Stop the Musical Bastardization

Tonight’s Rant is geared at my own industry and in particular the way that music has become so abused in commercials.

Like most of you, I’ve become quite accustomed to TV commercials using popular songs as musical beds. Some are done quite well where the lyric of the song ties directly to the concept. I don’t mind that. I’ve done it myself most recently with an updated version of “Getting to Know You” on a Honda Canada ad.

Then again, others simply buy a song to excuse the horrible concept of the ad – or lack thereof. You know the spots - happy people bouncing around to a tune that adds absolutely nothing to the idea other than a soundtrack. As if a good song can save a bad commercial. These ones bother me. And I fail to understand why any client would pay the licensing and publishing fees to polish their turd of a commercial. I guess they deserve it.

But that’s not the worst offender. Which brings me to the focus of my diatribe.

Today, I was driving into work and heard a radio spot that started with a very familiar refrain – the smooth melody of Marvin Gaye’s “Mercy Mercy Me.” And then, good lord, the horror began. Instead of the lyrics that opened this poignant song, the words, “Mercy, Mercy Me” were replaced by “Mercer, Mercer, Me.” The ad was for a condo company selling a new development called, guess it, “The Mercer.” Agh!!! You can’t be serious?! Someone had the gall to take what is probably one of the first ecological anthems, a heartfelt plea for environmental awareness and turn it into a piece of shit jingle for a condo! You’ve got to be fucking kidding me?

But, y’know what, someone actually approved that lyrical change. Either Gaye’s estate or the current holder of his publishing rights (because Marvin was the sole creator of the song).

Can you imagine how the conversation went?

“Ah, hi there. We’re interested in the publishing rights to Mercy Mercy Me, but we’d like to make one itsy, bitsy change to the lyrics.”

“Hmm. Okay? Which ones exactly – the chorus, the verse, what?”

“Actually, we’d like to kind of re-write the main lyric and title of the song.”

“I see. Why? You find the word Mercy a little too soft? Are you doing a kind of punk rock thing with it and want to get edgier?”

“Not really, we’re selling condos.”

“You’re what?”

“We’re selling condos called the Mercer…and…well, I think you know where this is going.”

“Geez, I don’t know about that. It’s the title of the song. And Marvin really had a lot of heart for it. I don’t know about…”

“We’ll pay you $100,000.”

“Alrighty then, Mercer Mercer Me it is.”

“Fantastic! The cheque’s in the mail. Oh, and just one more thing.”

“Uh huh.”

“We’re building another project in downtown Toronto and we were wondering if you might be interested in selling us the rights to Marvin’s Inner City Blues – Makes Me Wanna Holler. We think Inner City Mews – Makes Me Wanna Call Up is kinda catchy. You think?”

(CLICK & DIAL TONE)

Mercy, Mercy Me indeed. Marvin Gaye must be rolling is his frickin’ grave for this blasphemy.

So, to the writer that thought it was a great idea to bastardize the lyrics, all I can say is shame on you. I hope the next time you try and get sexy with your partner to Sexual Healing your erection fails you miserably (if you’re a guy). May you break your ankle the next time you get up to dance to What’s Going On at a wedding. And may you continue on the pathetic career path on which you’re currently engaged.

And that’s my brainfart for Friday, September 3, 2010.

Telecaster Must Go

For anyone in the advertising business that knows me, this week’s rant is something that I personally have expressed an opinion about on more than one occasion. And it’s got to do with the governing body that decides what’s fit for Canadians to see from a commercial content point of view. And that organization is known as Telecaster (who just this week rejected a couple of scripts I was working on for completely inane reasons – hence the Rant).

Anyone in the ad biz knows how this works. But let me explain for everyone else. Telecaster is an organization that, decades ago, was established as a self-regulating body for television advertising. Networks didn’t want to deal with advertising complaints and so The Television Bureau (TVB) created Telecaster to “screen” commercial scripts to make sure that “public decency” wasn’t being defiled. And, in turn, insulate networks from direct potential complaints. I did mention, decades ago right?

Now, let me tell you how it works.

An agency must submit a TV script to Telecaster in order to get approval to air it. Now, you’d think that an organization with this much power would be a large body consisting of the heads of broadcast corporations, cultural anthropologists and other such intelligent folks. They’d be truly national in scope and aligned with and considerate of the content of TV programming that the commercials were being broadcast on.

But then you’d be wrong.

Telecaster literally consists of a very small group of people that self-interpret a very loose “code” and make decisions on what “they” deem acceptable for over 33 million Canadians to see. Hey, sounds just like communism – a small minority deciding what’s acceptable for everyone else to watch. (Or call it plain old censorship).

But the truly fucked up part is the code itself. It’s not like the criminal code that’s very prescriptive and cut and dry. Telecaster’s code is so wide open to interpretation that your commercial can literally be killed on what they deem to be in “good taste” or not. And we’re putting this in the hands of a bunch of ultra-conservatives.

And guess what? It doesn’t matter jack shit about the TV programming that the commercial is going to appear on. For example, years ago, I had a spot that was supposed to air on the Sunday Night Sex Show with Sue Johansen in which a woman dressed in sweats (after noticing her vibrating laundry machine) comedically and awkwardly rubs up against it. The spot was rejected because you’re not allowed to show "self-stimulation." Meanwhile, back from commercial break, here’s Sue waving around a 12” rubber dildo. Another case? We came up with a new flavour of slushie for Mac’s called Whack and created a double entendre-laced spot that was supposed to be air during The Family Guy. We had to bleep out both the name in the audio and “black-out” the name of the drink on the cup. On a show that features a pedophile character and a perverted, over-sexed pilot - giggety-giggety. Really?

And if you think it’s just sex, think again. We had a situation with a certain sandwich franchise that, even after we got initial approval for the spot, Telecaster tried to prevent us from airing because a male character was mistakenly struck on the head with a frying pan by his wife. “You can’t show hits the head,” we were told. I can’t tell you the bullshit we went through to finally get a “Telecaster-approved version” on the air (including having to get rid of any sound effects of the “hit”). Then not 2 months later, Pepsi Max came out with a spot in which a guy gets hit in the head, not once, but twice with a golf club; another guy gets a bowling ball dropped on his head; another guy stands up in a limo sunroof and strikes his head on a highway underpass… And I’m being punished for a frying pan whack? How the fuck isn’t this a double standard? I’ll tell you what I think. Pepsi spends way more money than my client did in TV advertising. But you draw your own conclusions.

AND…I could go on and on and on and on. (By the way, most recently, sorry Mitsubishi).

The point is this. Telecaster is out of touch. Their guidelines simply don't reflect what’s going on in current TV programming. The current crop of popular shows, like 30 Rock, Two & A Half Men, Family Guy, etc… are exploring more mature themes and sexual innuendo than ever before. So why are Telecaster’s guidelines not keeping pace? There is a real discrepancy between what is permissible or deemed acceptable from a TV content versus commercial content perspective.

Furthermore, Telecaster is actually fucking the very networks that they were once hired to police. Advertisers and agencies are getting fed up with the bullshit regulations and they’re taking their money other places (hello Internet). And we’re left with what? A bleak TV commercial landscape where ads take no risk and offend no one.

If you don’t believe me, ask yourselves this: when was the last time that you saw a commercial that really made you stop and take notice? That might have even made you feel a bit uncomfortable? That made you break down laughing because it was so wrong but seemed so right?

As far as TV commercials are concerned, Canada is becoming the land of milquetoast and mediocrity.

So, here’s my plea. I want to encourage advertisers, agencies and everyday people who love great commercials to petition for a more liberal interpretation of “ethics” or simply put the onus back on the networks as it was at the beginning of TV. Because, the reality is, Telecaster ain’t working. And so much fantastic, creative and funny advertising is being wrongly shielded from Canadians. So, write tvb@tvb.ca and let them know that they need to stop the censorship, get it right or get lost.

The question is, who has the balls to stand with me for change?

And that’s my brainfart for Friday, April 9, 2010.