Sickening exploitation of the music we love

"All You Need Is Love" in Chase Mastercard Ad on TV.

Could there be more of a contrary meaning between the intent of the
song's lyrics, and the intent of the commercial?

sequentially...

Well, the Beatles had to have given that band permission to record the
song. It doesn't bother me any. It Keeps the Beatles music alive anyhow.

Jeff

CDBaby:
Amazon:

Manco...

Crass commercialism was exactly Lennon's intention in June 1967 when he
wrote the song. He was always about the money, by his own quotes!

Dale Houstman...

We have lived through the raging capitalist muck of the 20th century,
and now are trying to hold on in the century that will see the
extinction of much of nature, much of personal identity, much of freedom
and - eventually - capitalism itself. I - for one - am no longer
surprised (and am far beyond being appalled) by the almost daily
assaults on reason and trust and integrity. Tomorrow will bring more -
and worse - examples. It's all just a part of the general degeneration
of civilization. To expect better is certainly a good thing, but I can
tell you it is going to wear you down if you put too much energy into
thinking the world is going to wake up before the ship sinks.

Dr. Strangemonde...

Until you've heard "Slim-Fast Revolution" you have NEVER truly
experienced the bottom of the commercialism barrel. How it even came to
exist is beyond imagining, but hear it here, about a third of the way

-- Dr Strangemonde

Look Here...

Yes, it's disgraceful.

Lookingglass...

...however... ALL YOU NEED IS CASH... is quite appropriate.

dave (...that's what I want...)

DanKaye...

I agree.

I read through this thread (I was not around for a few days) and I
think that the thing is, that many of us here grew up as teenagers in
the 60's and at the time, there was a very anti-establishment and
anti-corporate mentality. It was clear that the Corporations were
funding the war in Viet Nam, and it was all about money.

FM radio at the time was very non-commercial, they played long,
non-commercial songs, the dj's had power to play what they liked more
like satellite radio now (though even LESS commercial perhaps), but
everyone had access to FM radio for free.

There was a revolution going on, a cultural revolution, which the
Beatles were a big part of. I'm stating the obvious only as a reminder
which goes back to why the idea that "All You Need Is Love" being used
to hawk Chase Bank is sickening to many of us.

I think that many of us who were into the music scene of the 60's feel
that most of the great 60's music was much more than just music, it
had an element of cultural revolution to it; in fact there was also an
element of real "revolution" in it. The Viet Nam war protest movement
was fueled by this music and the artists behind it, and we/they did in
fact change the world by protesting that war somewhat successfully.

So, to now use these 60's songs which meant so much to us, for crass
commercialism is something akin to "sacrilegious". It offends us.

Sixties Gen...

I agree with your assessment.

Sixties music and the cultural changes occuring at the time are
inseparable. They often had equal affects on each other. For those of
us who came of age in the Sixties, the use of this music, that meant so
much to us politically, socially, culturally, and yes...emotionally...
to sell non-associative products is like running one's fingernails down
the chalk board.

As to whether Paul has the right to use his songs to promote cars and
such, that is his own decision, and he is within his rights to do it.

Personally I don't see why he would want to lower himself and his
music to do so, when he does not need the money in any way. His doing
so lowers my opinion of him, somewhat. He doesn't need to do it, so

UsurperTom...

Do you feel the same way about George allowing "Something" to be used
in a Chrysler commercial?

Dale Houstman...

I do.

why do it? If he were a nearly forgotten sixties performer, say,
someone like Peter Noone of Herman's Hermits, as a silly example, then
using a product to remind people of his songs, might be a good way for
him to 1) make some money by doing a commercial; and 2) get people to
hear his music again. But Paul doesn't need that, so why do it? Again,
it's his own choice. I just disagree with it.

Using one's songs for commercials, in my opinion, detracts from the
purely artistic value of the song, reducing it to a "jingle".

Lookingglass...

I myself try to avoid *commercials* as best as possible... I have NEVER
displayed a 'name' on any article of clothing that I wear... if they want me
to display a 'name', PAY ME!

The songs in question have not changed for me... they will always be songs
to listen to and appreciate.

...and as another poster pointed out... I remember some GREAT jingles
specifically written for commercial products... "...and away goes trouble
down the drain..."!

Besides, what will they use when all the 60's catalog is used up?

dave (...I've got nothing to say but, "It's OK!"...)