“Double your pleasure, double your fun.”
Some of us may know that as the words from the old Doublemint ads from a few years ago. Others might know it as a lyric from Chris Brown’s hit single Forever.
Coincidence? Nope.
Turns out Wrigley commissioned Chris Brown and producer Polow da Don to create a new take on the famous gum jingle to be released as part of a new marketing campaign to be launched this week. Brown just took it one step further and added his own lyrics to make the song a viable pop single.
Needless to say, some people are upset.
I think it’s a brilliant business move.
Let’s face it: Chris Brown’s track was never supposed to be anything but bubble-gum pop (yeah, totally nailed that metaphor there). The lyrics — even apart from the Doublemint nod — were weak at best, and it wasn’t as if Brown was trying to create a song that would change the world. Instead, it’s a track that gets your feet moving and makes you want to dance — nothing more.
Why the uproar with the fact that it was originally a Wrigley ad then? It’s not as if Brown released the actual Wrigley ad on his album; he re-wrote the majority of the lyrics and used a beat that is undoubtedly extremely catchy. He’s not pretending otherwise.
Some music is created not to have a message, not to be provocative, and not to make you think. Some music was made just to make you dance.
Chris Brown’s Forever does just that. Why hold it to some standard of moral quality it doesn’t aspire to?
Interesting. I wonder if anybody was upset at Moby when all his songs from one album was sold off to make commercials? If so, he’s still an icon to many.
KK
I think the problem in this case was that the song was “originally” for the ad, and then repurposed, instead of the way around.
That being said, it’s business, and it’s cookie-cutter pop. Nobody’s trying to make a statement, so why be upset?
Over-the-top reaction from Gawker. As if product names in pop and rap songs just get there because the famous artists like them (I would never have heard of Cristal otherwise).
…and here Wrigley is trying to set the record straight (there’s my metaphor) on what happened!
Haha…your metaphor is much more cerebral than mine Connie.
You’re right: very over-the-top reaction. I say, if people like the music, it shouldn’t matter why the music was made. I don’t think it’s a musical masterpiece, but it surely gets me moving to the beat; then again, so do some of those “Got Milk” ads you see on TV. Why does it matter if Brown originally made the song for a corporation?
Er, um. I think it’s a pun actually rather than a metaphor.
What ev-ar.
Good point. Then again, I’m no language pundit. (Oh, that was painful.)
I’m curious to see if the song (I’ve never heard) will have rotation on Much Music now that its owned by CTV. If you recall, Justin Timberlake’s “I’m Lovin’ It” was kept out of rotation on the radio and TV for exactly this reason: the song was nothing but a preemptive product jingle but out first as a single. Brutal.
Ryan, it would be hard for Much not to play the track — it’s super popular, number 1 on several charts, and doesn’t “really” reference the gum explicitly.
JT’s track was written for and released at the same time as the McD’s coampaign, so it was a little more justifiable.
Then again, who knows? Maybe CTV will get a kickback from Wrigley…