as to say enhancing the communities/genre through their involvement – e.g Becks which has a longstanding relationship with music and engages with awesome acts, and great events like Becks Bar at Sydney festival and their Berlin Sessions which are loved by dance music punters etc etc.
Promoters just need to maintain control over the actual musical offerings of the night. The Events will then speak for themselves despite the booze branding, as hosting genuinely great acts/performers.
Top article a very good read makes me think about things in whole different way
Grace, I agree totally with you there.
I guess the point about corporate alcohol sponsorship is that the companies involved are aware that the public is media savvy and wary of any traditional attempts at branding.
They know this, so they go about sponsoring music events (and I’m talking generally here of course, there are some truly horrific alcohol/music campaigns… Absolut for one) by supporting the artists involved and promoting the scene.
It’s in their interests to keep the music scene healthy, because that’s where they’re making their money…
It’s a complex issue, and one that can be articulated plenty further, but it’s refreshing to hear some healthy dialog. Big up Tim there too.
This a very interesting subject and one that reminds me of an attempt at a corporate tobacco takeover of rock venues in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane in the 80s by Peter Jackson cigarettes. They tried to have banner sponsorship at all the main venues, much like what Winstons did for rugby league and B&H for cricket. It meant that if you wanted to play at Selinas, for example, you would be playing under a Peter Jackson banner. It gave the impression that the band endorsed the product. As you can imagine, a few of us who were band managers at the time were not amused. I was very much involved in organising what turned out to be a loud and successful campaign to stamp their butts out! I got all the States health departments to contribute money, got the public support of as many of the biggest bands in Australia as I could, and then got a huge list of prominent sports personalities, judges, politicians, society types etc to put their name to the campaign. We ran full page ads in the National Times – first week was “Hands Off” our venues with all the bands signing their name to it, followed a week later with “Hands Up” with the other personalities stating they supported our stand. We killed the cigarette campaign in a matter of weeks and one of the very few campaigns to stop a cigarette sponsorship in the world at the time.
While I understand that promoters need to have capital to survive, the point I am making is that the artists have a right to have a say whose products they are surreptitiously being asked to endorse. If you do not like the product then make a stand and do not support it. The power can shift as the ultimate power rests with those who perform on stage, who attract the crowds, who make the music. It is a matter of getting together to make it happen – remember “United We Stand”.
Cheers Chris, excellent point.
Grace I understand where you’re coming from, but in light of the changes in the music industry I think it is important to stay aware of the issue. It’d be interesting to know how these sorts of branded events began – whether someone was looking for funding or it came from the company itself.
Tim, big business is uninterested in music. Big business is interested in money. When it comes right down to it, Tooheys don’t even really care about beer. Now, that’s much the same situation as the record corps – to them it’s product. But to them it was a specialised product. Of course the money is helpful, but money is helpful wherever it comes from. You wouldn’t take sponsorship from the Scientologists, would you? That would be unethical. You have to ask the same basic question about any corporate involvement in your event.
P.S There was a psytrance party at the Abercrombie a couple of years ago that was sponsored by the Raelians. Yeah, the UFO sex cult Raelians. I thought that was pretty fucked up.
My band played a show a few weeks ago sponsored by Jack Daniels but there were no drink deals it was just scratch tickets to win hats, jack bottle shaped USB sticks and that sorta thing. The USB sticks turned out to be 128 meg (which makes me wonder how old they are) loaded with crap music they were trying to promote. So I reckon that works for Jack Daniels but who the fuck would carry one that looked like that cat piss extra dry…
What was the music?
it would be could if we could make the money without the corperate fucks
“Perhaps sponsorship could come from smaller companies, like independent breweries instead of Beercorp.” So basically your article isn’t a rant about alcohol advertising, it’s just a rant about corporations. I can see where your coming from but to be honest they are spending millions to help our music scene develop and thrive, in return they get a brand image they want. Seems like a fair deal to me.
This is a stupid article…what are you trying to say? you have no clear argument here. Like alex said “…basically your article isn’t a rant about alcohol advertising, it’s just a rant”
@Dean, the idiocy you display with that misquote beggars belief.
@Stephen – that’s interesting about club owners struggling. Is this true for the majority of places across Syd right now?
The article is mostly an invitation to speculation based on changes occurring in the music industry right now, and a suggestion to keep ethics in mind when dealing with big business.
They are spending millions to get a brand image they want and the question is: will that help our music scenes develop and thrive?
heya jesse
this is a pretty curly issue in some ways but i have to say, as a promoter, if approached by a beercorp or similar to sponsor an event where i would be able to provide a space for some musos to share their sound, i wouldnt say no.
i have organised/booked/passed on several bands to play the annandale jager events and have never thought twice about it, then again those events are OBVIOUSLY sponsored, going in you realise that you are “supporting” the brand.. in only as much as they are supporting your band/music etc which is..basically not at all. (p.s in all my experiences at these type of nights, no musos were given even 1 free drink of that brands product)
my problem with brand advertising in live music is more like what chris molloy is saying above, when the ads and such are very very prominant on the stage/near the stage etc and you werent aware it was going to happen/or even if it isnt a sponsored event.
I had a show a couple of months back at a popular sydney live music venue and there were heaps of Tooheys ads everywhere, not only next to the stage on the walls but hanging from strings like flags across the top of the stage. first of all i was trying to take photos without showing the hideous ads everywhere, thinking i would have to do a bunch of photoshop cropping etc then eventually stopped taking photos – as all you could see were the ads. (in retrospect, if i had had more presence of mind at the time, being a bit wobbly, i shouldve cut them down!)
throughout the whole show various performers were referring to the ads, saying they preferred guiness, only drank magic goon etc etc
had it been a tooheys sponsored event though (with everyone being aware of it) then all the ads prob wouldnt have raised an eyebrow
one more thing, if ethics in this case mean that you 100 percent support/love/encourage others to love the place/event you are playing, then a whole lotta venues would be out of acts.
bands need places to play, and that often means playing venues you dont like/venues being run by arseholes/venues with dodgy managers/venues with shitty staff and yes… events that are corporate-branded. sad but true
Leyne
ps
glad to see you have found a more public forum for your views than in the old days
oh p.p.s
music feeds seems happy to have beer adverts….
Thanks for your input Leyne. Yes, as it stands the influence corporate sponsorship has over events is fairly benign, but things won’t necessarily stay that way.
Jesse i couldnt agree more. Extra Dry IS a shit beer!
You ask the question, Who cares more about music? Universal Music? Or Tooheys Extra Dry?
The answer is of course, “Neither”.
Let’s be clear here. It doesn’t matter which corporation you are talking about here. They both only care about making money.
I remember back in the late 70’s when I was involved in a lot of hit records and local acts having a meeting with the head of marketing at EMI and he said to me, “this would be a pretty good business, if we could just get rid of the musos”.
That is reality for you. The attitude of the 70’s from a few has become the embedded culture of the noughties.
Back then the big scary sponsor was Coke. Now its Tooheys.
In the words of the Who “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”