MTV used to stand for Music Television

Bob Lefsetz usually upsets someone sooner or later and we find that half the time we agree with him and the other half we don't but it's like having a friend at lunch with opinions giving you time to finish your meal first before jumping in with a comment.

The biggest act in music isn't Christina Aguilera OR Justin Timberlake.

It's Pink Floyd.

Now if you asked me a couple of years back, I would have said Led Zeppelin. Jimmy and the boys are still huge, but they've been eclipsed. By the sheer magic of the head-spinning aural gyrations of Roger Waters, David Gilmour and even Syd Barrett. Yes, fifteen year olds know who Syd Barrett was. HOW COME MTV DOESN'T KNOW THIS??

August 1st marked the twenty fifth anniversary of MTV. But there was no hoopla on the channel. Better not to alienate the younger generation, WHOSE PARENTS were addicted to the twenty four hour music station in their youth. The only problem is, these kids are addicted to their parents' music. Not the evanescent crap MTV aired in the eighties, not even the still-around U2, but the music of the sixties and seventies. These kids didn't just fall off the turnip truck, they were weaned on the BEST MUSIC OF ALL TIME! They know every Beatle song, and most of the Eagles' too. They know today's music is crap just like our generation knows you can no longer buy a Chevrolet. But chasing advertisers with a fifteen year old formula, MTV completely missed the point.

This was evidenced most dramatically with MTV's coverage last year of Live 8. MTV had the mistaken impression that being a member of the group, hanging with your buddies, ECLIPSED the music. Not only were there commercials during the broadcast, we had inane talking heads speaking with idiot concertgoers as the acts were reduced to background noise. How could MTV get it so WRONG?

The channel tried to make it up to us by airing an unexpurgated version after the fact. But if you think this makes a difference, you're probably watching tape of last year's Super Bowl. In a now world to be even tape-delayed is to lose audience to the Web. And that's just what music fans did, they watched Live 8 on AOL.

You must never forget who you are. But somehow MTV did.

Realizing that the ratings of long form programming surpassed those of endless videos, they exorcised the videos. But in the process, the channel lost its spirit. MTV today is just reality programming for kids. And the music "stars" they get to drop by are tools of corporations, slaves to the grind, the ANTITHESIS of rock and roll. With no one believing in the channel, it's got no soul.

The reason Pink Floyd is the biggest band in the world today is not only its music, but where it's coming from. Pink Floyd never played by ANYBODY'S rules. And this appeals to today's youth. They don't expect anybody on MTV to come up with an opus like "Dark Side Of The Moon", god, how would they promote it on the channel? Pink Floyd was outside, but MTV is inside. Oh, for its first decade and a half the channel walked the line, trying to appear hip as it sold out to Madison Avenue, but after the boy bands, after the dating shows, it was clear. MTV would do what Pink Floyd never did. Which was follow the money.

Sure, music didn't get ratings as good as reality shows. And music videos moved to the Web. But by sacrificing its soul, by eviscerating the music that was always its underpinning, MTV ceased standing for anything.

And its Web-presence was just as bad. It was a reflection of the televisionchannel, when all the successful Websites had NO counterpart on the tube. Craigslist.org
succeeds because it's utilitarian, it not only delivers what you want, it does so QUICKLY! Whereas to visit mtv.com is to endure an interface akin to swimming through molasses. MySpace delivers the MUSIC of its members. If you're lucky, you can figure out where on mtv.com to post your comments on the celebutantes and no-names featured on the TV channel. In an era where Websites from
awfulplasticsurgery.com to perezhilton.com to egotastic.com make FUN of the very same people MTV exalts, the brass at MTV were too invested in these morons, and too stupid to know they were going down on the ship with them. Really, the only stars ARE those musicians who haven't sold out. Oftentimes, like Ani DiFranco, never featured on MTV. But, rather than save its soul, MTV kept focusing on lower and lower common denominators, to the point where the only people watching the channel not making fun of it were four year olds.

There was a moment there when MTV could have said mea culpa. When stories started to appear everywhere, when there was an outcry, that there was no longer any MUSIC on the channel. The bigwigs didn't realize they were losing their audience, figuring that it changed over every five years or so ANYWAY. But not only did this lack of music drive away oldsters, and let's not forget, even the most ancient stopped by at MTV to try and stay hip, youngsters unexposed to the glory days of the outlet had no investment in the channel, no belief in it AT ALL!

The Academy Awards telecast is tanking in the ratings. Because movies don't represent the soul of America anymore. Movies are where idiots like Wilmer Valderrama go for big paychecks made by studios looking for the safest, most success-insured product possible. Avoiding all risk, kids no longer take the movies seriously. As for stars... Do you really think kids want to tune in to sexagenarians, SEPTUAGENARIANS, mugging?

What are the VMAs for?

Fearful of conflicting with 9/11 memorials, MTV moved the show BEFORE Labor Day. What a big mistake. The show worked because you were ALREADY IN SCHOOL! Summer was over. It was a way to avoid doing your homework. AND, you tuned in so you wouldn't be left out of the discussion at your school the next day. But with all the kids spread out over the landscape, there's no center, the VMAs were/are not MUST SEE TV, so people don't.

And the show no longer makes sense. Kids know there's no music on the channel, and oldsters haven't heard of the acts. What is the DRAW? MTV proved it in Miami. If you're playing to the "National Enquirer" crowd, you've lost it. The VMAs were always hip, irreverent. Now they became what they were mocking. Vapid "stars" fawning over each other. The VMAs are just not where it's at.

So the ratings tanked.

If they wanted the ratings to go up, MTV would have needed a revolution.

What would that revolution look like?

Well, control would have been taken out of the hands of the usual suspects and given to the audience. Yup, the VIEWERS' VMAs. Performers selected by viewers, the show featuring the kind of YouTube videos that never seem to air on MTV.

And, the music wouldn't be a slave to the Big Four, but the magic stuff kids want to hear.

Like Pink Floyd. Like Led Zeppelin. This is not OLD stuff, but CLASSIC stuff. Bob Geldof knew this, knowing he needed the world's attention. Who did MTV get? JACK BLACK!

Who'd already done the show. Who, after "School Of Rock", has appeared in fly by night vanity projects.

Shit, how about Robert Plant hosting the show? MTV thinks the young won't accept him, but that's like saying that kids have no interest in seeing "The Godfather".

Yes, kids love the classics. And they love what they make themselves. They don't love the crap that smug baby boomers who think they can hoodwink youngsters feed them.

If you think about it, MTV declined because it didn't take heed of those musicians it featured. Haircut 100? A Flock Of Seagulls? MTV wore them out, sapped all their soul, along with all the acts who sold themselves on TRL. Even that afternoon train-wreck's host, Carson Daly, WHO THE F--- CARES?

Whereas people care about Neil Young. Because he MANAGES THE BRAND! He only does what he wants. He's not beholden to others. He's always trying something new, and even if he fails, we still pay attention, because we believe.

But Neil Young is not Pink Floyd. With Neil Young, it's about him. With Pink Floyd, it's about US. Neil Young is selling a story, whereas Pink Floyd is more basic, it's like a drug, an LSD tab that you can take by dropping the needle, pushing play on your iPod, on ANY of their music.

It's not about the personalities in the band, but how the music makes you feel. It's not about your body, but your MIND!

MTV only focused on the body. The hotties on the channel. It lost control of its audience's mind. And as a result, MTV's got no fans, no believers.

And this is why the fact MTV Networks plays videos on its other TV channels is irrelevant. You buy "Atom Heart Mother" because you love "The Wall". But if there was no "Wall", kids wouldn't be going back and buying the catalog. Without belief in the flagship, people don't believe in the subsidiaries. A band might have a great album track, but if all the singles, 9/10ths of what people are exposed to SUCKS, they won't care about it, because they're looking for acts to believe in overall.

And this is why MTV is doomed to fail on the Web. Because MTV stands for something bad. Something even worse than network TV. MTV is crass. With no respect for its audience, nobody respects it. So why in the hell should people go to its Website when they can visit a zillion others, real estate/distribution not being a problem on the Internet as opposed to cable TV.

MTV got fat and happy. Until one day it all collapsed.

Not that different from the major labels, if you think about it.

Each wants us to come back. But that's not going to happen. Because each has abused our trust. We AVOID them!

If you go for the short term bucks, if you don't have one eye on the future, then you're doomed to fall off a cliff at some point. When suddenly, EVERYBODY gets the memo. And realizes not only that you're not what you used to be, but that you have contempt for them.

But the baby boomers running these enterprises believe they're ENTITLED to their success. That it should go on forever. Not realizing they sold their souls for that million dollar lifestyle and lost touch with the peons as surely as Marie Antoinette did in Versailles.

Which is why kids are gonna take over. Contrary to boomers' belief, they know what's going on, they know what's real, they can't be so easily manipulated. And now, with the means of production AND distribution within their grasp, there's no need for the old forms. Just like there's no need for IBM in a PC world.

Oh, IBM reinvented itself. As a services company. And is doing well.

But it's no longer dominant.

If you want an ubiquitous hit single, you must be with a major label. MTV is home to youth-oriented reality shows that can be profitable with a tiny sliver of the audience that networks demand to make their balance sheets work. Both will live on. But neither will have a grasp on the hearts and minds of the audience. They will be greatly diminished enterprises. Because when confronted with change, they just stuck to the course.

The labels should have authorized a pay version of the original Napster. And certainly shouldn't have sued their customers.

And MTV should have aired more music.

In both cases the transition might have been wrenching, but by not seeing the handwriting on the wall, the major labels and MTV are now in the predicament of Floyd Landis. It's their word against ours. And all that matters is the court of public opinion. And the people have determined that the major labels and MTV are worthless bottom fishers.

Floyd Landis isn't coming back. And the major labels and MTV aren't either. Because once you're tainted with the stink of the skunk, you're done.

"MTV Awards Suffer Big Hit in Ratings":

http://broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6368436.html






Michael McCartney from The Time Machine adds:




...and don't think that the irony of VH-1 Classic celebrating its sister network MTV's 25th anniversary a month ago didn't go past anyone who got a chance to see it that weekend! VH-1 Classic aired the first twenty-fours of MTV's debut broadcast from 1981. A number of music geeks know that The Buggles "Video Killed The Radio Star" was the first video to ever air on MTV but it was quite a treat to see what else aired on that historic day in television. After dealing with the fact that MTV is ashamed to show their own material (heaven forbid they lose viewership that day from an audience trying to figure out what happened to their "reality shows"), we all sat down to soak in MTV's first day of music videos.

You need to know that we didn't have MTV on Maui here in Hawaii when the network debuted so this was a chance to see how it started. We only had USA Network's "Nightflight" or HBO's "Jukebox" and later WTBS's "Friday Night Videos" or was it called "Night Tracks"? Heck, it was 25 years ago and the only music promo film clips we got were usually on the "Mike Douglas Show" or "The Midnight Special" so forgive me if my mind is cloudy on the details. Most musical performances were caught on "Saturday Night Live", "American Bandstand", "Soundstage", "Austin City Limits" and talk shows ranging from "Merv Griffin" to "The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson".

It was a trip to see that the vast majority of "videos" were those very same "music promo film clips" from the late seventies (music videos weren't the full fledge industry that it was just a couple years after MTV premiered). Imagine my own delighted surprise to see four separate videos from Andrew Gold. Andrew Gold! MTV was all over the musical map which it hasn't done in over fifteen years. The best example that had all of us applauding in the household was when an Iron Maiden concert clip was immediately followed by a music video from Lani Hall and her husband Herb Alpert. IRON MAIDEN followed by LANI HALL! It was like real Top 40 that showed the variety of music that the public masses listened to back in the old days before genres and niche formats made the playlists on radio so tight which lead to all of the music television networks to do the same.

All the usual musical suspects from 1981 were on that broadcast day; REO Speedwagon, Cliff Richard, Pat Benatar, Styx, Leo Sayer, Split Enz and The Pretenders. Rod Stewart seemed to come on the most as he had the most music clips from the previous five or six years.

Outside of the fact that MTV didn't have the guts to air this anniversary special themselves, my only gripe is that VH-1 Classic didn't let the VJs from 1981 do their entire bits. I understand that MTV didn't really record that first day as the entire 24 hours appeared to be rebuilt from the playlist of the debut as it was filled with updated videos. Some of the credits that appeared on videos weren't around in those beginning years. I really wanted to see and hear what JJ Jackson or Martha Quinn did that day but the clips were mere seconds. Everyone I talked to were under the same impression that I was, that it was the actual first day of broadcast, yet VH-1 Classic took every chance that they could to turn it into an infomercial for a network that plays so little music videos that most viewers who are music fans gave up years ago and headed for VH-1. VH-1 has followed the footsteps of MTV and has pretty much the same programming agenda with videos only playing late at night and early morning. Both VH-1's "Storytellers" and "Behind The Music" were the last real television series about music on MTV's sister network but all of this is a story for another time.

The passion for music is still there but MTV turned their back on it years ago by becoming a programmer for, as you stated, "The National Enquirer" audience. Then again, so has "Rolling Stone" magazine so let the new musical revolution come with such force that no matter how many of us baby boomers talk about the past of these influential pipelines, that an entire generation raised on digital will have no idea what MTV or Rolling Stone is or was...

It's all about the music.






Adding to this post is a story from this week's Chicago Tribune:

MTV launched 25 years ago this summer with "Video Killed the Radio Star".

For Tom Freston, the man who helped make MTV a multibillion-dollar empire only to be ousted Tuesday as president and chief exec of MTV parent Viacom, it looks as though digital killed the corporate star.

Viacom Chairman Sumner Redstone made it clear enough in naming longtime adviser Philippe Dauman as Freston's replacement: because MySpace isn't TheirSpace, Freston has lost HisPlace...

Last year's $580 million acquisition of MySpace by News Corp. is not the sole reason Viacom's stock has slumped... But the fact that MySpace and other sites have loosened MTV's one-time iron grip on the young audience that makes marketers drool... surely didn't help Freston's cause.

"We have to be more plugged in," Dauman told analysts...

MTV still claims 82 million monthly TV viewers in this country. But the brand has been devalued and does not enjoy the same cachet on the Internet, the medium favored by MTV's core audience between the ages of 12 and 34. The 3-year-old MySpace attracts roughly 55 milllion unique visitors in a month, around 14 times the less than 4 million who visit MTV's Overdrive site...

Although Freston only got eight months as a chief executive, Redstone has said it will take at least a year to evaluate the splitting of Viacom with CBS, which was supposedly the slow-growth part of the company, with radio, TV and publishing among its assets.

Moonves, 56, however, has been acquiring digital properties such as the popular college sports site CSTV.com... Freston, 60, had not been so aggressive...

But there is more money to be made in the future, and even if he intends to live only another 20 or 30 years, Redstone apparently doesn't intend to miss out on any of it.

"There isn't any time to waste," he said. "The landscape is changing rapidly. Those that don't move quickly will be left behind. That's why we believe it's extremely important at this juncture that Viacom has a leader with skills and experience to capture those opportunities, to catapult us to the next level."

"To not screw up."