Comments on: Imma Sponsor Your Face

By: mispeled

mispeled — Mon, 24 May 2010 20:19:06 +0000

John and Levi, you’re right, keeping them “on brand” would be a problem, since the artists would probably want to speak against the brand just for kicks. I know I would, if sponsored, unless I really believed in it, but that’s unlikely. Everything is disillusioning eventually. Hell, “corporation” control was a problem even back in the day – even old Mike had to paint over Adam’s willy so he didn’t offend the Catholic Church in ye old Sistine churchthing.

Jeeves – sure, they put them in their stores, but the real question is if they put anything into those artists’ pockets. They don’t tell you that.

Really, the more that I think about how to turn this into a business model, the more I get back to how these companies would find artists to sponsor, and then I get to the intermediary, and I’m right back at the agent model, which was what I wanted to circumvent in the first place. Le sigh.

By: Jeeves

Jeeves — Sat, 22 May 2010 23:54:41 +0000

i think starbucks sort of does sponsor certain musicians like josh ritter or at least they play their music, invite them to sing at their choice NYC locations, sell their CDs at the store and tweet about them.

By: Levi Montgomery

Levi Montgomery — Sat, 22 May 2010 19:03:31 +0000

I don’t know, but if you get that figured out, let me know, because I’d go for it. As long as my sponsor can take what I write, because I ain’t bowing down to no royalty but the muse.

By: John

John — Fri, 21 May 2010 14:53:30 +0000

Interesting idea! However, I don’t think there’s much corporate interest in sponsoring “controversial” artists. First, it’s hard to keep artists “on brand” (they tend to speak their mind, and even change their mind!). Second, artists often connect with a small subset of the population or if they’re an act like Bob Dylan, they might connect with one set of the population, alienate that segment, move onto another, etc., whereas corporations like consistency. Next, we have the public perception of artists “selling out”. The “sell out” moniker is most harshly applied to the most independent artists; there’s still a kind of cultural wish that these folks speak truth to power. With big name folks like Lady GaGa, selling out is part of the act. But there’s only so much of it the public’s gonna take before they tune out these acts.

In terms of shipping more product, I think the sponsored artist idea can’t get the same traction as the sponsored athlete. Cory Doctorow has a fierce tribe of followers, who wouldn’t take kindly to corporate sponsorship. A broad cross-section of America would rather put Kevin Smith in a laundry machine, than watch his films, so Tide would risk alienating their consumers … they, like many companies, want safe and tidy art.

Well, that’s my take on it!