411 Music Fact Or Fiction 07.16.09: Week 103

Posted by Ben Czajkowski on 07.16.2009

This week, 411Music's Paul Hollingsworth and Chris Crowing take on the headlines: Michael Jackson was murdered, and Joe Jackson wants to ruin more kids. Does Aerosmith need to head to a retirement home? Is a new KISS album a good idea? Should American Idol have replaced Ryan Seacrest? And finally, is Metallica releasing a new DVD a good life decision? Find out what Hollingsworth and Crow have to say, and then leave your thoughts!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hey everyone! Yeah, you! Dude with the mullet! Oh, sorry. That's just my mom.

Welcome to another week of 411Music Fact or Fiction! Damn, hard to believe this is Week 103. The beautiful and always chillaxed Dan Haggerty has stepped down from Fact or Fiction to do something else with his time. Some crappy news report from what I hear. He's stepping into my territory.... Might have to get out my hammer and knee cap him!

For those of you that don't know me, I'm Ben Czajkowski. I've been with the zone since before the stock market sucked. I write the Monday and Tuesday flagship pieces. Respectively: The All You Cannot Live Without news report (and its subtitle) and The 411Music Top 5 (well, I more compile the latter...). I also do CD reviews and a bunch of other odds and ends.

Whatever, right? You're not here to talk about me. You want answers to these burning questions.

So like a urinary tract infection, I bring you the pain of Chris Crowing and Paul Hollingsworth. Crowing pens a sweet column called As The Crow Flies. Currently, he's teaching his reader's the alphabet. This week, he's on bands that begin with C. Two come to mind, but they don't count: Revolting Cocks and Gaggle of Cocks. See where I'm going with this...

Paul Hollingsworth writes an amazing serialized bit called Thrifty Tunes. He explores thrift stores for old stuff and then writes about it. One of the more underrated columns in the zone, in my humble opinion. When he's not writing stuff for 411Music, he's washing my car and trolling the waterfront for the mother of his next child.

Alright, let's get to it.

READY?! FIGHT!!

Round 1
Question: Joe Jackson is going to ruin the lives of more children by sending Michael's kids on tour. (Click to read story)
Chris Crowing: FACT.  I've been pretty forthright in my opinion that much of the blame for Michael Jackson's various problems and alleged deviancies can be laid at the door of the people who pushed him to the front of the Jackson 5 and made ‘little Michael Jackson' a worldwide star, effectively robbing him of his childhood – i.e.: Joe Jackson.  While by no means the norm, it is well-acknowledged that the life on the road jades and eventually kills strong-willed fully grown men, and drives many more into depression, drink, drugs and other forms of desperate escapism.  It is NO PLACE and NO LIFE for children.  I have heard that MJ has made provision for his kids that the bulk of the proceeds for his posthumous releases will go to them, without requiring them to go on tour or suffer the routine he did as a child.  They have NO NEED to undergo this, but could grow up in a life of comfort with every opportunity to decide on their own path in due time.  The only person who benefits from Michael's kids going on tour is Joe Jackson.
Paul Hollingsworth: FACT. There's an old saying which says those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Apparently, Joe Jackson thinks it's a good idea to put his grandkids through the same hell he put his own kids through, in order  to make them 'stars'. It doesn't seem to matter if any of MJ's kids have any musical talent or are even interested in having a music career. It's hard enough, I imagine, to be one of MJ's kids, and the last thing those kids need is more pressure put on them by their own family.
Agreement Score: 1 for 1

Round 2
Question: Metallica releasing a filmed concert on DVD is a good move for the band. (Click to read story)
Chris Crowing: FACT.  Every live video/DVD Metallica have released from Live Shit: Binge & Purge to S&M has been a stunning example of the ‘big rock show.'  Cunning Stunts remains one of my favorite ‘background' DVDs.  Add to this pedigree the fact that the World Magnetic show is probably the best live experience this writer has EVER had, and I'm sure the full-on, polished up, all angles-covered mega production we could expect from the Metallica Marketing Machine will probably be the best music DVD of the year.  I'll definitely want one for Christmas!  As far as being a good move for the band, I'm sure it will sell a million units, making them a ton of money, keep them in the public eye a little longer before they vanish to record the next record.
Paul Hollingsworth: FACT. Metallica's concerts are spectacles and full of the piss and vinegar that all rock shows should have, and the band always manages to capture that essence on their live releases. I see no reason why this one will be any different.  Metallica always does right by its fans, and this will be a nice souvenir of what, by most accounts, was a return to greatness for the band. Live DVD's are often hit and miss, due to sound quality, acoustics, crowd energy, band energy, etc, but Metallica has always had a good feel for what works in a live setting and I'm sure this DVD will be another classic release from the band.
Agreement Score: 2 for 2

Round 3
Question: Seacrest in: American Idol re-signing its host to a huge contract was a poor move for a show that desperately needs a shakeup. (Click to read story)
Chris Crowing: FACT.  I'll freely admit to only ever watching American Idol for the freak factor.  In the UK, the host (for the X-Factor) was changed from Kate Thornton to Dermot O'Leary and apparently that livened up the product.  In any case, I for one am pretty jaded with the concept.  We KNOW that any act with character, charisma or independent thought will be winnowed out in the audition stage, and any remaining vestige of character will be squeezed out through the show proper, leaving us with just another empty headed, probably quite vocally talented but ultimately soulless product.  A change in host will not alter this.  Then again, I'm not the target market (being a fan of music, as opposed to facile ‘reality TV') and doubtless a change to a new (more likeable, or more attractive) host may well have given the show some more pizzazz to those who it is in fact aimed at.  For my part, my apathy is deafening.
Paul Hollingsworth: FACT. Like Chris, I'm not a fan of American Idol, and feel it's to blame for much of what's wrong in music today. Ryan Seacrest, from what I can tell by my brief viewings of the show, is about as bland and vanilla as an interviewer can be. (I'm talking Lord Alfred Hayes bland, here.)  I'm not sure what else he brings to the show other than some sort of weird sexual tension between he and that prick, Simon. Did the producers of the show really think that people tune the show in because of Seacrest? Is anybody standing around holding a microphone really worth the type of money Seacrest signed for? I wish this show would go away, and take all the other copycat shows with it back into the deepest, darkest cave in hell from whence they all came.
Agreement Score: 3 for 3

Looks like we're batting a perfect game through three innings. Only this is 100 times more exciting than baseball.

Round 4
Question: It's about damn time Gene Simmons got off his ass and made a new album.
Paul Hollingsworth: FACT. I think Paul Stanley is more the driving force behind this new record and not so much Gene. Paul released an album and did a club tour two years ago, and it seemed to have lit a fire under him. Kiss doesn't have to release albums anymore, as most fans seem willing to go see the concerts and hear the greatest hits over and over again. The fact that they wanted to record a new album makes me curious, and as a lifelong member of the Kiss Army, I am blood-bound to purchase it, but I'm not expecting "Destroyer 2" or even "Love Gun 2". A new Kiss album makes me happy, at least until I hear it and get mad that it isn't, in fact, "Destroyer 2".
Chris Crowing: FICTION.  To paraphrase Paul's answer to the next question, rock bands have expiration dates.  I figure that as long as you can still manage physically, and the fans still want to see you, you should tour as long as possible.  However, there comes a point when nobody really cares about your new record. It will suffer horribly in comparison to your more vital, passionate, younger work. The attempt actually demeans your legacy.  This counts double for bands like Kiss, who's appeal is largely in their image and a undoubtedly juvenile lyrical bent.  To attempt to replicate that in your later years is just tragic, and if they change the formula then it's not Kiss is it?  As such, I'm more than happy for Kiss to tour every couple of years, for Gene to fly, split blood and fire across the stage, for Ace's guitar to ‘burst into flames' and all that – I might even care enough to go and see them at some point - but as for a new Kiss record,  I really couldn't care less.  Furthermore, Gene Simmons has made a career out of being a rock cliché, leering at every big-chested woman in his vicinity, dropping pearls of wisdom about making money in music, and how to live like a rock star.  As such, I'd actually be a lot more interested if Gene became the new host/judge of American Idol!
Agreement Score: 3 for 4

And there goes the perfect game.

Round 5
Question: Aerosmith is literally falling apart. It's time to call it a day, guys. (Click here to read second story)
Paul Hollingsworth: FACT. I've been over Aerosmith for a long, long time. I was never a big fan to begin with, and I've not heard anything new by them that I liked since "Crazy." The band is really falling apart. A friend of mine went to see the band on their current tour with ZZ Top, but the show was canceled because Stephen Tyler fell off an amp and couldn't perform. It may have been the mountains of cocaine the band snorted over the years, but they've not aged very well and things seem to be catching up with them. I'm a firm believer that rock and roll musicians should have expiration dates, after which they should become producers, promoters, managers to new bands, or simply retire.
Chris Crowing: FACT.  There comes a time in every bands career when they really have to look at their toll of injuries, and just admit that they can't do it anymore.  There is no disgrace in slowing down once you are in your fifties (or older) and while I'm not saying Aerosmith should completely give up, they should certainly take some time off, and perhaps restrict themselves to special appearances, limited date ‘greatest hits' tours in the very biggest (and most profitable) stadiums and set about finding a life away from music.  I can't see anyone in Aerosmith as a manager (although Joe Perry could probably be a decent producer.)  However Paul's suggestion of them becoming promoters has me thinking that the concept of an Aerosmith-braded tour that doesn't necessarily involve Aerosmith playing (like Ozzfest or Family Values) could be interesting.  Metal has a surfeit of such tours, and perhaps one such tour dedicated to blues-based rock could do well.  Anyway, I've gone off point.  I certainly think Aerosmith need to take a good step back, but like pro-wrestlers I can't see them ever quite managing to retire.  There will always be a reason to come back - I just hope they have the sense to do it on their own terms.
Agreement Score: 4 for 5

Round 6
Question: You're with LaToya: Michael was murdered. (Click to read story)
Paul Hollingsworth: FICTION. I believe Michael was addicted to pills, probably for many years, and the addiction finally caught up with him. When you're grieving for a lost sibling, as LaToya is, you tend to blame everyone and anyone for the death except for the departed. Everybody loves a good conspiracy theory, but I'm afraid you're not going to find one here. I can't blame LaToya for trying to find a reason or someone else to blame, but the sad truth is that Michael's addictions killed him.
Chris Crowing: FICTION.  I'll agree that Michael most likely died because of his numerous addictions – a cocktail of heart medication, somas and god-knows-what-else is going to send pretty much anyone to the morgue.  However, assuming for a second that I'm of a suspicious, cynical frame of mind – if Michael WAS killed, who did it?  The usual maxim is to ask - who benefits?  Thinking that way, you have to assume that the person who benefitted most from his death is either Debbie Rowe (who could sue for custody of the children and thereby a slice of Michael's revenue stream) or Joe Jackson (who could use the media from Michael's death to promote his own business, and find a way to get at some of the money.)  However, I don't believe either of these people would (or for that matter COULD) have killed Michael – even Joe Jackson isn't that cynical and evil.  And so, with a rational head back on, I have to conclude that it was just Michael's time, and while that is a tragedy for his family and his fans, and I wish them whatever condolence they need, it is not to be found in this kind of conspiracy theory.  Then again, I've been wrong before…
Agreement Score: 5 for 6

Not too much dissention and argument this week, folks. Now, it's your turn to react:

Michael Jackson was murdered.

Fact or fiction? You decide in comments below. Until next week, see you guys then!