What the hell is this?
 

http://www.undercover.com.au/news/20...evienicks.html
update: Stevie Nicks Story Withdrawn

by Paul Cashmere

November 2, 2005

As we have been informed Ms Nicks does not talk to "websites", and therefore recognise online music websites as a legitimate form of media, Undercover has withdrawn the previous story promoting her upcoming tour.

As communicating to her fans via online media is of no value to Ms Nicks, then we can only assume that this update will equally have no relevance.

-----------

How much more unprofessional can you get?

OMG, did you see the photo of Stevie Wonder and the caption underneath it?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

very strange, maybe someone in her 'camp' blew them off....she may not even know about it...

sounds like a case of sour grapes...what a jerk! :mad:

Yeah, that is exactly what it sounds like...someone told them to bug off.

I can not imagine Stevie be anti-web, that considering she does have an "official website".

Is that site not connected with "free" music some how??

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The quality of reporting on this site is generally pretty bad, so if Stevie's camp did blow them off, I'm not surprised.

I can and when it comes to anything other than that boring official website, I'm sure she is.

I'm emailing that bugger

[email protected]

I know. What the **** ever Losers. Stevie Wonder is a great singer, but to do something like that is just BS:mad:

Well said:thumbsup:

Yeah, Nicks Fix is the only foray onto the Web Stevie Nicks is ever likely to make -- & even that isn't going to be major, as evidenced by the scant work on that one.

Do you think she or any people from her camp are even involved in it at all? I mean it used to just be a fan site, right? And it hasn't changed at all since then, except for the addition of Q&As and ocassional giveaways.

It sounds to me like they asked for some sort of interview and Nicks' management told them no and now they are pissed. All that rambling sounds like our grapes to me. I mean the statement "As we have been informed Ms Nicks does not talk to "websites"," means they did not talk to La Nicks directly and the next statement "therefore recognise online music websites as a legitimate form of media," is the author's spin on the reason why.

Stevie has Mick's sense of participation: she or her brother or her publicist or someone like that feeds an item to the Nicks Fix administrator about . . . oh, three or four times per year.

Taku's the only guy from the current camp who mixes with us. Past guys like Welch & Weston also mix, but Taku's the only current guy -- unless someone else does, too, pseudonymously. Maybe one of our regular ledgies is actually Karen or Cory.

Well, whatever else ... they got their facts straight.

from what I've been told, nothing is posted on the site without approval from Stevie's people first....

Well (and with respect as always :wavey: ) - she talks to her website - so the statement that she does not talk to websites is incorrect. The statement should be she does not talk to websites other than her own.

Also, the statement "(does not) recognise online music websites as a legitimate form of media" is a gray area and IMO mostly untrue. For TISL and SYW - she used online media to promote those records. For example, she used VH-1 (a music website) for TISL and gave interviews, etc. which could only be found on VH-1 - then for SYW, they used AOL First Listen (a music website). So, she has used mainstream online media in that regard. If by media, they refer to press - she has done that as well in the sense that articles on her are online and some of the online versions are more in depth than the print ones, if they were ever printed in the first place, which some were not a la Salon and that ilk, which I think she has given interviews to in the past.

Finally, the statement "communicating to her fans via online media is of no value to Ms Nicks" is false because she uses her website to do just that. For example, her journal posts after 9/11 - her letter to Peter Jennings - her letters to the troops - her statement when her father died, etc.

In the end, she obviously prefers her own website and legitimate media/press - which this rouge website is not.

I also have no opinion on whether that choice is bad for her.

Oh, all right. Let's split hairs & miss the general point.
Oh baloney, Jason. If you actually believe that Stevie Nicks had anything to do with those marketing activities other than signing a check, you're living in LaLaLand. In fact, she probably didn't even sign the check. Stevie Nicks is as Net-phobic as they come in the entertainment industry. She always has been & she probably always will be.

The rest of your points -- that Stevie has "given interviews" to online news outlets, that Stevie communicates to her fans via online media, that Stevie recognizes the online world in general as legitimate -- are so sophistic & ridiculous that I don't think I'll even bother to refute them. It's like arguing that Hitler expressed sanctity for life because he took care of his puppies.

You habitually crow about the exception as if it were the rule. Does your mind not function with the underlying truths of generalities?

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, you were the one talking about facts and I gave them to you. That you do not like them is not my affair. But, that does not change their status as a fact.

BTW - my mind functions with facts as that is all I am really interested in.

But, in the end, I agree with you that La Nicks, like most musicians today, refuses to see the value of the net promotion, though she has done just that, as noted above, and with success a la TISL :shrug:

Oh, huge success, that.

That's total bull sh*t. While La Nicks may not be the most internet-friendly person on the face of the earth she has done numerous interviews with websites, including cdnow.com and launch.com. Just check nicksfix under articles and interviews. These people are obviously bitter because she did not grant them an interview. Very poor business sense to put out a statement like that.

And let's just say she did refuse to talk to them it's outrageous to assume she doesn't "recognize online music websites as a legitimate form of media". What does one thing have to do with the other? Just because she doesn't want to talk to them she doesn't recognize online music as a legitimate form of media? That's just plain ridiculous.

Well, for TISL - it got her into the a #5 debut, which is not too bad for an essentially irrelevant artist in the commercial world Brittany Spears. Ditto for SYW (though I think it debuted higher).

IMO sadly, the steam ran out after that and those records sold about the same in numbers (SYW was a little higher) - which was a hundred thousand or so less than a million. But, the question is where would they have sold without that online promotion. I think they would have sold less initially and overall though the other regular media blitz they did may have compensated for the lack of online exposure. Interestingly, the most successful marketing tool they ever used was MTV for The Dance, which I think they tried to do for SYW with the Blockbuster concert they then posted sniglets of on AOL. Sadly, that method was not as successful as The Dance.

In the end, though, I agree with you that they should utlize the net to market their music. But, that would require separation from a huge label that allows them luxury while recording, and they are never going to do that.

I mean I really think if LB released the remaining GOS and the newer stuff online via his website, he would sell more and make more (assuming no contractual obligations would prohibit that) - but they apparently will never do that, which is sad.

I agree with you completely. There is no denying the power of the net, especially as a marketing tool in music. But also keep in mind who we are dealing with here, "a cliff dweller from the old school". It's not so easy to sell these people on the idea and how much of it is really in their control anyway? Isn't the record label responsible for a good deal of the marketing/promotions?

Exactly. Well put:nod:

I believe it is, but the artist can interject ideas. I think David's point is La Nicks had nothing to do with obtaining the VH-1 promotion - the idea was brought to her and she essentially said whatever you all thinkk will work. I think La Nicks is far more hands on than that and I based that conclusion on her business acumen on the DR video and her comments on how she and Crow talked about how they were going to get La Nicks' music on the radio, etc. So, La Nicks knows she has to market herself and I think she does a pretty good job of it considering the public's general lack of interest in her as opposed to Eminem and the like.

I also think her music is unappealing and bland to many, including her milder fans.

Anyone remember which article they had up in the first place?

This was the article that was posted a few days ago...

===
Horse race named after Stevie Nicks * * * *
Monday, 31 October 2005
By Paul Cashmere
Undercover News


Fleetwood Mac superstar Stevie Nicks has a horse race named after her in Melbourne this week.

Race 7 at Flemington Race Course this Saturday (November 5) is the Stevie Nicks Plate. "I am so honored to be a part of something with such cultural value as the Melbourne Cup and the whole week of the racing carnival” she said in a statement. “I know it's a very special time for the city and I'm thrilled to be able to experience it all first hand”.

A day at the races means dressing up for the star. "Besides the great racing, I've been told the fashion is wonderful and so my designer Margi Kent and I are having so much fun planning my outfits. I know it's going to be a fantastic week" she said.

Nicks is in Melbourne this week to announce her forthcoming concert tour. She will perform with the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra on February 18, 2006. The show will be filmed for a live DVD. Promoter Andrew McManus was also the man behind MSO shows for DVD with Kiss and Meatloaf.

Stevie will perform with John Farnham in Perth and Brisbane as well as her own shows in Sydney and Newcastle.

Vanessa Carlton will support all shows.

Dates are:

Saturday February 18 Melbourne, Rod Laver Arena * with the MSO
Monday February 20, Brisbane, Entertainment Centre * with John Farnham
Friday February 24, Newcastle, Entertainment Centre
Saturday February 25, Sydney, Entertainment Centre
Tuesday February 28, Perth, The WACA Ground * with John Farnham

i sent the link to a friend of mine...
guess what?
the link below now targets the original article

:shrug:

what the hell is this is right! :blob1:

Interesting. That was complimentary. I thought maybe it was the one that said something about Stevie thinking it was still 1978 because of her boots and dress... that would offer more of an explanation as to why her people may have snubbed the site when approached for comment or something. Oh well. It's pretty stupid to put up a bitter little message like that, whatever the case.

Look Again
 

Hey hey check it out again..there is now a article and a nice picture of Stevie too..!! I think maybe they got some complaints about the article being withdrawn.......tee hee..
http://www.undercover.com.au/news/20...evienicks.html

yes paul was very bad!

maybe my email worked

what did you write?

I don't know if you are implying here that she should? If not, don't read on... But, imo, mixing with fans via the internet is not actually in her job description. I appreciate that Taku does, but with all due respect to him, he's not quite on the same plane as Stevie in terms of fans. If she ever came to this board and started posting and interecting, as Taku does on his site, this place would crash! :laugh:

AHHHHhhhhh, BINGO!
For those who may not know, Stevie (and many other music stars)
supported an amicus brief to the Supreme Court when the Napster
case was tried there. (Against Napster, obviously.)
Napster? Napstar? :shrug:

I've been wondering that since you posted a couple pages back that you were going to email him. Did the bugger respond to you? I totally agree with everyone who said he was suffering from a major case of sour grapes. Loser.

Yeah let's get on their case and have them sell it to a corporation
once and for all. . . . .
Maybe $20 a month for membership?

I basically said that he needed to check his facts and back off. I said that Stevie may or may not have even had knowledge of what was going on and that attacking her personally was out of line and that the picture of Stevie Wonder and its caption was tasteless and that he should be ashamed of himself for acting like a 5 yr old. That her fans support her 100% and that being so mean-spirited is not the way he should be addressing things. Short and sweet.