AOB1 - History of NME

History of NME

March 7^th 1952 brought us the first published issue of NME, after London music promoter Maurice Kinn bought the ‘Accordion Times and Musical Express’ and renamed it ‘New Musical Express’ which was later shortened to ‘NME’, as we know it today. Shortly after this change, NME almost closed down due to being beaten in sales by its main competitor, a magazine named ‘Melody Maker’. Alan Smith, as a new editor, brought with him a team of new talented journalists that gave the magazine everything that it needed and managed to save it from collapse. Next came the exciting new music genre of 70’s rock and the new lifestyle that came with it, along with a new style of music journalism. Charles Shaar Murray and Nick Kent, along with photographer Pennie Smith were within the package of new talent that Alan Smith had brought to NME offices. Pennie Smith was responsible for the large cover photos, a sign of technical response as images only looked good when they were blown up due to poor quality of paper. Circulation of the paper increased rapidly once it has been re-vamped. Reaching 300,000 copies a week, it was also the first weekly magazine to feature a singles chart.

Music magazines in the 50’s and 60’s were known only to compliment and talk positively about artists and their music, which was becoming too expected and comfortable with the stars. NME has changed this and has since been known to mock and ridicule artists and their ideas and lives. By the end of the 60’s, NME’s audience was changing with the shift in music as ‘rock giants’ such as Led Zeppelin emerged. Around a similar time, the hard-drug-destructive culture of the 70’s emerged, and Nick Kent spiralled into self-destruction, following his idols Iggy Pop and David Bowie, becoming addicted to heroin. The magazine then recognised a need to change with society, hiring Chrissie Hynd after she completely criticized a Neil Diamond album. She and Kent then started a relationship.

In 1976, a few years after punk emerged, NME put out an ad requesting ‘young, hip gunslingers’. The magazine then took on Julie Burchill and and Tony Parsons who embraced the punk era and filled the magazine with coverage. One of Parsons’ first jobs was to cover the Sex Pistols ‘Anarchy in the UK’ tour. Many mainstream publications and television/radio shows at this time refused to cover the Sex Pistols as they were considered too explicit, or stories were blown out of proportion to create a ‘media storm’. NME stepped up and provided real coverage of punk bands such as the Sex Pistols and Clash. One band not praised by the magazine was the Stranglers.  Julie Burchill criticized their song ‘Peaches’, accusing it of being sexist and misogynistic, while Parsons was attacking the band Generation X for being ‘too clean’ and middle class.

NME later faced a mix up in editors as Nick Logan left and later created ‘Smash Hits’ and ‘The Face’. Neil Spencer then took up Logan’s position and cut some of the older staff, including Nick Kent, and brought in a group of new writers. NME journalist Paul Morley heavily covered the ‘Madchester Scene’ which featured bands such as the Happy Mondays and Joy Division, who were then launched into the spotlight as a result.

Of course, as times changed again with the influx of 80’s pop, so did the magazine which involved a more intellectual way of writing, which not only included music journalism, but social and cultural commentary too. An early example of this is Lucy O’Brien’s article ‘Youth Suicide’, which focusses on the rise in youth suicides at the time. Also to hit the scene in the 80’s was American hip-hop, which caused a massive stir as the magazine was split between this and rock, resulting in two thirds of its readership being lost. During the 1987 elections, NME saw the biggest change it would ever experience as Neil Kinnock was given a cover. Heads rolled, three editors were fired, freelancers walked out and Alan Lewis was taken on as a new editor. The magazines days of political involvement were stopped and it was highly controlled. Despite this incident, NME kept producing and has survived as a journalism giant even until this day, proving its ability to survive as a music publication. 

AOB2 - Magazine Structure

NME magazine structure

For this task, i was asked to complete a flat plan of the layout of an issue of NME magazine. I looked at each page and on the plan i made note of what was on each page, in the correct order. I then colour coded each category of content on the plan, which enabled me to visualise this more easily. 

The first thing i noticed was the amount of paid adverts in the magazine. I knew there would be quite a large number, but until completing this task i was unaware that there was such a huge number of pages that had been paid for. The first was a full page advert on the inside cover, and then the next adverts were on both sides of the third double page spread, then again on the second page of the fifth double page spread. This spread of adverts is repeated throughout both the beginning and ending of the magazine, however during the middle section, there are smaller adverts on each page. There is also a section of seven double page spreads of mainly gig adverts, with a few adverts for different magazines and mobile phone ringtones and games etc.

The main thing i noticed when studying this magazine was its repetitive layout, which offers familiarity to the readers, for example if i bought an issue of NME in January and studied the layout, then compared it to the layout of an NME in November, the layout of the content wouldn't be much different. This enables the audience to easily flick to their favourite feature, piece of news, guides or specific review in the magazine with ease.

This is the pie chart i created to show the content of the NME magazine in visual terms. It shows that the biggest proportion of the pages of the magazine have been paid for in the form of adverts, with the second largest proportion being features. The smallest category on the chart is un-paid adverts, where NME have advertised things such as future issues, or subscriptions to the magazine which they wouldn't make them any money.

AOB3 - Music Press (Creating Meaning)

AOB3 – Creating meaning

The late 1950’s brought us music magazines as we know them today. Those of the 50’s and 60’s are different in all aspects as a result of the new classification of adolescent youths as teenagers. In this task I will analyse the change in conventions between modern and dated music magazines, including how they communicate with the audience through language, pictures, layout and colour scheme.

The unusual use of the pink typeface in the masthead and cover lines on this special edition of NME magazine suggest that it has been used to try and attract a new audience, possibly female, as well as keeping current readers interested and intrigued. The change of colour conveys a message that this issue of NME is different and more female dominant, and since Rihanna is a worldwide star, her fans could be found buying this issue of the magazine, rather than general NME fans and readers. The cover is minimalistic, with Rihanna standing confidently and set back from a plain background with a quote underneath which portrays her to be a strong, independent woman, which female fans may aspire to.  The cover may seem minimalistic, with little text and information, but when ‘The State of Music Today’ list is read in the bottom left corner, the audience are promised content on 10 different artists.

The quote from Rihanna underneath her name on the front cover is direct and assertive, which allows the audience to believe that is what they will get if they read the article inside. The use of bad language (although censored) on the front of such a well-known and major publication shocks the audience and encourages them to think that inside is a stripped down real life interview with Rihanna. For this issue of the magazine in particular, the reader profile seems to be a female heavy audience, of mid to late teens. This is apparent by the choice of language, pink writing and celebrity on the cover, although Rihanna also attracts a wide male audience, scoring 3^rd place in FHM’s 100 sexiest women. NME’s regular reader profile is a predominantly male audience, of an average age of 24 who are interested in all genres of music, as displayed by the variation in the artists listed in the bottom left corner of the cover.

The differences are instantly apparent between the new issue, and this old issue of NME. A sign of the technology available at the time of print (roughly 1970, the year of Paul McCartney’s first solo release as referenced by the cover lines) this cover shows no colour. To correspond with the times, rather than relying on the colour of the typeface and clothing worn by the cover models or celebrities, bold lettering and clear, un-cluttered images were used to create a similar effect. It was actually common at the time, for magazine covers to just show an image of the artists’ head, which was a way of getting them to stand out whilst getting around the printing limitations. Bold lettering has been used on this cover to attract the audience’s attention, such as the words ‘untamed’ and ‘unleashed’. This sort of practice is still common now, however not as much so as when colour printing was not available. This difference can be seen across the two covers, as the newest has very few differences in typeface in comparison to the older one, due to colour being used to put emphasis on different words instead.

References to the artists Paul McCartney, Mick Jagger and the band the Untamed suggest that the audience was predominantly people in their mid to late teens, as rock and roll had exploded onto the scene at this time, as the first music genre directed at young people. The cover is dominated by male artists, however there is no indication that this issue of NME is targeting at certain gender, unlike the more current issue featuring Rihanna. The mode of address is completely different on this issue compared to that of the cover of the newer issue. The audience is addressed much more directly on the newest issue, whereas on the older issue of NME, cover lines such as ‘Paul goes solo’ and ‘the real Mick Jagger’ are without direct quotes. The new cover gives the audience a direct quote from Rihanna, as if she is addressing the audience directly, and the use of bad language is not featured on the old cover which is as expected for the era and social conventions at the time.

Content between the two magazines is relatively similar, as they both feature what artists are currently doing, including interviews which are flaunted as being a real look into the artists’ lives. The older issue takes a more promotional approach towards the artists in comparison to the newer issue which presents itself as being more open, honest and scandalous, however they are identical in their aims, which are to promote the artists, so it could be argued that there are very few differences between the two. 

AOB4 - (Music Press) Representation

Music Press Representation

An artiste can be represented in many different ways and for different outcomes. The press generally is to inform the reader of current events and stories of common interest. As controversial and emotionally removed as journalists can be, personal opinions can still be reflected, changing the point of view and objective of the article completely. Sometimes these opinions are displayed on purpose, therefore it would be logical for these publications to be delivered to an audience of similar views and opinions.

A day before Stephen Gately’s funeral, in November 2009, an article was released in the Daily Mail by journalist Jan Moir, stating scepticism of the official ruling of the Boyzone singers death. The article was centered around Gately’s homosexuality, and his lifestyle, suggesting that his death was something more than just of ‘natural causes’. The 33 year old man died in his sleep after a night partying with his partner and a young man which accompanied them back to their apartment. Moir also points out the common story of young celebrities coming to a tragic end due to their lifestyles, suggesting substance abuse was to blame in most cases.

Jan Moir’s article created huge uproar within the press and on social media websites, along with complaints bombarding the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) at the highest rate ever recorded, crashing company servers. She was accused of homophobia, insensitivity to Stephen Gately’s family and inaccuracies of the facts within her article as she disregarded official medical professionals rulings and came up with her own interpretation of this man’s death. Celebrities such as Stephen Fry, Derren Brown and Charlie Brooker voiced their disgust at Moir, with Fry and Brown posting their state of appall over twitter, and Brooker writing an article in the Independent, slating Moir’s incorrect representation of the tragic death of Stephen Gately. Moir stated that her criticisms in her article were not from a homophobic viewpoint, but that she was merely stating Gately’s lifestyle choices of drug use and casual invitation of a stranger into the couples home. This was, however, not the first time that Moir has been pulled up for displaying homophobic views on public figures, for example Peter Mandelson. It was apparent to the public that these underlying homophobic views were not simply a case of misunderstanding. Moir also went on to claim that the natural cause of death (being a hereditary heart problem) was just a sweet cover up for a more bitter truth. This led to insensitivity complains towards Gately’s family and close friends.

The Daily Mail and the Independent appeal to different audiences and readers. The Daily Mail’s views on illegal drug use and homosexuality meant that the article seemed to contain underlying supportive ideas to these issues, with the main audience presumably supporting this as it supported their own views and ideas. Once the backlash from this article started, the Independent would have seen this as an opportunity to voice its criticism and opinions, therefore appealing to their own audience and those who were also appalled by Moir’s article.

AOB 5 Distribution and Ownership (Music Press)

AOB6 - (Music Press) Regulation

The Press Complaints Commission.

The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) is a self regulatory body for British newspapers and magazines, usually dealing with complaints made against these forms of media. The PCC is fully funded by an annual levy charged to newspapers and magazines, resulting in it having no legal powers. Often referred to as ‘toothless’, the PCC are known for being reluctant to take significant action, as not to pose threat to their funding from the company it may be ruling against. This has caused many newspapers and magazines to adapt to a ‘publish and be damned’ theory, in which they publish content at their own risk, with confidence that the PCC will not act on any breaches of the editors code.

The most common complaint received by the PCC is accuracy, followed by discrimination, harassment, witness payments, confidential sources and intrusion into grief and shock. The PCC can only do so much because, as mentioned previously, they actually have no legal powers. Editors usually try to talk their way out of complaints by stating that the articles and information contained within them is in the interest of the public.

In relation the the case of the death of Stephen Gately, the PCC received more than 25,000 complaints after Jan Moir caused speculation into the cause of death, bringing Gately’s homosexuality and personal life into the frame. In a ruling, the PCC stated that it was "uncomfortable with the tenor of the columnist's remarks”. The commission also added "Argument and debate are working parts of an active society and should not be constrained unnecessarily.".
The director of the PCC then released a statement saying that the article contained flaws, however "It would not be proportionate to rule against the columnist's right to offer freely expressed views about something that was the focus of public attention.".

Although the article did breach the code of conduct on three grounds, by being inaccurate, intruding into private grief and containing homophobic remarks, the code says that the press must ‘avoid making pejorative references to a sexual orientation’, Moir did not use any discriminatory, abusive or offensive language.

AOB1 - History Of Music Video

History of the Music Video

The 1930’s marked the beginning of music videos, minus the typical conventions we associate with them today, but with similarities such as eccentric dance routines to music which lasted roughly 3 minutes long. The ‘Soundies’ were an early version of the music video produced in New York, Chicago and Hollywood between 1940 and 1946, with the last group released in March 1947. They were displayed on Panoram’s, coin-operated jukebox’s which appeared in nightclubs, bars, restaurants, factory lounges, and amusement centres. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (commonly known as MGM) produced big budget films which, although not being conventional music videos or ‘soundies’, contributed to shaping music videos into what they are today.

The 1950’s brought the first colour TV transmission, and ‘rock and roll films’ such as ‘Blackboard Jungle’ and ‘Jailhouse Rock’. Controversy was caused as the classification of ‘teenager’ was brought on by the imitation of the behaviour shown in these films, and the culture surrounding them. Adolescent teens were given their own fashion and music, however, on screen behaviour resulted in them rioting and ripping up theatre seats.

Music videos as we know them today were first brought to us by The Beatles, with their video for ‘Strawberry Fields’. This was inspired by Top of the Pops, who used to play short video clips recorded by a band or artist to accompany the playing of a track when they were unable to make an appearance on the show. These were very basic and with an extremely low budget.  The 1970’s brought us the start of the modern music video, and gave us one of the greatest videos of all time, Queens ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’. Unlike today, the only effects were achieved by camera tricks rather than post-production editing techniques. The producer and crew had a budget of just £3500 to work with and the video was also filmed in just three hours, which is nothing compared to the time and money that would be spent today. Music videos were widely unaccepted at this time, as people believed that it took something away from the music and that it was just a ‘fad’ that would soon pass by.

The 1980’s brought us a new trend within music videos, in the form of intertextual reference. This was usually in the form of imitating popular films such as Michael Jackson’s ‘Beat It’ imitating Westside Story, Queen’s ‘Radio Gaga’ imitating Metropolis and Tupac’s ‘California Love’ imitating Mad Max. This trend still continues today, with a good example being Katy Perry’s ‘Last Friday Night’ and the film ‘She’s All That’ which is directed by Robert Iscove. The music video has been structured similarly to the film: a stereotypical ‘geeky’ girl with glasses, who admires a ‘popular’ boy in school, with the outcome being that they fall in love with each other. There is a clear bond between the music video and the film, which allows the audience to reinforce and expand the meaning of the music video, almost transforming it into a short film.

Former Monkee Michael Nesmith completely revolutionised the history of music video in 1981, by creating MTV (music television) which would be a television channel dedicated to the play of music videos, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The Buggles ‘Video Killed the Radio Star’ was the first music video to be broadcast on MTV when it went live on August 1^st at 12:01am. Three years later it was recognised that business had become revolved around making music videos, and that money was needed to be made off them. This ended an era of unpredictable, free and creative music videos which previously existed. The growing demand for music videos from artists resulted in image becoming seeming more important than actual music and talent, and it was clear that MTV had impacted the music industry in a way that was irreversible. “Music videos (were now) advertisements for lifestyles” – Laurie Anderson.

One of the most successful artists at this time, who gained fame through music videos, was Madonna. She showed that fame could be achieved through creating an image, via music video, which would otherwise have been achieved through touring and radio play (most probably over a much longer time scale). The rock genre was a late comer to the music video trend, partially due to the fact that these artists believed it was a promotion of image rather than raw talent, and possibly because characteristics of the genre is to ‘rebel’ or to be alternative. However once the success took over, there was a lot of pressure from record labels for artists of all genres to start creating music videos.

After the fascination and novelty of music videos started to wear off, artists wanted to push boundaries and create controversy and uproar. The first music video to be banned was ‘Relax’ by Frankie Goes to Hollywood. Phenomenal public outrage was causes by the highly homoerotic themes, which resulted in the video being banned from television completely. This then caused more interest in the video leading to its huge success. Other artists then caught on to this, such as The Prodigy with ‘Smack My Bitch Up’ and Madonna with ‘Justify My Love’ and they then tried to gain more success through ‘shock value’. 

AOB2 - Music Video Analysis

AOB3 (Music Press) Creating Meaning

AOB 4 Music Video (Representation)

How and why is Beyoncé represented in different ways in her music videos?

For this task, as a group we watched four of Beyoncé’s music videos from throughout her career, in which there were both similarities and differences. We then individually made notes about the ways she was represented in each video, and the reasons for it.

The video from the earliest point in Beyoncé’s career that we looked at was ‘Crazy In Love’ which she performed with her husband Jay-Z. Throughout the video, Beyoncé is seen dressed provocatively, dancing s*xily and parading herself around in a daring manor. The video submits a message of danger and excitement, which is reflected from how she must feel being, as she describes, ‘crazy in love’. Dance routines fill this music video with heat and energy. Approximately half way through this video, Beyoncé can be seen trapped in the back of a car which is then set on fire. She then appears on screen as the un-touchable alter-ego that she has created for herself- Sasha Fierce. Dance routines appear more intense and even more s*xually related, giving Fierce the representation as Beyoncé’s wild inner-self. 

The second video that we watched by Beyoncé is called ‘Single ladies’ and immediately represents s*xiness and class. The video is consistent throughout in both music and visuals. It is set in a pure white room with just Beyoncé and two other dancers, one either side of her. All three girls are dressed exactly the same, with the exception of Beyoncé’s left arm, which appears to have some form of armour on it, possibly to represent power and strength. Exhibitionism is displayed throughout this video as Beyoncé and her dancers perform a sexualised dance routine in black leotards. The costume for this video also creates a sense of class, as well as s*xualisation, as the leotards only really reveal Beyoncé’s and the dancers’ legs. The nature of the song is to express the independence and strength of women. This is represented in the video as no men appear throughout the whole video, just three women energetically parading around a room. Also, the majority of the camera angles are from below eye level, which enhances the message to the audience of females being strong, single and independent.

Beyoncé’s video for her song ‘Halo’ has more of a narrative than ‘Crazy In Love’ and ‘Single Ladies’. More scenes of her with her husband, Jay-Z, are featured and there are less s*xualised images. A couple of very short voyeuristic dance scenes can be seen of Beyoncé practicing ballet alone in her dance studio, where she is unknowingly being watched from above by her husband. Not once does she look into the camera, or acknowledge that it is there. The video also starts with Beyoncé watching over her husband lovingly as he sleeps, and continues to show many different scenes of them together in their home. The song is about being in love, but is represented in a completely different way to ‘Crazy In Love’. Beyoncé’s character is portrayed as sweet, innocent and natural, in comparison to being portrayed as s*xy and strong, or voyeuristically dancing in the middle of the street.  In connection with the title of the song, the colours used in the video for ‘Halo’ have been selected to coincide with the heaven-like theme. For example, Beyoncé and her husband are always shown wearing neutral colours, instead of perhaps a bright colour such as green or orange. The type of colour palette and the desaturation of the image also connect the lyrics to the visuals, creating a blissful, dreamlike state associated with being in love.

The final video to be analysed is ‘Telephone’, which Beyoncé performs with Lady Gaga. In this video we see Beyoncé take much more of a supporting role, as Lady Gaga is in the spotlight. This video also shows much more of a narrative, and is full of inter-textual references to Thelma and Louise, various Quentin Tarantino movies and many more, particularly in the second half of the video. Beyoncé has completely replaced her usual style of class and elegance with a more edgy bizarre dress sense, much like the dress sense in which Lady Gaga is famous for representing. The storyline within this video is Lady Gaga being held in prison, which could be seen as a visual representation of feelings displayed the in lyrics, where she feels trapped and held down, unable to go out to a club without being mithered. Beyoncé plays the character who, in the video, bails Lady Gaga out of jail, and then accomplices her in poisoning to death several members of the public in a café, before driving off together and promising to ‘never come back’. These characters may represent a bad or dangerous side to Beyoncé or Gaga, giving Beyoncé’s fans something unusual and explicit.

The audience of these music videos can be easily influenced, and this can be explained by the two-step flow model. Most commonly, Beyoncé is the ‘opinion leader’, with many followers and is seen as a role model, especially to younger girls. The messages and feelings portrayed in her music videos, along with sense of dress and general characteristics, are likely to be imitated. It is believed that young women and girls can sometimes use music videos and other media forms to try and build a personal identity by relating their real life situations to the lyrics and thoughts/feelings in a song. Male viewers tend to have a more s*xualised view of the videos, and wish to view Beyoncé herself, or seek the females that imitate her behaviour. 

AOB-5 - (Music Video) Distribution & Ownership - One Sheet

AOB-5 - (Music Video) Distribution & Ownership - Record labels

AOB 6 Regulation (Music Video)

Ofcom Ruling – Rihanna ‘S&M’

On March 10^th 2011, at 11:25am, a music video was broadcast on the television channel ‘WTF TV’. Due to the explicit content displayed throughout the video for Rihanna’s song ‘S&M’, issues we’re raised as to the suitability for its audiences.

I have included a quote from the Ofcom report, which details the content of Rihanna’s music video, and the issues in which it has raised:

“The video contained themes of s*xual bn*dage, dominance and s*domasochism, including images of Rihanna: being dragged into a room of press journalists and cameras; her body and face being restrained behind cellophane; walking a man – who is the well known gossip blogger Perez Hilton - on a leash like a dog and whipping him; whipping a man dressed as a journalist with his hands and feet tied up with gaffer tape; in s*xualised positions with blow-up dolls; lying on the floor on her chest with her hands and feet tied up with rope behind her back in positions of s*xualised restraint; dressed up in various rubber and latex f*tish outfits; and eating a banana and licking an ice cream encrusted with jewels in a s*xually suggestive manner. The video also included images of people dressed as press journalists with bondage-style “b*ll g*gs‟ in, or gaffer tape across, their mouths. There were very brief images of the word “sl*t” written on Rihanna’s dress and a press journalist’s notepad.”

Ofcom then considered whether this music video raised issues under Rule 1.3 of the Code, and asked TV Two (the parent company of WTF TV) how this music video complied with the following rule - “Children must also be protected by appropriate scheduling from material that is unsuitable for them.”

TV Two responded, and stated that “the song of the music video in question has currently sold more than 12 million copies worldwide and recently remained in top position for 2 weeks in the UK Top 40 Chart”. Also that “the broadcasting of pop music videos is a well established genre... [and] the nature of the genre is that from time to time certain performers artistically like to shock and challenge existing standards”. It stated that, “the reality is that such challenges are likely to shock unknowing parents rather than the younger, street-wise consumer of the material”.

In my personal opinion, I was not affected by the content of this music video; neither did I find it offensive or degrading. Being an 18-year-old female, I am able to understand the content of this music video and the lyrics of the song. Also being familiar with the artist in question, “Rihanna”, I wasn’t shocked to see any of the scenes displayed in the video, nor was I surprised to see an element of ‘shock value’ being used in her video. As TV Two stated, Rihanna’s song “S&M” had sold more than 12 million copies worldwide at the time of this report, and had remained in the top position for 2 weeks in the UK Top 40 Chart, which implies that despite the apparent argument against this video, the artists’ fans aren’t offended or appalled at the subject matter. However, after taking into consideration that this particular music video was played before the watershed, and during the daytime and before the watershed on other music channels an edited version of this video was broadcast, i must agree with the Ofcom ruling. As this music channel, and the video in question was within breach of Rule 1.3, and this video shows highly s*xualised and potentially harmful (if imitated) images which shouldn’t be broadcast when children could be viewing. I believe that a more thoughtful approach to scheduling would have been more appropriate and professional.