June 26, 2023 - 1:30pm
Internet fandoms just ate Glastonbury Festival. Rina Sawayama, a Japanese-heritage British pop singer, introduced her song “STFU” by “calling out” label-mate Matty Healy, lead singer with The 1975, for making racist jokes on a podcast.
Sawayama that she wrote the song “because I was sick and tired of microaggressions” and dedicated it to “a white man who watches [pornography series] Ghetto Gaggers and mocks Asian people on a podcast. He also owns my masters [master recordings]. I’ve had enough.”
Wait, what? None of this makes sense outside the context of fandoms — which, the internet historian Katherine Dee argues, now comprise literally everything. Name a topic, and at least someone will be sufficiently into it to seek out other topic obsessives and form online social groups ordered around (or arguing about) devotion to that topic. And just recently, hating Matty Healy has emerged as an important adjunct to one of the biggest fandoms there is: Taylor Swift’s.
The main reason so many people have now heard of Healy is because he was briefly reported to have been dating Swift — a musician with such a colossal fan following that at one point all ten of the Top Ten chart singles were Taylor Swift songs. “Swifties”, as her obsessive followers are known, instantly went into protective-auntie mode, conducting the most rigorous imaginable background check on the new boyfriend of their parasocial object of devotion. Healy was then revealed to have made some off-colour remarks, at which point the Swifties went bananas.
There is no way Sawayama was unaware of this. I haven’t taken a close interest in the music charts since 1996 yet even I was aware of the Healy/Swift internet controversy. For Sawayama, then, “calling out” Healy onstage was an intricate act of intra-fandom signalling. In effect, it piggybacked on a much larger fandom — the Swifties — and captured some of that group’s unhinged intensity for herself. And it worked, after a fashion: her set resulted in a few mentions in music magazines, but that one remark has generated a slew of coverage in the mainstream press.
This ephemeral incident is illuminating because, as Dee points out, the same phenomena can be found across a multitude of topics — including politics. It took barely a few hours for a “Russian mutiny” fandom to emerge, as the world watched the bewildering events over the weekend. And, much as in the tangential relationship between Sawayama’s real-life Glastonbury gig and the moment that got all the press coverage, what’s really happening on the ground is of secondary importance to such fandoms, which mostly feed on — and are energised by — their interactions with one another.
The Sawayama moment also illustrates the reciprocal relationship between fans and their object of devotion: a phenomenon known as audience capture, in which the desires of fans begin to shape their object, sometimes to a grotesque degree. Did the fan response trigger Swift’s break-up with Healy? I dare say the Swifties would like to think so. (Arguably the reason J.K. Rowling is now so routinely vilified is that she makes absolutely no concession to the audience capture dynamic, robbing her most obsessive potential followers of a sense of agency.) And at Glastonbury, we saw another unrelated musician joining the same emotive shared meaning-space, for her own unrelated ends.
While this is mere froth when it’s the music industry, we should take seriously the capacity of collective fandoms to divert and shape political currents. My recollection of the early days of Covid, for example, was of leaders’ genuine uncertainty about how to act — an uncertainty dispelled the moment online consensus settled in favour of lockdown.
In other words: the Sawayama incident illustrates in microcosm just how much of what we call “politics” today comprises, or catalyses, the interaction of something akin to digitally-mediated swarm intelligences. It also illustrates just how far the preoccupations of those swarms have only a tangential relationship to facts on the ground — facts which continue to be real whatever the swarm thinks, or wants. Anyone who still imagines we have a rational public square, in which truth is sure to win out, really hasn’t been paying attention.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeWithout Matty Healy this article would be entirely about the society of women.
Without Matty Healy this article would be entirely about the society of women.
Beyond the immediate subject of this article, MH makes some very pertinent observations about herd mentality, including the one concerning the start of lockdowns in the UK. One might argue that government exists, in some sense at least, to save people from themselves but in the Covid instance the lockdown policy was being screamed at them from all sides. This is worth remembering in the context of the Covid non-inquiry currently taking place.
Beyond the immediate subject of this article, MH makes some very pertinent observations about herd mentality, including the one concerning the start of lockdowns in the UK. One might argue that government exists, in some sense at least, to save people from themselves but in the Covid instance the lockdown policy was being screamed at them from all sides. This is worth remembering in the context of the Covid non-inquiry currently taking place.
I do try to be interested in this type of thing, but I signally fail. I read the article and I still can’t work up any interest. This is not really much of a comment, but it’s the best that I can manage.
I do try to be interested in this type of thing, but I signally fail. I read the article and I still can’t work up any interest. This is not really much of a comment, but it’s the best that I can manage.
Microaggressions, microcosm, audience capture? What a microdrama. The back story is probably more interesting to write about that any of the music these two women ‘create’ which is just the usual overblown international pop – heavy on production, light on originality. Not that their besotted fans would be discouraged by that. Anyway, if the music leaves you unimpressed there’s always the leg-show.
Microaggressions. I keep seeing this new word, and always in contexts of eye-glazing pomposity or self-importance. Shouldn’t a ‘microaggession’ be only barely perceptible, and therefore a fortiori barely worth worrying about? Or are these people so attuned to the microworld of offence and micro-injustice that they are constantly micro-battered into miniature PTSD microstates? All very nano-interesting.
Microaggressions? A phoney problem invented by groups of slimy activists (SJWs and the like) as a moral weapon to beat ordinary people with.
It’s a bit like that other bit of moral trickery: unconscious bias: you might think you’re humane, tolerant and morally sound but below the surface you’re just another racist/sexist/homophobic bigot in urgent need of fundamental Marxist style re-education.
Microaggressions? A phoney problem invented by groups of slimy activists (SJWs and the like) as a moral weapon to beat ordinary people with.
It’s a bit like that other bit of moral trickery: unconscious bias: you might think you’re humane, tolerant and morally sound but below the surface you’re just another racist/sexist/homophobic bigot in urgent need of fundamental Marxist style re-education.
Microaggressions. I keep seeing this new word, and always in contexts of eye-glazing pomposity or self-importance. Shouldn’t a ‘microaggession’ be only barely perceptible, and therefore a fortiori barely worth worrying about? Or are these people so attuned to the microworld of offence and micro-injustice that they are constantly micro-battered into miniature PTSD microstates? All very nano-interesting.
Microaggressions, microcosm, audience capture? What a microdrama. The back story is probably more interesting to write about that any of the music these two women ‘create’ which is just the usual overblown international pop – heavy on production, light on originality. Not that their besotted fans would be discouraged by that. Anyway, if the music leaves you unimpressed there’s always the leg-show.
Rina Sawayama has a great voice but nothing to say that isn’t a second hand ’empowerment’ cliché and no tunes that deviate from the rigid 1 key and 3 chord written-by-committee disco formula. Pop music is exhausted.
Rina Sawayama has a great voice but nothing to say that isn’t a second hand ’empowerment’ cliché and no tunes that deviate from the rigid 1 key and 3 chord written-by-committee disco formula. Pop music is exhausted.
At a lower level, there was another Glasto situation which, to my eyes, involved manipulation of a swarm in a similar way. An artist who calls herself “Billy No Mates” announced she was cancelling all future concerts, and requested the BBC take down the video of her performance, because a handful of men on a BBC 6Music station Facebook group had made unkind comments about her music. This created a Twitter/Social Media storm which led to the handful of critics being “outed” and roundly turned upon. Scathing references to “6 Music Dads” went viral, and a swarm of online fans of other artists were all now backing Billy No Mates and (saying they would be) listening to her music, while heaping vitriol on her critics.
Twitter, of course, had been full of tweets taking the mickey out of every single artist, often in an amusing but very derogatory way. That’s Twitter, it’s what it does. But only these hapless “6 Music Dads” were cancelled.
To what extent was this manipulated by Billy No Mates or her associates? Possibly not at all, and I have no animus towards her or her music. But it’s an interesting phenomenon.
Nope! That’s what people use Twitter for. Twitter does nothing but provide a forum for the chronically opinionated – you know, the people who imagine their fleeting moral outrage is hugely important [no shortage of those].
By the way, the only Twitter Storms I have been aware of are those which journalists write about. Otherwise I’d never know they were happening – I don’t have a Twitter account.
I had a Twitter account, but I called a BLM woman a “racist c**t”, so they shut down my account until I agreed to delete my tweet but I refused and haven’t been back on Twitter since.
Mr Craven, I would give you a thousand thumbs up if I could!
Mr Craven, I would give you a thousand thumbs up if I could!
I had a Twitter account, but I called a BLM woman a “racist c**t”, so they shut down my account until I agreed to delete my tweet but I refused and haven’t been back on Twitter since.
Nope! That’s what people use Twitter for. Twitter does nothing but provide a forum for the chronically opinionated – you know, the people who imagine their fleeting moral outrage is hugely important [no shortage of those].
By the way, the only Twitter Storms I have been aware of are those which journalists write about. Otherwise I’d never know they were happening – I don’t have a Twitter account.
At a lower level, there was another Glasto situation which, to my eyes, involved manipulation of a swarm in a similar way. An artist who calls herself “Billy No Mates” announced she was cancelling all future concerts, and requested the BBC take down the video of her performance, because a handful of men on a BBC 6Music station Facebook group had made unkind comments about her music. This created a Twitter/Social Media storm which led to the handful of critics being “outed” and roundly turned upon. Scathing references to “6 Music Dads” went viral, and a swarm of online fans of other artists were all now backing Billy No Mates and (saying they would be) listening to her music, while heaping vitriol on her critics.
Twitter, of course, had been full of tweets taking the mickey out of every single artist, often in an amusing but very derogatory way. That’s Twitter, it’s what it does. But only these hapless “6 Music Dads” were cancelled.
To what extent was this manipulated by Billy No Mates or her associates? Possibly not at all, and I have no animus towards her or her music. But it’s an interesting phenomenon.
Anyone know what this means?
I’m no expert on copyright law, but this is presumably to do with ownership of master-tapes of recordings, which means they could be digitally altered by the owner and used for other purposes.
Healy’s former girlfriend Taylor Swift is famous for her refusal to be “owned” by a recording company in this way.
The article suggests he is just on the same label as her. Does he own the label? Presumably he must if he owns her masters.
Following on from my point about the Healy/Swift relationship, Healy doesn’t have to own the label to be in control of his own “masters” – he could have acquired the rights, and possibly those of other artists attached to that label as well.
As i said – i’m no expert in these matters. You enquired what “he owns my masters” might mean, and i’ve simply suggested the explanation.
Edit: just read P. Burrell’s response, which is probably closer to what was meant.
Thanks Steve
Thanks Steve
Following on from my point about the Healy/Swift relationship, Healy doesn’t have to own the label to be in control of his own “masters” – he could have acquired the rights, and possibly those of other artists attached to that label as well.
As i said – i’m no expert in these matters. You enquired what “he owns my masters” might mean, and i’ve simply suggested the explanation.
Edit: just read P. Burrell’s response, which is probably closer to what was meant.
The article suggests he is just on the same label as her. Does he own the label? Presumably he must if he owns her masters.
Rina Sawayama and Matt Healy are on the same record label (Dirty Hit). Matt Healy resigned as a director in April but may still own shares, hence the comment “he owns my masters”
Thanks Philip
Thanks Philip
I’m no expert on copyright law, but this is presumably to do with ownership of master-tapes of recordings, which means they could be digitally altered by the owner and used for other purposes.
Healy’s former girlfriend Taylor Swift is famous for her refusal to be “owned” by a recording company in this way.
Rina Sawayama and Matt Healy are on the same record label (Dirty Hit). Matt Healy resigned as a director in April but may still own shares, hence the comment “he owns my masters”
Anyone know what this means?
I’ve heard of Taylor Swift, but not of either of these other people.
Worse, I’ve even heard Taylor Swift. See blog:
https://ayenaw.com/2023/01/08/is-taylor-swift-our-greatest-living-poet/
Worse, I’ve even heard Taylor Swift. See blog:
https://ayenaw.com/2023/01/08/is-taylor-swift-our-greatest-living-poet/
I’ve heard of Taylor Swift, but not of either of these other people.
In the past, when art had substance, a fan was someone who was smart or talented enough to appreciate what the celebrity was doing, but not smart or talented enough to give them competition. I think the fans of today are just people who pick their celebrity and watch them fight someone or something else.
In the past, when art had substance, a fan was someone who was smart or talented enough to appreciate what the celebrity was doing, but not smart or talented enough to give them competition. I think the fans of today are just people who pick their celebrity and watch them fight someone or something else.
Is it any wonder why many people, including women, largely dislike women?
Is it any wonder why many people, including women, largely dislike women?
Any relation to Denys?
Any relation to Denys?