Why I hate X Factor...So very very much

X Factor? More like Z factor: A plea to the sane television producers out there...

Dear top ITV bosses, please make this year’s X factor as quick and as painless as possible. Unlike last year’s, which was about 2 months of crying, laughing, screaming and homophobic jokes (and that was just Danni). As well as badly mimed performances by Cheryl Cole on the night of the final, and a failed attempt at getting I-can’t-even-remember-who, to number one. This was incidentally won by metal band Rage against the Machine with single ‘Killing in the Name Of’ in a Facebook campaign whose main aim was to try and topple the might that is the X Factor. More like the zzz Factor. They didn’t really put up much of a fight did they? In the end Rage were the clear winners with something like 40,000 more sales.

So what can we expect to find on this year’s X Factor? A heavily pregnant Danni, giving birth during the live final maybe? That would certainly make interesting television, or Simon Cowell admitting live on air that his abnormally square head is due to getting it stuck in a vice during woodwork at school. Either way I certainly do not have high hopes for this year. Producers of the show need to realise that unless they change something (or my favourite idea, cancel the show altogether), viewing figures will start to drop, as we have already seen the record sales do. The idea of the show is to turn ordinary people into pop stars, a feat that has failed many times over the years; Leon Jackson, Steve Brookstein, Michelle McManus? Know who these people are? Didn’t think so, but they are all winners of either the X Factor or its former show Popstars. 41 year old Steve is now back singing in his local pub after being dropped by his record label; you can just imagine him sitting next to the elderly locals telling them, ‘I’m off the telly you know.’ And after appearing in various glossy magazines after her dramatic weight loss, people have forgotten that Michelle McManus is even a singer! A television show that has lost its way? I definitely think so.

It has the same design every year; mix together a bunch of deluded singers whose biggest fan is their mum, and you have the auditions. Then add the absolute no hopers, the weirdoes, the comic relief, the angry loser, the sob story, the person who may actually win and the one Simon Cowell wants to sleep with (tall, tanned, massive breasts, long dark hair). Mix in some cliché abuse from the judges, and some pointless remarks from Danni and you have the live finals. Cue the excited final, the British public go mad, ringing off the hook for their favourite loser. And you end up with a wannabe pop star, which is kind of what they were at the beginning, only now they have a record label that will drop them in 6 months and a guaranteed lifetime spot doing panto every year in Coventry or Plymouth.

Someone once said to me, “You might not like it, but 8.5 million people watched the live final last year.” To which I smiled, and casually pointed out, “Yeah, but there was 50 million who didn’t.”

And...

Just for reading all that heavy journalistic stuff, here is something a little bit more light hearted...

Bauer Declares War on Freelances

Bauer music magazines declare war on freelances

Magazine group Bauer are facing a standoff with their 200 freelance music writers and photographers, over a new contract that sees them sign away all copyright.
The document that can be seen in the Press Gazette applies to Kerrang! Q and Mojo, and outlines how freelances are being made to sign away their copyright but still take full responsibility for any legal action that may be taken against them. The NUJ believes this would leave freelance writers completely on their own to face legal action, and many of the writers and photographers are calling this new contract 'unfair'.
Bauer wants to introduce a new contract that,
"Removes copyright and all financial, legal and moral rights from freelances while simultaneously requiring that they provide Bauer with an unlimited lifetime financial indemnity in the event of legal action arising from their work."
They also encourage freelances to, "acquire licenses from their subjects for the company to use their image for its own profit as and when it wishes."
This means that Bauer would have the right to sell the stories or photographs to whoever they want to, without having to make reference to the writers, photographers or even the subjects of the work. The covering letter, sent with the contract to over 200 journalists issues an ultimatum; after April 16th 2010, if the contributors do not sign, they will no longer be commissioned.
The three music magazines involved rely heavily on contributions from freelances so it comes as no surprise that nearly all of the 200 contributors are refusing to sign the contract, being described as 'foolish', 'malicious', and an 'unprovoked and pointless declaration of war on freelancers.'
The three magazines are the first former Emap titles on which Bauer are imposing their new contract; however Managing Director of Bauer’s music titles, Stuart Williams confirmed the company are looking to extend into the other magazines Bauer bought from Emap. Some of which include, Empire, Heat, Closer, Grazia, Match!, FHM and Zoo.
Since a few contributors sent a letter of objection to Bauer the company have told freelances that there will be no further amendments to the contract and the April 16th deadline is final. As a result Bauer now face losing most of its best known music writers and photographers including Q contributing editors Billy Bragg, Miranda Sawyer and John Harris; as well as former Kerrang! editor Paul Brannigan and former Mojo editors Mat Snow and Paul Trynka. Iggy pop biographer Trynka says, "Their behaviour is bizarre and counter productive." And acclaimed photographer Kevin Westenberg said,
"You’ll either have to sign the contract – signing copyright away; sign and be a slave – or not work for them again. I already decided not to sign a long time ago. Never give your rights away. This is your legacy."
The general mood amongst the music freelances is that what Bauer is trying to do is far more than just attack a specific group of music writers and photographers, what they are doing undermines the value of freelance journalism as a whole. It is no secret that being a freelance journalist is tough, and it comes with a number of risks. As well as having a fluctuating income they have to pay for their own equipment, come up with their own office space and training, without any of the statutory sick pay, maternity leave and holiday pay granted to regular staff. What Bauer seem to be doing is all rather odd; do they think that by forcing out all the best journalists they will sell more magazines? From a business point of view it doesn't make a lot of sense.

The Digital Economy Bill

The Digital Economy Bill

We've all heard about the digital economy bill. Despite its quick and quite frankly 'hush hush' passage into British law, you may have heard of it without really understanding it and what it means for you. If you have never illegally downloaded a song off the internet, or played on a gory video game, then there's nothing for you to worry about, but the chances are you have. So here is our run down of the digital economy bill and what it means for you...

The digital economy bill has been passed into law during what is often called the 'wash-up' period. This is where outstanding legislation is rushed through before a general election. The bill covers various aspects of our lives from local television provision and video games ratings, to the powers Ofcom have and how internet domain names are registered in the UK.

What is it? The digital economy bill is a broad selection of legislation aimed at bringing Britain into the 'digital age’; it follows proposals published in June 2009. The bill will touch on many parts of our digital ways of life, but it's the illegal file sharing that has grabbed the most media attention. Measures are being introduced that have been designed to stop illegal file-sharing. This is basically a long and boring set of instructions on how to deal with net piracy.

Why is this controversial? Persistent file-sharers may be disconnected from their internet and copyright holders will be given the power to block access to websites hosting illegal content. It has also caused quite a stir with the politicians, many say the bill has been rushed through, and there are concerns about how this will affect public Wi-Fi services. Universities and libraries have also become worried.

What does this mean for me? In theory, if you do not upload or download copyrighted content, these plans should not affect you at all. But there are an estimated 6 million people in the UK who do, so you must be out there somewhere. If you do download illegally then the government and creative industries hope these new measures will encourage you to use legal services.

Why and when are these measures being brought in? The government has expressed its wishes to protect the UK’s creative industries, which it says is under a threat from piracy. It is more than likely that these measures will be introduced in 2012 if agreed upon. There will be a trial period of a year, and after the 12 months there will be a review. If illegal downloads fail to fall by at least 70% Ofcom will be asked whether more serious measures, such as temporarily suspending internet service or limiting the speed are needed.

Why do people oppose the bill? MP’s from all parties have expressed concern that the laws have not gotten enough debate and were rushed through parliament. Campaigners against the bill say it will not work and only drive illegal file sharing underground. Also Google is concerned that blocking websites may also cause legitimate sites to be blocked as well and some ISP’s are saying that they do not wish to become the internet police.

How will I be detected? The responsibility will lie with the content holders tracking you down, although ISP’s will bear some of the cost. They plan to monitor certain websites which offer links to copyright content and then grab your IP address.

Will this actually work? The music industry hopes so, but a lot of people are sceptical. More persistent file sharers are already using software that masks your IP address, and the files being sent are encrypted. But it’s not really being aimed at the technically advanced minority, it’s aimed more at the majority, which is the teenagers who do it because they can, and think they’re going to get away with it. The government hope the threat of being watched will make them stop.