BRITNEY UPDATE:
So, we were talking last week about Britney Spears smuggling a rude message into her song 'If You Seek Amy', and whether radio stations should feel obliged to play it, even though it's a kind of schoolyard provocation*, and therefore tantamount to bullying (if you really overthink things).
Well, it seems a solution has arrived, in form of a rerecorded version of the song, especially for the radio. Instead of singing "all of the boys and all of the girls are begging to if you seek Amy" and offending crossword puzzlers the world over, Britney will now sing "if you see Amy".
This is clearly much better because now the innocent interpretation of the line will make as much sense as it ever did (ie: none), and the dirty version will have Britney singing "F. U. C. A." instead of, er... *blushes*
Which is palpable nonsense, but not actual obscenity.
To get a full perspective on the ramifications of such a change, I spoke to Steve Perkins, ChartBlog's Britney correspondent, and he said: "I do not approve. "All of the boys and all of the girls are begging to F.U.C.A. me?" RUBBISH. JUST RELEASE 'AMNESIA', ALREADY.
There. I think that's all sorted out now. *dusts hands*
*It's not unlike that game where you go up to a girl and say "are you a pig?" and when they say no, you sneer at them and go "Uhhh! You're not a Pretty Intelligent Girl!", and then run off.
Comment number 1.
At 27th Jan 2009, pinkparadox wrote:I agree - release Amnesia instead!!!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 27th Jan 2009, dennisjunior1 wrote:Fraser:
i think that of britney's newest songs was ok....
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)
Comment number 3.
At 27th Jan 2009, thranjax wrote:It was childish rubbish before, now it is childish rubbish which is watered down.
It's a gimmick song, existing solely around the furore it generates. It might as well be the crazy frog song or the birdie song for all the genuine worth it has.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 3)
Comment number 4.
At 27th Jan 2009, hackerjack wrote:Can you please change the non-capitals. Don't you know anythign about nettiquette?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 4)
Comment number 5.
At 27th Jan 2009, Fraser McAlpine - wrote:I'm not sure what you mean, Hackerjack. Change the capitals? Change TO non-capitals?
Would you mind elaborating?
Cheersta
Fraser
Complain about this comment (Comment number 5)
Comment number 6.
At 28th Jan 2009, mike-duke wrote:Dont The Script have a song on their album called If You See Kay.
Why don't you see any of this fuss about them? WHY?
Complain about this comment (Comment number 6)
Comment number 7.
At 28th Jan 2009, Fraser McAlpine - wrote:Because they are the Script.
Next!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 7)
Comment number 8.
At 28th Jan 2009, thranjax wrote:Fraser,
I'm not entirely sure, does that mean the Script are so fantastic they are above criticism of any form, or does it mean the Script are so meh that no one cares what they do?
Would you mind elaborating?
Thranjax
Complain about this comment (Comment number 8)
Comment number 9.
At 28th Jan 2009, Fraser McAlpine - wrote:Not at all. Anything for you, Thranj...
First of all, this is about a potential single release, not an album track. And even if the Script released their song (which may not happen), the radio stations would be under less pressure to play it as they're not as big as Britney. They may even chose not to play it at all, which could conceivably damage the band's fledgeling career.
Having said that, if they DID release it, most of what I've said about Britney's song would apply to theirs.
Having said that, it's unlikely that putting the song out would be seized upon as further proof that the Script have loose morals, in the way people talk about Britney. She is considered to be public property - and therefore fair game for open criticism - in the way they are not.
Also, I thought it was a funny joke. Along the lines of your second option.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 9)
Comment number 10.
At 29th Jan 2009, thranjax wrote:Yes, I kind of thought the second option was more where you were headed :)
I like the idea of "further proof" that the Script have loose morals, as if you are building up a dossier secretly at night hunched over a magnifying lens in a darkroom.
And just imagine having a job where you are "under pressure" to play a Britney Spears record. Being a DJ has just gone from being quite a cool job option to somewhere below holding back Amy Winehouses's hair while she retches.
Thranjax
Complain about this comment (Comment number 10)
Comment number 11.
At 29th Jan 2009, thranjax wrote:Winehouse's
(God I thought we had all this plurals and possessives stuff worked out, obviously not).
Complain about this comment (Comment number 11)
Comment number 12.
At 29th Jan 2009, Fraser McAlpine - wrote:I think everything I want to say about the over-sensitivity some people have to other people's mistakes has been said by Stephen Fry...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 12)
Comment number 13.
At 29th Jan 2009, Fraser McAlpine - wrote:Bah...direct linking doesn't work, for some reason.
Go to
And read the post called 'Don’t Mind Your Language…'
Complain about this comment (Comment number 13)
Comment number 14.
At 29th Jan 2009, SteveChartBlog wrote:To add to Fraser's points in comment number nine, some people also persist in seeing Britney as an act whose records are aimed at children (despite the fact that her last three studio albums have all contained a fair amount of racy content) in a way that The Script are not.
Indeed, The Script are not suitable for children because children are impressionable and might grow up believing that sort of nonsense is acceptable. (Insert giant THIS IS MY OPINION NOT THAT OF THE ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ disclaimer here, obviously.)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 14)
Comment number 15.
At 29th Jan 2009, thranjax wrote:Fraser, I was criticising myself, not someone else. About the apostrophe I mean. And I wasn't being entirely serious.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 15)
Comment number 16.
At 29th Jan 2009, Fraser McAlpine - wrote:Oh I know. It's just the subject of proper grammar has come up a few times in comments on the blog, and I don't really like the finger-pointing aspect, unless I've been a ridiculous buffoon (which does happen).
What I was trying to say is that I'd be the last person to pull you up on your apostrophe use, mainly because it serves no useful purpose.
Of course, what I should have said was "Hah! LOL!" and left well enough alone, right? ;-)
Complain about this comment (Comment number 16)