Neil Young: Why MTV Banned 'This Note's For You' & Then It Won An MTV VMA

Neil Young: The time MTV banned his video for 'This Note's For You' and then changed their mind and the video went on to win the VMA for video of the year. SIGN UP for 10 of the Craziest Stories in Rock N' Roll [Secret Playlist]: https://bit.ly/3vVPAEF Have a video request or a topic you'd like to see us cover? Fill out our google form! https://bit.ly/3stnXlN ----CONNECT ON SOCIAL---- Instagram:   / rocknrolltruestories   Facebook:   / rnrtruestories   Twitter:   / rocktruestories   Blog: www.rockandrolltruestories.com #neilyoung #thisnotesforyou #mtv I cite my sources and they may differ than other people's accounts, so I don't guarantee the actual accuracy of my videos. The LA Times perfectly summarized the state of MTV in 1988 writing No one shows kids a good time like MTV. The 24-hour vid channel offers so many crazy deejays, wild contests and nutty promotions that, in MTV Land, it seems like Spring Break every day of the year. What MTV’s savvy image makers don’t say is--there’s such a thing as having too much fun, especially when that fun comes at the expense of important MTV advertisers.” Neil Young would find out the hard way that the network didn’t appreciate poking fun at the network’s advertisers. Thjat’s what were going to explore in today’s video. In 1988 Neil Young would release his 16th studio album This Note’s For You. Part of the album's centered around the concept of commercialism of rock and roll tours, something he was of course a critic of Side note I’ve done a whole video on this that involved the black crowes getting fired from opening for ZZ Top after criticizing miller beer’s corporate sponsorship of the tour. Young would release a video for the title track In 1988 Neil Young would release a video for the song “This Note’s for You,”. The song would mention particular companies including coke, pespi and budweiser, some of whom advertised on mtv at the time. The video would also take aim at well known musicians who promoted corporate products including, Eric Clapton and Michael Jackson. There would be a spoof of Eric Clapton’s Michelob ad, and the time michael jackson set his hair on fire during a Pepsi dance routine, The video would also take aim at budlight corporate mascot spudz mackenzie. The network, concerned about their advertisers banned the video. It was difficult for MTV to justify such a move since critics of the network pointed to sexually suggestive videos making it through their standards and practices department. Even the spokesperson for MTV had a hard time defending the decision to ban the video telling the lA Times “I must admit I feel awkward defending our decision because I happen to think it’s a fantastic video,” “Everyone in Programming loved it--it’s spectacular and it’s very funny. But we had two corporate problems: First, our attorneys advised us against playing it because its use of likenesses of Michael Jackson and Spuds MacKenzie could leave us open to trademark infringement charges. Since then, Warner Records’ legal department has offered to indemnify us against any claims, but our attorneys still felt that might not be enough protection….“I agree that it’s a spoof, which is what I argued with our Standards execs,” “But I lost the argument. Standards feels that if we appeared inconsistent, other record companies would want exceptions down the road.” Young’s manager Elliot Roberts would tell the press at the time “I think the whole thing is a disgrace,” “It tells me that the M in MTV stands for money , not music. The shame of it all is that Neil had written a song talking about how advertisers are taking control of the music--and now MTV has proven that corporate control of rock has gone further than you could possibly imagine.” Young’s camp and his label did offer to change the video to remove any impersonators but MTV still said no Warners. According to the LA Times and i quote “It has been a long-standing MTV policy that the channel refuses to air clips that depict--or contain lyrics-- that refer to specific commercial products. The intent of the edict is to protect MTV from the glut of tacky product placements that clog so many Hollywood films.” The war of words between Neil Young’s camp and MTV also appears to have come from poor communication. Roberts would claim to the Times that he sent the song and the video script to the network ahead of time and claimed it was approved. While Lee Masters MTV general manager approved it, the network’s standards department didn’t. Despite MTV’s ban Canadian music channel MuchMusic ran the video and it proved to be a hit. MTV changed their mind shortly afterwards and the video got heavy airplay on the network. The irony of the whole thing is that it would win the MTV video music award for video of the year in 1989. It also went on Sources: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.latim...