Why no Hype for the young Brothers?

[willgroove2]

Johnny Lang - because he's more popular. Nothing to do with skin color or talent.

Society may prefer him due to some institutional racism - but the promotion company is just catering to the desires of society, not determining them.

The point I was making was that due to a bunch of factors(youth,novelty,and talent) Jonny Lang is going to get more $$$ for a gig than someone like Lonnie Brooks so a lack of coverage by a blues mag isn't going to hurt him but if Lonnie Brooks isn't covered it has a bigger effect on his career. I used Lonnie Brooks because thats who popped in my head but a better comparison would be someone like Buddy Guy who is a bigger name (after 50 yrs in the biz). I know a bunch of young Brothers who play on the Blues set in Chicago and tour internationally ,and when i say young I mean under 30;do they get national coverage from Blues mag's? (that's a honest question i really don't know)

 

[Brad Johnson]

I'm not talking about ads, although in most of these types of magazines (BP, GP, Mix, etc.) that IS what the gear reviews basically are.

I can read fawning gear reviews designed to appease the people buying ads in the Musicians Friend catalog or the manufacturers brag sheets - so I don't need that.

Have you two met?


In any event, what does it have to do with artist coverage?

Probably no one, although possibly the readership. Not everything is there to appease, mostly just anything that mentions anyone who pays to advertise in the magazine.

I can read fawning gear reviews designed to appease the people buying ads in the Musicians Friend catalog or the manufacturers brag sheets - so I don't need that.

Again, have the two of you met?

You talk about the magazine, ignoring what the OP was about and focus on ads and gear reviews. You've run the fact (in your mind) that the magazine is strictly about the money into the ground and now you can't tell me the strictly about the money motive behind featuring a guy most people weren't even aware of.

I don't have numbers - but it is the typical scenario. The popular artists are popular after all because more people are interested in them.

Typical based on what? You don't read the magaizine.

Did that change?

BP is no different from what I've seen in the few issues I've perused than any other magazine of the sort - GP , BP, Mix, etc. are all very similar.

It's amazing and amusing how small a sample some of you are willing to hang your hat on.

If you regularly sell enough newsstand copies, absolutely. All advertisers care about is sales - they don't care whether it's a million new customers each month, or the same million each month (well, actually they'd generally prefer the former over the latter).

We're talking about Bass Player magazine. Do you know or even have a clue as to the breakdown of newsstand vs. subscription at BP. If not...

Duh. Those numbers weren't intended to be real, they were intended to explain why in a lot of cases it makes more financial sense to cater to popularity.

So it was something you pulled from somewhere? Cool.

In a thread where some are continually asking for real numbers... duh.

Do you think BP is intentionally foregoing profit by avoiding lesser known black players?

Did I say that? Maybe, because few bring the issue up, they don't even realize it is one for many people.

Do you think they are doing so because of racism?

IMO - IF they are foregoing profits, it's unintentional and done in a belief that what they are doing is the best way to maximize profits. I may be wrong, but the idea that they are doing it out of some racist leanings is rather ludicrous.

If it's unintentional, do you think people should remain quiet abut it? How would they ever find out?

Duh.

 

[Brad Johnson]

What about all those legends they ignore like Dragonetti, Bottesini, Simandl, Nanny, Koussevitzky, Karr, Zimmerman, Rabbath...

Is it just that they don't appeal to the readership, or is there some nefarious plot in not featuring them either?

Forgot your profit motive spiel already?

 

[aborgman]

I can't speak for other people, but I clearly stated that I think there are sound financial reasons to support diversity.

Do you believe BP would make more profit if they increased the diversity of their coverage?

If so, your argument is that you know better than the management of BP what will sell their magazine.

You may be right, you may be wrong - but if I were a betting man, I'd bet you're wrong.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I have never said, nor intended to imply, that the evidence I have put forth should be the end of the discussion. Rather, it should be the beginning. Only from looking at actual facts can we ever actually address a problem. Anecdotes and perceptions are way too susceptible to interpretation. Facts are what they are. That is, unless you're a George Bush, "my-mind-is-made-up, don't-confuse-me-with-the-facts" type.

How could it be the beginning when it tells us practically nothing of the content of the magazine? Again, this was not about covers... so what does your list of covers go towards proving?

Nothing. What actual facts do you think you presented by doing that?

You certainly won't confuse anyone with your "facts". But keep swingin'

 

[Brad Johnson]

Do you believe BP would make more profit if they increased the diversity of their coverage?

If so, your argument is that you know better than the management of BP what will sell their magazine.

You may be right, you may be wrong - but if I were a betting man, I'd bet you're wrong.

You think that by appealing to a wider audience, they make less profit? I'd take that bet.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Do you believe BP would make more profit if they increased the diversity of their coverage?

If so, your argument is that you know better than the management of BP what will sell their magazine.

You may be right, you may be wrong - but if I were a betting man, I'd bet you're wrong.

Do you believe that BP intentionally denies coverage of Blacks for financial gain? That certainly seems to be what you are insinuating, which, by the way, is way more than any of us critics have said. If so, they are blatantly racist and deserve support from no decent person. If their relative lack of coverage is not intentional or conscious, then my arguments for increased diversity may well apply.

 

[chicago_mike]

Hey Will, I know a lot of brothers young and old who dont get a lot of rep on said blues mags. Its a drag really. The only local bassist that I see in one mag from time to time is Felton Crews, who was playing with Charlie Musslewhite...

Heres the kicker...(of wich I could care less, just pointing out a fun trivia fact ), IN one particular issue theres lots of photos from him on stage and with other blues musicians....NEVER did I see Charlie Musslewhite or when it was a group of cats, what color was everybody? Ill never write to the magazine and I still pick it up from time to time...and I have been told to my face I am the wrong color to play blues, hell I've called the wrong color to play bass! All this does is tell me I must be doing something right!

And as for Johnny Lang..its marketing really..I was watching tv with my band and some girl was like all ready to mate with this kid (johnny was on tv), cause he was young and cute.. With the hair in front of his face...you know someone told him to have his hair cut like that...look what they did to Anthony Gomes! YIKES!

I think we only market out of sex and fear.

 

[beggar98]

How could it be the beginning when it tells us practically nothing of the content of the magazine? Again, this was not about covers... so what does your list of covers go towards proving?

Nothing. What actual facts do you think you presented by doing that?

You certainly won't confuse anyone with your "facts". But keep swingin'

You don't think distribution of cover articles has anything to do with who a magazine gives coverage to? What planet are you on?

I'm the only one in this thread who has tried to quantify this issue. The only one. I've broken down the racial distribution of every BP I own. Granted, I don't own many, but it should open the door for someone who has more issues lying around to either confirm or refute my theory. Why are you so afraid of examining this problem?

 

[aborgman]

If it's unintentional, do you think people should remain quiet abut it? How would they ever find out?

No - unintentional or otherwise - if people want to change it, they should actually take some ACTION outside just talking about it.

Write the editors, boycott the magazine, contact the advertisers, organize a protest... do something that actually has some remote possibility of actually achieving something.

 

[aborgman]

You think that by appealing to a wider audience, they make less profit? I'd take that bet.

You're under the assumption that increasing diversity will make it appeal to a wider audience.

Due to limited space, more "up and comers" means less established artists. It's quite possible that less established artists and more "up and comers" will actually appeal to a smaller (if "wider") audience.

 

[aborgman]

Do you believe that BP intentionally denies coverage of Blacks for financial gain?

No - I think BP has a finite amount of space, and tries to allocate their space such that they maximize the amount of information that the majority of their customer base desires to read.

If their relative lack of coverage is not intentional or conscious, then my arguments for increased diversity may well apply.

I think it's intentional - and I think it has nothing to do with race. I think it has to with popularity and a finite number of pages.

It's a zero sum game. Every new person featured means less of the popular featured, and the less of the popular featured the less magazines they'll sell.

 

[elBandito]

Because they're not:
-White
-Female
-Plays braless in a tight tshirt

 

[chicago_mike]

sex and fear..if you can keep people afraid, they'll consume what your selling.

If you can get people horny, they'll consume what you are selling.

thats about it.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

No - I think BP has a finite amount of space, and tries to allocate their space such that they maximize the amount of information that the majority of their customer base desires to read.




I think it's intentional - and I think it has nothing to do with race. I think it has to with popularity and a finite number of pages.

It's a zero sum game. Every new person featured means less of the popular featured, and the less of the popular featured the less magazines they'll sell.

Given that you think their policy is purely about money, and given that the editor of BP plainly stated that the staff reads TB for ideas, why do you think posters criticizing BP here is a waste of time? If they read TB for ideas about content, why are the ideas in this thread any less valuable than ideas on content in any other thread on TB?

 

[willgroove2]

Hey Will, I know a lot of brothers young and old who dont get a lot of rep on said blues mags. Its a drag really. The only local bassist that I see in one mag from time to time is Felton Crews, who was playing with Charlie Musslewhite...

Heres the kicker...(of wich I could care less, just pointing out a fun trivia fact ), IN one particular issue theres lots of photos from him on stage and with other blues musicians....NEVER did I see Charlie Musslewhite or when it was a group of cats, what color was everybody? Ill never write to the magazine and I still pick it up from time to time...and I have been told to my face I am the wrong color to play blues, hell I've called the wrong color to play bass! All this does is tell me I must be doing something right!

And as for Johnny Lang..its marketing really..I was watching tv with my band and some girl was like all ready to mate with this kid (johnny was on tv), cause he was young and cute.. With the hair in front of his face...you know someone told him to have his hair cut like that...look what they did to Anthony Gomes! YIKES!

I think we only market out of sex and fear.

If someone told you you were the wrong color to play Bass, walk away from them....fast because their stupid! Although I am a lifelong Chicagoan I never played a lot of Blues but because of friendships with guys who do I made some observations a long time ago ; Many blues club owners in Chicago like the idea of a bunch of old black guy's up on stage playing. Because they cater to tourist that's the image they want to portray even if there are others who are talented enough to also be featured who are not black.But on the other hand if you read the media coverage about the jazz scene in Chicago you would think that there are very few brothers playing jazz and if they do they play avant-gard or improvised music. No mention of the smooth jazz players who work with national acts,no real mention of the acid jazz scene or Neo soul/R&B players nothing. This is the same in other citys also but i live in Chicago so that the sample I'm using.

 

[chicago_mike]

Very true sir! Very true.

 

[PilbaraBass]

Given that you think their policy is purely about money, and given that the editor of BP plainly stated that the staff reads TB for ideas, why do you think posters criticizing BP here is a waste of time? If they read TB for ideas about content, why are the ideas in this thread any less valuable than ideas on content in any other thread on TB?

Please, stop with the rhetorical question arguing already. It's giving me (and probably others) a headache (hard to follow for my simple mind )

I don't think the way people should criticize BP mag is simple...

don't like, don't buy...

I don't believe BP is racist. Nor do I believe they are slighting anyone intentionally.

I do believe that they are leaning towards the metal market more heavily these days and that's unfortunate, as I am not a fan...

but I believe that they are motivated by marketing, pure and simple...and metal, unfortunately, is a more thriving market vs. jazz and urban...

 

[Billy Low]

I don't believe BP is racist. Nor do I believe they are slighting anyone intentionally....

I (being the OP) never said they did.

If I kicked you in the head unintentionally would it hurt less than if I did it intentionally? I think the impact would be the same. Your response may be different, but I am sure your head would hurt no less.

 

[KJung]

Interesting thread, and I'm in very late.

I guess I'll just add one thing. It's just an 'impression' versus anything I've really thought through in detail at this point, but it seems to me that the music being played by primarily white artists (for lack of a better term) still has, for the most part, the classic 'bass/drums/guitar/keys' format (i.e., bands!), while much of the music I see and hear from predominately black artists seems to be more synth and track based (i.e., solo artists). This is primarily based on watching MTV/VH1 to try to keep up with what is happening in commercial music as I get older and more out of touch!

In other words, there are more young, white bassists getting airplay (radio and video) in the pop world due to the above. There just seems to be more white bands with bass players on the air today, versus the more 'solo' format in the more black oriented hip hop/rap/and even soul and r&B category at this point.

I know this is an oversimplification, but it seems that BP's mix of younger bassists (which does seem to be slanted toward white artists) reflects that mix in the current market place (at least with regards to contemporary pop/funk/R&B/rock/soul music).

With more established artists, I see no color bias at all in that magazine.

Just another idea and interpretation... be gentle