Scott Rodger (Maverick) leaks Morrissey information and email re: Bonfire / Miley via X (October 17, 2023)

There's been drama!

---

Related item:

• Scott Rodger (Maverick/Quest): Bonfire of Teenagers scheduled for Feb. 23, delayed by featured artist - Dec 24, 2022

 

[The Wild Turkey]

Wow two cult members the EXACT kind of people who eat any shit Moz gives them. They are the people the fans who got Moz where he is , they enable not stick up for hin
The guy is an ugly moron and so is she , put your sweaty baps away darling. All her pics are the same kinda pose . Funny AF.
Scott only published them to stick up for a woman who was blamed for nothing

Who cares.
Capitol messed up the Turkey Step.

 

[goinghome]

He was the catalyst for one of the biggest and most spectacular backfirings in quite a while, so he should resolve the situation himself, and I think he probably would as well.

On the other hand as has been pointed out, he could be thanked for bringing the state of play out into the open and catalysing new momentum.

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

It may seem ambiguous to you, but the emails very clearly elucidate the matter. If it was about the money, Columbia would have requested a fee from Capitol in exchange for Miley's feature on Morrissey's album.

Major labels are incredibly particular about the execution of their PR campaigns, especially for flagship talent. There is a great deal of time, effort and cash dedicated to organizing these promotional strategies

So as I was saying, and there you agree, it is about the money.

and the labels take care to ensure that the waters remain as unmuddied as possible before these campaigns go into production. Morrissey's public announcement may or may not have affected Miley's campaign,

I think someone mentioned that the record sold well (?) if true, it seems his announcements didn’t have much of a impact on it

but that's irrelevant. The issue is in Columbia's belief that no parallel campaigns should clash with or detract from the specificity of their approach.

And you're wrong about "different artists, different companies, different times." The business principles have mainly stayed the same. Artists can generally do what they like --pop into the studio and jam with friends, contribute riffs, sing some backing vocals --but the legal factors come into play when their likeness is used in the promotion of said product. Morrissey's cynical insistence on using Miley to "help him 700%" being a perfect case in point. If he had never said/confirmed anything about her contribution until some time after the record was released, there likely wouldn't have been a problem whatsoever.

Yes we can, as you have above, speculate on the situation.

 

[Simple]

So as I was saying, and there you agree, it is about the money.


I think someone mentioned that the record sold well (?) if true, it seems his announcements didn’t have much of a impact on it


Yes we can, as you have above, speculate on the situation.

As I said, a label doesn't want another press campaign interfering with theirs. Clogging headlines, creating brand fatigue -- I'm not saying that any of this actually matters, but it's absolutely the opinion of those working on the promotional front for mainstream artists.

As far as agreeing with your pedantic highlighting of the word "cash"...uh no, you still seem determined to generally misinterpret the issue here.

 

[goinghome]

You're misunderstanding the fundamental point of this issue. It wasn't about money, it was about Capitol's right to market and promote their artist as they see fit -- a matter of particular significance to them during the lead-up to an album release. Capitol would not have taken issue with Miley's vocals appearing uncredited on Morrissey's album, but auxillary legal factors came into play once he took it upon him to reveal this information to the public.

See: Eric Clapton's appearance on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps," Bruce Springsteen's appearance on "Street Hassle" and so on.

Maybe those legal factors weren't explained properly to Morrissey, which he deserved, since they were about to have severe ramifications on his recording fate and preferences.

 

[marred]

I second that Dog is the best Morrissey record since Vauxhall.

I second that!

 

[Simple]

Maybe those legal factors weren't explained properly to Morrissey, which he deserved, since they were about to have severe ramifications on his recording fate and preferences.

Ask yourself what's the likelier scenario: a major label walking themselves into an expensive, needlessly complicated legal situation or Morrissey finding himself incapable of doing what he's told.

 

[marred]

Ask yourself what's the likelier scenario: a major label walking themselves into an expensive, needlessly complicated legal situation or Morrissey finding himself incapable of doing what he's told.

This is a trick question. I'm not falling for this

 

[Crisstti]

Maybe those legal factors weren't explained properly to Morrissey, which he deserved, since they were about to have severe ramifications on his recording fate and preferences.

In fact, from the only email of his we've seen about this, he appears completely unaware of any issue with Columbia. It seems he had only been told (at that point anyway) that Miley's manager didn't want her credited/named.

 

[Malarkey]

Morrissey is very stubborn when he wants something - but I very much doubt he would come up with a strategy that leans into the far right racist scandal that has been causing him extreme distress & has nearly ended his career.

And I don't believe he'd think the way to change Miley's management's mind is to post controversial things that imply he wants non-white immigration to the West stopped & that he thinks non-binary artist Sam Smith is a Satanist.

That was so wildly ridiculous they had to rush to change the implication of it.

I think Donnie's getting some kind of benefit out of this chaos.

And SER is daft enough to think it vindicates his Uncle.

 

[goinghome]

Morrissey is very stubborn when he wants something -

Why do you keep posting in detail about right-wing notions now, on threads dealing with unrelated topics? Malarkey in name only?!

 

[TheSmiths_1985]

Why do you keep posting in detail about right-wing notions now, on threads dealing with unrelated topics? Malarkey in name only?!

She’s insane, obsessed with idolising and infantilising Morrissey to an unhealthy degree, and she loves the attention. She poisons every thread with her opinion-as-fact bullshit ideas, plots and theories.
She’s one of a handful of people on here who seem to have appointed themselves as Morrissey’s surrogate mother, while also wanting to bang him. It’s like some incestuous, psychotic, acid-inspired, underground art-house soft porn film. And I hate that kind of porn.

 

[Malarkey]

Why do you keep posting in detail about right-wing notions now, on threads dealing with unrelated topics? Malarkey in name only?!

I'm posting in detail about Central's posts losing Morrissey the Capitol deal - which is related to Scott posting that Central's post lost Morrissey the Capitol deal.

 

[Crisstti]

What *is( clear from the email. Columbia said "no" at least twice. Morrissey knew this. He went ahead and promoted Miley's involvement anyway, did not seem to care about Columbia's denial, did want to promote Miley's involvement for commercial, culture war (and I suppose) artistic reasons, and deeply cared/cares about Miley's own feelings about her inclusion/promotion/ And then he blamed Capitol for withholding the album, while disclosing *none* of those particulars

It's not clear at all that Morrissey knew this. At least not at the point when he commented on Miley's participation.
The email only shows he knew her manager has said she wasn't to be credited.
And, iirc, the Columbia executive email is from after Morrissey mentioned Miley's involvement.

 

[Malarkey]

Intrigued about the nitpicking.

 

[goinghome]

Intrigued about the nitpicking.

Are you not doing some too?

Central's different now, changed to what you were looking for, having largely ditched 'hot button' references. You were instrumental in pointing out how the old approach could be problematic, and presumably leading to a rethink and more on- key messages. So well done you!

Now please sit back and enjoy the shows!

 

[Dirk Blaggard]

The way some people have been going on about this is fecking retarded.
Who cares
I agree, it doesn't make M look great. He seems very needy and desperate but most of us
guessed he only wanted MC to shift units. Same with the people on California Son
He used to be more about art , than he is these days and he would have ran a mile from the likes
of Greenday members and MC. its a shame he has gone down that road
The trouble with M is, he wants to prove a point the whole time, he is so keen to show people in the UK , that he is better than them and has American fame (which in his mind, is true stardom ) that he ends up making some bad moves but what the feckever.

 

[DaveJCarr]

It's not clear at all that Morrissey knew this. At least not at the point when he commented on Miley's participation.
The email only shows he knows her manager has said she isn't to be credited.
And, iirc, the Columbia executive email is from after Morrissey mentioned her involvement.

I'm going by Scott's original tweet: To Morissey: "you went ahead and did what you are asked not to do" That seems pretty clear to me. Even if it was just from the management, that is still s denial through official channels. Artists are paired with managers in order to communicate their wishes and to facilitate harmony between the artist and the labels. Sometimes it doesn't work out, but clearly, even Scott Roger was engaged in attempts to facilitate some kind of acceptable resolution – I find it very easy to believe that he himself may have communicated "hey – management/capitol said no to Morrissey directly. Shouldn't either of those things be sufficient to an artist who is been around longer than I've been alive?

Further, the idea that "if Miley herself says it's okay to be on the sleeve and it is the word of She Who Must Be Obeyed.." Is not at all how the record industry works, not how exclusive contracts work, and Morrissey knows this. But, the management and label positions do not matter to him. He i has this idea of Miley's artistic investment in an the project – and her commercial boon, – which should be respected at all costs.

And yet, somebody with Morrissey's experience might also have known that the omission of a response from Miley herself could very well be of response in and of itself. How many times has he ghosted people throughout his career to avoid conflict, or to simply remove himself from the situation? How many times has he used managers to communicate with potential and soon-to-be former bandmates? Lots

Silence can be no. If she really wanted to appear accredited or uncredited, she'd have said so. I don't really see the need to bend over backwards to give them every benefit of the doubt when there were plenty of indications that there was no coming from somewhere, from official channels that you have meant something regardless of his own personal feelings about the efficacy of managers in general

And at least, now finally, thanks to the Fox interview he seems resigned to acceptance on that score.

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

What a jerk. Morrissey really ruined Columbia’s campaign. It was extremely difficult to sell those Miley Cyrus records ever since Morrissey opened up his mouth. Talk about ‘Bigmouth strikes Again’ ! Am I Right?

 

[DaveJCarr]

If I pay somebody handsomely for the exclusive rights to publish and distribute their creative work, I also have veto power over which other publishers can have access to their works and officially collaborate with them, how, when, and if those collaborations get published. The reason I choose to decline certain collaborations and publicities is immaterial. It is still a right I have. No one seems to dispute that.

People are also free to believe that those corporate decisions are mindless, stifling, and banal too

Miley and Moz seem to share a genuine kinship in a lot of ways. One of them is choosing/wanting to continue to exist ss talent paid talent on label rosters, despite both having the cache for independent self-distribution. That comes with a loss of power and autonomy. But it's a choice they are both freely making