Jump to content

💓 DAWN OF CHROMATICA 💓

Follow Gaga Daily on Telegram
celeb

Billie Joe Armstrong throws shade at Ariana when talking about Billie Eilis


BUtterfield 8

Featured Posts

Lord Temptation
8 minutes ago, Didymus said:

:ladyhaha:

We're on a pop forum. All major pop stars had major financial backing from their label, especially Gaga. If you know anything about her early career you already know this, so why use that argument against Billie alone and not everyone else?

And before you start with a "Gaga worked much harder!" narrative, let me remind you that the only reason Billie became famous is because one of her performances went viral on SoundCloud (she was not discovered by a talent scout who hooked her up with the right connections like Gaga) and that it took Billie four full years of doing promo since her first official release to get the public's attention. Meanwhile Gaga had the benefit of Interscope throwing all the money they had to her to promote Just Dance (they booked her major gigs while she was still a nobody and literally hired a company to force-promote her to the gay community), and only had to wait five months :rip:

Be careful which sword you use. This one is definitely double-edged.

Gaga was an underground performer since she was 19 and dropped out of college, moving out of home to the Lower East Side, hustling her way through gigs at dive bars, burlesque shows and heavy metal clubs.

But you knew all this.

Billie got signed to Interscope when she was 15. She has never been a performer. She did it all in the comfort of her home, where she got homeschooled by her Hollywood parents who gave her all the right connections. Zero struggle.

There is literally no comparison.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Gagaplayer315

Ariana has vocals, Billie has.... whispers. It really isn’t comparable 

serious the four GIF by Diddy

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

AzeaIia Banks

It's annoying how some of y'all are dragging Gaga into this :saladga:

Billie isn't that special. Yes she and her brother worked on her album, but who gives a ****? That's impressive but it's the quality were here for.

Ariana could've also been writing songs by her own at some point.

Gaga please release Red Flame and Ratchet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Didymus
21 minutes ago, Lord Temptation said:

Gaga was an underground performer since she was 19 and dropped out of college, moving out of home to the Lower East Side, doing gigs at dive bars, burlesque and heavy metal clubs.

But you knew all this.

Billie got signed to Interscope when she was 15. She has never been a performer. She did it all in the comfort of her home, where she got homeschooled and her Hollywood parents gave her all the right connections. Zero struggle.

There is literally no comparison.

But what does Gaga's previous work have to do with Interscope forcefeeding her first single down everyone's throats until it smashed? :madge: I thought this conversation was about industry planting and how artists who benefit from a commercial strategy drafted up by their record label are inauthentic frauds. Suddenly, now that your own argument works against Gaga, you switch the subject to whoever worked harder, the longest? :ladyhaha: Just as I predicted in my previous post, ironically.

Billie and Gaga's pre-major contract life is indeed incomparable. But what happened after they got signed to a major record label who wanted to promote them as the next big thing, is definitely comparable. I don't understand what dropping out of school to become a musician has to do with how Interscope hired FlyLife to make sure Gaga got a loyal gay fanbase who could lift her up out of obscurity. Or how Gaga doing dive bars has to do anything with her eventually signing a 360 contract which allowed Interscope to take full creative control of her career.

She made her choices and she chose a label which was determined to promote her as the next big thing. To catapult her into superstardom through a combination of her hard work and their absolutely unprecedently large investment into a debuting artist. Gaga would never have become famous without either of those two. And neither would Billie. The only difference is that Billie's music has the advantage of promoting itself through honestly earned critical acclaim, while Gaga had to distract (at first) the media from her music and create notoriety through avant-garde costumes and performances. You tell me again who's the obvious industry plant and who's the talented artist.

Edit: Before someone comes at me, I'm not saying Gaga didn't work hard or doesn't deserve to be famous. It's just that the "industry plant" argument against Billie also works against Gaga (as well as basically every other pop star). Major label investments are a reality but that doesn't mean the artists benefiting from them are untalented or unworthy of being praised...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Didymus
10 minutes ago, Gagaplayer315 said:

Ariana has vocals, Billie has.... whispers. It really isn’t comparable 

serious the four GIF by Diddy

Stop :air: Where does this tired argument keep coming from? She's proven she can sit next to an accomplished singer and sound not only professional but better than said accomplished singer :rip:

The thing you haters don't realize is that Billie has songs written by/for her to expertly match her vocal style. It makes it sound easy and like there's nothing to it. Unless someone else tries to sing them :ladyhaha: I mean, Alicia sounds... not good. Despite her obvious vocal talent.

Get that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FfFfFfFF
32 minutes ago, Mariano said:

Uhm... Billie is definitely more interesting than Ariana (incl. their music respectively), but they are not that far off :lmao:  He is acting like Billie is Amy Winehouse level and Ariana is Britney level, yikes. 

Unnecessary and makes no sense in the first place, they are both commercial and cater to the same target group, like let's not. 

Tea, they hate to see it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord Temptation
17 minutes ago, Didymus said:

But what does Gaga's previous work have to do with Interscope forcefeeding her first single down everyone's throats until it smashed? :madge: I thought this conversation was about industry planting and how artists who benefit from a commercial strategy drafted up by their record label are inauthentic frauds. Suddenly, now that your own argument works against Gaga, you switch the subject to whoever worked harder, the longest? :ladyhaha: Just as I predicted in my previous post, ironically.

Billie and Gaga's pre-major contract life is indeed incomparable. But what happened after they got signed to a major record label who wanted to promote them as the next big thing, is definitely comparable. I don't understand what dropping out of school to become a musician has to do with how Interscope hired FlyLife to make sure Gaga got a loyal gay fanbase who could lift her up out of obscurity. Or how Gaga doing dive bars has to do anything with her eventually signing a 360 contract which allowed Interscope to take full creative control of her career.

She made her choices and she chose a label which was determined to promote her as the next big thing. To catapult her into superstardom through a combination of her hard work and their absolutely unprecedently large investment into a debuting artist. Gaga would never have become famous without either of those two. And neither would Billie. The only difference is that Billie's music has the advantage of promoting itself through honestly earned critical acclaim, while Gaga had to distract the media from her music and create notoriety through avant-garde costumes and performances. You tell me again who's the obvious industry plant and who's the talented artist.

Billie Eilish (before age 18):

- Partnerships with Spotify to put her in all playlists

- Beats by Dre sponsorship

- Apple sponsorship

- Gets record deal with Interscope before turning 15

- YouTube sponsorship

- Kids clothing line

- Gucci sponsorship

- Interviews with Variety three years in a row

- Glastonbury Festival performance

- Coachella Festival performance

- Wins all Big 4 Awards at Grammys

If that is not an industry plant then I don’t know what is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LaMaisonGaga said:

oh yeah, a whispering industry plant is the real deal.

I've... been thinking about this, honestly.

Spoiler

what do you know djfskdjfksdhfsdkjh

 

3 points in and ready for more
Link to post
Share on other sites

AzeaIia Banks
17 minutes ago, Didymus said:

But what does Gaga's previous work have to do with Interscope forcefeeding her first single down everyone's throats until it smashed? :madge: I thought this conversation was about industry planting and how artists who benefit from a commercial strategy drafted up by their record label are inauthentic frauds. Suddenly, now that your own argument works against Gaga, you switch the subject to whoever worked harder, the longest? :ladyhaha: Just as I predicted in my previous post, ironically.

Billie and Gaga's pre-major contract life is indeed incomparable. But what happened after they got signed to a major record label who wanted to promote them as the next big thing, is definitely comparable. I don't understand what dropping out of school to become a musician has to do with how Interscope hired FlyLife to make sure Gaga got a loyal gay fanbase who could lift her up out of obscurity. Or how Gaga doing dive bars has to do anything with her eventually signing a 360 contract which allowed Interscope to take full creative control of her career.

She made her choices and she chose a label which was determined to promote her as the next big thing. To catapult her into superstardom through a combination of her hard work and their absolutely unprecedently large investment into a debuting artist. Gaga would never have become famous without either of those two. And neither would Billie. The only difference is that Billie's music has the advantage of promoting itself through honestly earned critical acclaim, while Gaga had to distract the media from her music and create notoriety through avant-garde costumes and performances. You tell me again who's the obvious industry plant and who's the talented artist.

Okay we get it. I guess I'll unstan Gaga now that I heard of this talented individual. I can't believe I haven't heard of this groundbreaking and hard-working artist.

Satire

Gaga please release Red Flame and Ratchet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Teal Ambition

Ugh I love Green Day but this comment was really unnecessary :selena:    

▌│█║▌║▌║ before I am Canadian, I am Chromatican ║▌║▌║█│▌
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gagaplayer315
6 minutes ago, Didymus said:

 

 

Just like I said, whispers :ladyhaha:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lilmonzter

Tf is wrong with you 

I don't enjoy ari's music but can't deny her impact in the industry though 

Sing C'est la vie 
Link to post
Share on other sites

freebit

His opinion probably weights heavily on Ariana being more of a classic pop star in aesthetic and sound. Whereas Billie looks and sounds more like the artists of the 90s, plus he personally knows her. 

48 minutes ago, Blue Lagoon said:

:ladyhaha:

 

^Really, this says it all about how he views music. There's a lot of people in the music industry that probably share his opinion, and that's probably another reason why Lil Nas X didn't collect Record of the Year.

39 minutes ago, Didymus said:

:ladyhaha:

We're on a pop forum. All major pop stars had major financial backing from their label, especially Gaga. If you know anything about her early career you already know this, so why use that argument against Billie alone and not everyone else?

And before you start with a "Gaga worked much harder!" narrative, let me remind you that the only reason Billie became famous is because one of her performances went viral on SoundCloud (she was not discovered by a talent scout who hooked her up with the right connections like Gaga) and that it took Billie three full years of doing promo since her first official release to get the public's attention. Meanwhile Gaga had the benefit of Interscope throwing all the money they had to her to promote Just Dance (they booked her major gigs while she was still a nobody and literally hired a company to force-promote her to the gay community), and only had to wait five months before she was a major commercial force :rip:

Be careful which sword you use. This one is definitely double-edged.

Let this sink in: Billie has had a stylist since she was fourteen years old. She was prepped to be a star when most girls are graduating middle school. She was 16 when she started to blow up with You Should See Me in a Crown. She didn't have to wait long at all. Lorde also had a similar come-up (being discovered super young), and is leveled with industry plant acusations from time to time, but most people don't give her flack anymore because has time has proven that she's a good songwriter. That plant narative will follow anyone who started being groomed that young. It's not the worst thing to be accused of and she'll be fine. 

We also don't have to drag Gaga into every argument and make her seem lesser than to prop another up. She had plenty of her own obstacles - not to mention Jimmy Iorvine didn't even want to support her because he percieved her as a threat to Gwen Stefani and would have had her locked up in the Interscope proverbial basement writing for acts like the Pussycat Dolls if he'd initially had his way. It wasn't that easy for her like you're making it seem. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...