Nicks McNuggets

[vivfox]

I wore this to see "EAT, PRAY, LOVE"--a very apropo outfit for that movie, don't cha think?--but this is somewhat of my normal eveyday kinda wear for people who follow this blog. The movie was--eh--maybe a 6.5 on the 1-10 scale--it wasn;t as deeply profound, impacting, or as enlightening as I thought it would be. But I was with great company--me Mum--and we enjoyed the scenery and cinemagraphy, and the music--and my Mother was really overjoyed to hear her girl Stevie Nicks "Dreams" playing in one of the scenes as she is of the Stevie Nicks OBSESSED! smile so cute!

http://loveyourlifeandyourlooktoday....s-some-of.html

[vivfox]

Madonna is reportedly in talks with promoters to sign up to a five year residency in Las Vegas, which could earn her $1 billion.

It's not clear which venue in the US city she is talking to, though it is likely to be the Caesars Palace hotel and casino. Cher is currently due to finish a three year residency at the venue next year, while Elton John completed at five year stint in 2009 and Stevie Nicks a three year run in 2007. Celine Dion's five year residency at Caesars Palace, also completed in 2007, reportedly drew almost three million people to see 717 performances. So successful was it, the Dion will return for another three year run in 2011. However, it's thought the Madonna could surpass Dion's success.

If Madonna agrees the deal, it would also make her the third highest paid female entertainer in the world, after Oprah Winfrey and Martha Stewart.

http://newsblog.thecmuwebsite.com/po...residency.aspx

[vivfox]

SL: When I saw you in Vegas, you surprised me with a great Stevie Nicks impersonation. Out of all of the characters or personas you use when you perform, do you have a favorite, or do you value each of them equally?

Shannel: I think they're all valuable - I mean you like doing certain characters more than others. I love to do Lucille Ball and I love to do Joan Crawford and Judy Garland, but there's other characters, like Boy George that I do only because I look like him, not because I really enjoy the character. With Stevie Nicks, I don't do that as a look-a-like, it's just because it's fun, and there's other characters like the Evil Queen from Snow White that I love to do where I'm not changing my makeup for her, I just look like her and you take on the persona. So, there's conceptualized characters like that - I do a lot of the Disney villains.

http://socialitelife.celebuzz.com/ar..._-_shannel.php

[vivfox]

Stevie Nicks: 'The Internet Has Destroyed Rock' - Starpulse.com
Stevie Nicks is convinced the internet has "destroyed" rock 'n' roll because young bands are no longer given the chance to develop if they don't achieve instant success. The Fleetwood Mac singer ...
Starpulse Entertainment News - http://www.starpulse.com/news/

Stevie Nicks Claims The Internet Destroyed Rock; Seems To Think ...
By News
What is it with aging rock-n-rollers complaining about the internet these days? It's kind of amusing how these rockers, who always tried to present such a rebellious persona, are now acting just like the older generation they mocked.
PHP Hosts - http://www.phphosts.org/

Stevie Nicks Hates The Internet | Project: Rock Star
By admin_rockstar
Seems like most celebs these days aren't big fans of this little invention we call the internet. A...
Project: Rock Star - http://project-rockstar.com/

Tonight - Stevie Nicks attacks the Internet
Stevie Nicks believes the Internet is a bad thing. The Fleetwood Mac singer thinks the web is ruining people's social skills and is destroying rock music ...
http://www.tonight.co.za/index.php?f...=5617297...354...

Stevie Nicks: Internet Is Bad Thing - TV.com
TV.com News Story: Stevie Nicks: Internet Is Bad Thing - The Fleetwood Mac singer insists the web is destroying rock music which she loves, and is ruining.
http://www.tv.com/stevie-nicks-inter...../137351.html

Nicks: Internet destroyed rock
Toronto Sun
The Fleetwood Mac singer is vehemently opposed to the expansion of the internet, blaming the growth of the online music industry for stifling upcoming ...
http://www.torontosun.com/entertainm...enn-story.html

Stevie Nicks Hates The Internet | ImNotObsessed.com
By Kyle
Seems like most celebs these days aren't big fans of this little invention we call the internet. Aside from ruining rock music, Stevie Nicks also says that people aren't developing their social skills anymore because of the internet.
ImNotObsessed.com - http://www.imnotobsessed.com/

UniUrs » Blog Archive » Stevie Nicks: Internet Is Bad Thing
By admin
Stevie Nicks: Internet Is Bad Thing. Filed Under (Hollywood) by admin on 25-08-2010. The Fleetwood Mac singer insists the web is destroying rock music which she loves, and is ruining people's social skills because people 'don't hang out ...
UniUrs - http://www.uniurs.com/

WEBTHUMP! 25 August 2010 | Hecklerspray
By Mof Gimmers
The internet has destroyed rock 'n' roll says Stevie Nicks. No mention of copious amounts of cocaine. – NY Daily News 9. Did you know that all ducks were wearing dog masks? – Twitpic 8. Hate hipsters? Then this is the blog for you. ...
Hecklerspray - http://www.hecklerspray.com/

[vivfox]

rock nyc - music live & recorded: Stevie Nicks Is Clueless
By Iman Lababedi
Coke head, teenage, california blonde, wild child Stevie Nicks woulda laughed herself sick at the middle aged drag Stevie Nicks who told the New York Daily News "The internet has destroyed rock. Children no longer develop social graces. ...
Yeah, I don't need anybody who reads this website needs me to point out how pathetic and stupid her world view is. All I'll say is, if the vast majority of future rock stars are gonna be middle class, they will be miles better off then the rock stars in the first half of rock's history.
http://www.rocknycliveandrecorded.co...-clueless.html

RLIndex Pirate News » Stevie Nicks: “The Internet Has Destroyed Rock”
By admin
Fleetwood Mac singer complains the Internet has made it impossible for new bands to make it these days, and that if they don't have a hit single their record label will drop them. Fleetwood Mac singer Stevie Nicks made some interesting ...
RLIndex Pirate News - http://techtweak.rlindex.net/

Stevie Nicks says the internet destroyed Rock | LadyObama.com
By Lady Obama
Stevie Nicks is under the impression the internet has destroyed rock and roll. She thinks the online music industry is stifling upcoming talent and.
LadyObama.com - http://www.ladyobama.com/

Stevie Nicks: “The Internet Has Destroyed Rock”
By Jared Moya
Fleetwood Mac singer complains the Internet has made it impossible for new bands to make it these days, and that if they don't have a hit single their record.
ZeroPaid.com - http://www.zeropaid.com/

[kokoro]

Notice how every time Stevie makes a negative comment about the internet, these people who otherwise ignore her are on her ass in a flash?

[michelej1]

[This article on The Brown Tweed Society blog uses Mellencamp and Stevie's internet comments as a springboard for a discussion about music's future]
http://thebrowntweedsociety.com/2010...-the-internet/
Aging Rockers and the Internet
August 26, 2010

John Mellencamp, RIAA, Stevie Nicks

by T. D. Ruth

The Internet has played a significant role in the distribution of music for over a decade. Whether its contributions are positive or negative is a question that has been debated for years, yet the last week has seen an uptick in commentary from some old school rock stars. The message that these rockers deliver is unique and, if the die-hards on both sides of the digital music debate would stop to listen long enough, they might just learn something.

The Debate

The digital distribution of music, movies and books is a polarizing topic. On one side are the industry trade groups who try to protect their members’ intellectual property through every conceivable means, including suing tens of thousands of end users who download these works for free. On the other side are groups of people who, for philosophical or pecuniary reasons, believe that the concept of “owning” intellectual property should go away.

While the RIAA may still pursue draconian instruments for enforcing copyright laws, its member-labels have come a long way towards embracing digital technologies. If they had not, there would be no ringtones (a good thing?), no Pandora, no last.fm, no iLike, and so on. There are plenty of creative uses of music online that did not exist 10 years ago, which have since become seamlessly integrated into our lives.

On the other side, there are those who still champion the role of the “pirate” and make tens of thousands of copyrighted works available to millions of people, yet organizations like Creative Commons now have a loud and legitimate voice in music policy. Creative Commons, which has been around almost as long as digital distribution, has proven that copyright is not a black-and-white issue. By creating a uniform and easy-to-understand series of alternative licenses, creators may distribute their works with all, little or no traditional copyright restrictions.

Insight From The Rockers

While both sides have taken notable steps towards reaching a middle ground, their underlying philosophical differences are nevertheless combining to substantively change the music industry. Unfortunately, it appears that the sum total of those changes may not necessarily be for the better.

ABC News ran a story last week on John Mellencamp, which quotes the rocker as saying, “I think the Internet is the most dangerous thing invented since the atomic bomb. It’s destroyed the music business. It’s going to destroy the movie business.” He continued, “Rock n’ roll – as important as we think it is, and as big as it was, and as much money as people made on it, and as proud as I am to say that I was a part of it,” will be gone after a few generations.

Then on Sunday, Stevie Nicks shared a similar sentiment, telling the NY Daily News that “the Internet has destroyed rock . . . I’m financially stable. I’m okay. But what about the kids trying to make it in this business? If you’re not an established band, if you don’t have a hit single, they’re gonna drop you. There are a lot of people out there as talented as we were, but they can’t sustain being in a rock ‘n’ roll band for long without success. We were able to, but we’re going to die out.”

Predictably, those who champion the Internet music model, in whatever form that innovation delivers, believe rock stars such as Mellencamp and Nicks are simply trying to cling on to an outdated business model. They paint these artists with the same brush as the RIAA simply because they dare to suggest that not everything is better online. However, oversimplifying the artists’ statements so they fit into the pro-industry narrative comes at the expense of an insightful message.

Mellencamp and Nicks are not a couple of corporate stiffs suggesting that the Internet be closed for business, or that we undertake drastic measures to undergird the industry in order to subsidize rockers’ lavish lifestyles. Rather, they are artists who are making a simple, educated observation. In short, blindly believing that technology can do nothing but progress our musical culture is naïve.

A Real World Example

Consider Nicks’ statement,“if you don’t have a hit single, they’re gonna drop you.” I work with a wonderfully talented pop rock band that’s truly better than your average commercial pop. They were signed to a major label and their first record did well, all things considered. In addition to respectable record sales and equally respectable radio play, their songs were frequently used in several of the year’s most watched television shows.

The label has been in trouble for the last couple of years, partly due to poor management but mostly due to the overall decline of the industry. When the time came to exercise the option for the band’s second album, the label hesitated. There were no number 1 hits on the first record and the label was not willing to risk paying the recording fund the band was promised in their deal.

The label offered to pick up the option but only if the band was willing to accept significantly less money to record the album, deliver the album on a tight schedule, and give up a higher percentage on non-record revenue streams. Not only was the proposal fundamentally unfair, the band would not have enough time or financial resources to write any decent songs.

The band faced an impossible choice between three options. First, they could take the deal, knowing they were getting screwed, they were going to deliver a sub-par record, and the relationship likely wouldn’t last for another album. Second, they could try to shop themselves to another label, knowing that things are just as hard everywhere else. Third, they could try to release their next record themselves.

Those who loathe the music industry establishment would suggest that the band go out on their own. The Internet provides uninterrupted access to the entire world market, distribution costs are nominal, and promotional channels are wide open. For a hypothetical band, especially one with an existing fan base and the talent to make a top-notch record, the go-it-alone approach is the essence of the utopian Internet/music business model, where record labels are rendered useless, the consumers are free from musical gatekeepers, and the artists earn an honest living from their craft.

Unfortunately, the members of this band live in the real world. They are a group of mid-20s guys, a couple of which are married. They have real bills to pay every month, just like everyone else. The money that is coming in from the first album, touring and merchandise is enough to cover their expenses and little else. There are no savings to draw from. So how are they supposed to support themselves while writing music for their next record? How are they supposed to finance tours and create merchandise? Who is going to undertake all the marketing and promotion?

In theory, the guys would take crappy jobs to cover the bills while they write music. Even if this hypothetical income was sufficient to survive, part-time writing produces part-time songs. Even if the part-time songs were good enough, a crap job certainly will not finance a quality recording. Even if they could record, they still face the extraordinary expenses to tour. And even if they were able to overcome all of these obstacles, if they are busy working at a crappy job while writing songs and recording, who is going to invest the time necessary to distribute the record, promote the record, book gigs, and manage all the other laborious tasks inherent in getting a record to the public?

Nicks is right. Here is one band that must make a crucial decision that they would not have faced 15 years ago. The industry shakeup has caused record sales to shrink dramatically, which in turn has reduced labels’ profitability, causing them to invest less in developing artists while taking an even greater share of the artists’ income. Artists with huge promise but little profitability are being dropped. The vast majority of those artists will never record again.

The bitter reality is that my clients may never have the opportunity to release another album and our musical culture will be that much poorer as a result.

A Simple Change in Perspective

Far too many well-intentioned people, both within and outside the music industry, seemingly believe that consumers are always right and what they demand necessarily must be given to them. However, as we have learned on so many other occasions, moderation is not instinctual in American society and music would not be the first thing we destroyed through over-consumption.

Give us buffalo and we’ll slaughter them into extension. Give us a forest and we’ll clear cut it until no trees remain standing. Give us unlimited access to free music and we’ll download it until artists can no longer earn a living recording it.

It is foolish to dismiss Mellencamp’s and Nicks’ observations. While their comments are full of hyperbole, the underlying concern is legitimate and we all would be wise to stop to consider what’s at stake. As both industry participants and consumers of music, it is imperative that we not take music for granted and acknowledge that, just like the buffalo and the forest, we are capable of doing irreparable harm to the art of recorded music.

It does not require an active imagination to envision a world where our rock music landscape includes an endless churn of “indie” artists who can’t survive in the business longer than a record or two, while the only artists with sustainable careers are a select few of the most contrived, formulaic pop monsters imaginable.

Accepting this reality is no less critical of a first step towards saving our musical heritage as accepting global warming is towards the survival of our planet.

[michelej1]

[Excerpt from an article on punk rock opera Everyhead who had an album planned for release in 1975, but it was supposedly banned in America. This reminds me of Dave Stewart's fake band Platinum Blonde ]

http://www.24-7pressrelease.com/pres...ion-167538.php

The Everyhead album features the lead guitar work of famed Steppenwolf band guitarist Michael Monarch, and was originally mastered by Kent Duncan, who mastered albums for such notable recording artists as the Jefferson Starship, Joe Cocker, Reo Speedwagon, Neil Diamond, Van Morrison, the Doobie Brothers, the Isley Brothers, among others.

It is reported that Stevie Nicks was interested in singing the part of the girl next door while she was still in Buckingham Nicks, but her new commitment to Fleetwood Mac interfered and she was forced to withdraw from the recording sessions.

[michelej1]

Rock and Roll photographer Greg Savalin is interested in putting together a book with his photographs. He had a showing of his pictures earlier this month and it included Stevie. Here's an article on him from the Sacramento Bee:

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/08/13/295...-featured.html

He's the one who shot the photo below.