-
Website
http://www.mathewingram.com/work -
Original page
http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/10/06/radiohead-not-so-revolutionary-after-all/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
scrawledinwax
23 comments · 1 points
-
webomatica
35 comments · 5 points
-
howardlindzon
46 comments · 69 points
-
JoeDuck
57 comments · 1 points
-
Karoli
32 comments · 39 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
2 weeks ago · 43 comments
-
Are independent bloggers an endangered species?
2 weeks ago · 8 comments
-
Bloggers, trust, MSM and correction fluid
1 week ago · 2 comments
-
Video: My panel with Shirky and Keen
1 month ago · 2 comments
-
Why media outlets want Facebook Connect
2 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
In defence of newspapers and serendipity
Music2dot0.com (http://www.music2dot0.com/archives/47 )has found out that the pitch is happening this weekend with the following as the main contenders:
1) ATO or Side One Recordings - Billboard and Hits considers them a front runner for the deal, with the common thread of Coran Capshaw owner of Red Light Management who also co-owns both ATO and Side One Recordings.
2) EMI - after 6 albums with Radiohead, of course they would try to be in the running for at least distribution outside of the US, though one wonders how much of a negative contributory factor they were in pushing Radiohead to strike out on their own.
3) Warner - has been faithfully flogging the dead horse trying to get Radiohead on their books since the latter’s early EMI days, so they would seem to be simply making up the numbers on this pitch
4) XL Recordings/ Beggars - They are not only in the running despite not having been mentioned anywhere else, but Music2dot0 also feels that this is the darkhorse of the lot - not just due to their pro-artist philosophy but also the fact that this is the home of Thom Yorke’s Eraser solo album.
If Radiohead is looking to further their innnovative approach, they would be well off considering the two independents, but if they were simply looking for a brute force functional distribution deal devoid of creative ideas - ideas which Radiohead have already shown great aptitude for - the two majors would certainly be suited for it.
1) inadequacies in its hosting infrastructure and
2) the competencies of the technical team responsible for hosting the site.
What it boils down to is that Radiohead - by declining the option of getting a world class, experienced web hosting company to provide the vital infrastructure required for a venture as bold as this - are greatly increasing the risk of jeopardizing the whole thing.
I explored this is greater detail in a blog posting entitled "Radiohead's Revolution to end in meltdown?" which can be seen here:
http://www.cluas.com/indie-music/Default.aspx?t...