I have been following the Rage developments with some interest via Facebook, ever since it became evident to me that the campaign to get Rage to No. 1 was enthusiastically endorsed by a whole mass of people. I personally feel that it is all a bit 'sound and fury, signifying nothing', not least because a) Very few people actually care what is No. 1 at Christmas any longer, compared to say the interest this may have generated 25-30 years ago (and, not least, because downloading of music has made the significance of Singles sale a virtual non-issue!) and b) the choice of song is singularly inappropriate, IMO (not because it lacks a protesting spirit, and, of course, it has been selected for the refrain of its memorable chorus, 'F*ck you, I won't do what you tell me', but simply because it is very specifically a song about the aftermath of the LA Riots in 1992, and much as I hate the X Factor judges, they seem to have very little in common with the cross burning, white supremacist LAPD cops that the lyrics are actually aimed against, so that when you actually consider the WORDS, it seems an odd sort of song to have chosen to promote.
BUT I would still defend the whole campaign on the basis that a lot of its significance appears to have been badly misjudged by a (basically biased) press establishment - firstly, there is NO indication that Cowell had any hand in its orchestration - this is a grass roots campaign that emerged solely through the networking possibilities of Facebook.
Secondly, it is certainly possible that Cowell may himself stand to make money from the result (and so, is laughing all the way to the bank), but at no point did the campaigners imagine otherwise (although some question whether he will see the revenue directly, because he doesn't own the specific labels involved) - they maintained that the campaign was NOT about challenging Cowell's implausible money making (perhaps it should have been!) - and ensured that percentages of all of their sales went to charity, so that the homeless charity Shelter is said to have raised £60,000 by this means. This may have been in part a self-interestedly 'right on' aspect of the campaign designed to emphasise the 'higher moral ground' that the Rage campaigners felt themselves to be promoting, but if the money gets delivered, then I'm sure the charity won't be arguing with the outcome.
Thirdly, the whole emphasis of the campaign was that a large proportion of people in common wished to protest the bland, homogenised and inspid brand of pop that Cowell and his X-Factor machine churn out year in, year out - deliberately coinciding release so as to ensure maximum publicity and monopoly dominance at the time that Christmas hits. Whether or not the chosen song was felt to be an appropriate example of more 'valid' genre music or otherwise (a lot of people hate it), the significance of the protest was its intention to re-establish the fact that there is a much, much wider realm of musical choice out there than the sort of force fed pap that the Cowell machine produces for our consumption. Rage's song is most certainly an example of a grungy, early 90's rock sound that by no means appeals to the majority (I'm no great fan myself), but I would like to think any lover of jazz, reggae, punk rock, 50's rock n' roll, trad blues, jungle, techno, heavy metal, Latino jazz, funk, Northern Soul or indeed, any of the numerous innovative and inventive genres that have characterised the development of true rock and pop over the past 60-70 years would have supported the principle of the campaign at least - a simple recognition that popular music has more to it than banal covers of Miley Cyrus songs!!!
I have no doubt that the X Factor will still be back next year though, and that Simon Cowell will probably land the *next* Christmas Number 1. So it goes.
