Neil Young posts angry YouTube missive Neil Young has hit out at YouTube by complaining it “unfairly” punishes artists to keep the online video business ticking over. Writing on his blog yesterday, the Sixties rocker and one-time supporter of Ronald Reagan, grumbled about a row that kicked off in December between Warner Music and YouTube after the firms failed to …
"The Canadian rock star described YouTube as "the new radio" but claimed that unlike the wireless* days of yore, Google's video sharing website fails to equally compensate for every artist and record label."
It seems Young forgets about all that "payola" stuff, and how most radio stations put crap music on the radio if the record companies pump enough money to them. Those who pay more get more radio coverage; and that has been the rule for at least 20 years.
It really is high time this place started to doing some half-decent research and not putting down comments that are half or complete bollocks about people. Especially when it concerns a shite description of Neil Young for heaven's sake.
And I thought this place was getting better. Jesus.....
He is aware that, in the US at least, (terrestrial) radio plays attract a royalty rate of zero, right? I bet YouTube would love that kind of agreement with the big four!
Oh, and Reagan supporters shouldn't really be advocating a non-free market just because they are on the losing side of a deal, right? The market will make it fair in the end!
This guy is your typical "faith based" musician". Doesn't use wireless or transistor gear because it breaks up the "pure signal" of a guitar - then shoves it through a 50K FET rig. Sigh. In his favour he has his Rainman tendencies - he owns over 400 Fender Deluxe amps but only uses one because the others don't sound the same. "I'm an excellent guitar player. Too much treble, mmaaah, mmaah"
If 'artists' would realize that outlets such as YouTube essentially advertise their products, for free, and realize that this is what will drive consumers to buy their products, they'd do much better instead of simply crying (or singing) the blues.
If they were even slightly smart (both labels and artists) they would simply demand credit or perhaps even a clickable link to buy their products.
Good grief, man, that's NEIL YOUNG you're talking about. "60s relic"?! I don't remember Paul McCartney releasing a song called "Let's prosecute the Prime Minister" about the Iraq war!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htUI8WiF14w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3_cS_iQ-w0
AFAIC, Neil Young has a permanent free pass to say whatever the hell he wants. (I'm a fan. Does it show?)
ODFO. No one gives two shits what drivel you are spouting these days. You were and continue to be a self important windbag. So do the world a favor and stop believing your own press. If you don't like the deal then take the metric ton of money you've made over the years, start your own label and cut the deals you want. Just stop expecting everyone to simply fall in line because "the great neil young" hath spoken.
Flames cus that and smoke are what comes out of my ears every time that twat opens his gaping maw.
P.S. We really need a twatdangle icon.
And you do exactly the same thing (state your opinion) and somehow think yours is worth more.
He wrote something on a blog, he didn't issue a press release, or go on stage during the oscars to let everyone know. The only people who read his blog are hardcore fans, if you are making such a big deal out of it then it is your problem, even if what he says is wrong or not thought through very well.
To AC: He makes a comment agreeing with ONE thing Reagan said in the 80s, and he is now perpetually a Reagan supporter?!
My only thoughts about this are, why is the Reg reporting something so insignificant? The comments of indifference outway just about everything else.
Amazing how the Internet wonks can all get excited because some retarded nobody has posted the details of their latest shopping trip on Twatter and then get their knickers in a twist because someone who's, you know, actually done something that made a difference to the world makes a reasonable sensible argument about justice and fairness.
I'm not a NY fan - I don't own anything by him - but I'm aware that his body of work adds up to more of an achievement than Facebook, MySpace, Wikipedia and Twitter all added together.
Why don't you all piss off and get back to watching Jade Goody die on YouTube? That seems to be the level of talent that's deemed newsworthy today.
Not a fan I'm guessing... what puzzles me is why you care so much that you boil over just because a musician dares to have a point of view. So.. how does it feel to be the only person left that still likes George Bush? Because that's the only reason I can come up with for the diatribe, unless you really, really don't like the idea that all artists are paid the same amount per download, regardless of the record label they're legally chained to.
It's the difference between how your record company interacts with YouTube and how they interact with radio.
Perhaps if your record company realised YouTube is a very useful resource for publicity and exposure you might get a better deal, it's hardly YouTube's fault now is it
BTW, HUGE Neil Young fan, but I think he's missed the point on this one!
I'm sure youtube offered warner the same deal as the other labels. Why would they do otherwise? I have no doubt whatsoever that Warner Bros didn't want to take that deal and walked away.
In that case, Mr Young would be better off
a) Changing labels
b) Whinging at WB management instead of youtube
Paris, because she always wants more, more MORE too.
"The big difference is the whiny old git blogged about how whiny and gittish he is - "I am me" didn't."
Did he? I was under the impression that he whined about how so many of his songs were used in YouTube videos and that he would never get any royalties for the thousands of plays that they were getting... which is a pretty fair complaint really.
Didn't he say "If all artists were compensated equally, and the people decided who had the hits and misses by virtue of number of downloads and plays, there could be no grounds for disagreement ..."
I don't see much whining involved there anyway, just a man who wants his fair due.
Cripes, he supported Ronald Reagan; I almost forgot about that. I still don't know what the hell was up with that, though it does explain "Welfare Mothers Make Better Lovers".
On the upside, he did an excellent album of songs about why George W. Bush needed a good sound Constitutional ass-whipping... but then finishes off with a version of "God Bless America" so goddamn' smarmy that it busted my internal Smarm-O-Meter™. I _still_ don't know what the hell was up with _that_, either. Rest of the album was great, though.
If Sir (spit) Paul McCartney, the Formerly Cute Beatle, didn't want to make a record about why Tony B. Liar needed a good solid ass-paddling from All Britons, that's his goddamn' problem. (you'll note that's why I called him the Formerly Cute Beatle, as opposed to the Talented Beatle, who, unfortunately, was taken from us years ago).
I wish to hell Young would make up his goddamn' mind if he's going to be a free-thinking, free-wheeling Leftie or a standard-issue cranky-assed Ron Paul Libertarian. I don't care which, as long as he'd just make up his friggin' mind.
Oh, for my high school days, the days of "Harvest", when ol' Neil was a good solid hippie, the guy who put the balls into Crosby, Stills, Nash'n'Young, a guy who, at his gigs, would stop every second or third song and announce from the stage that "I think I'll stop and roll a number..."
All Young said was that Youtube is being unfair when it comes to artists on Warner/Reprise, and that there should the same payment policy for all artists. I can certainly agree with that, if only for the smaller labels who get next to nothing because they can't do the hard negotiations like the bigger companies.
It really isn't clear to me whether the bad party is Youtube or Warner, so maybe Young is blaming the wrong guys or maybe he knows more than me. Overall, I agree with his sentiment.
...make a record condemning imperial occupation? Well, my apologies, Sir Formerly Cute Beatle.
I haven't actually heard this song myself, but knowing the quality of Sir Formerly Cute's output since becoming a Former Beatle, I'm sure it's nowhere near as ball-busting good as John Lennon's "Luck Of The Irish".
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
