Taylor Swift’s next re-recorded/re-released album will be 1989 (Taylor’s Version). It will be out on October 27rd and Tay says it was her favorite to re-record. [Socialite Life]
Al-Hilal offered Kylian Mbappe a $775 million contract?! [JustJared]
Ice Spice wore tartan to a Billboard event. [GFY]
A discussion about that Regina King-Jennifer Garner clip from 2017. [LaineyGossip]
How TMZ became the spin-site of choice for terrible men. [Pajiba]
Mattel is also introducing new Ken dolls, inspired by the movie. [Tom & Lorenzo]
Beyonce’s tour looks are so amazing. [RCFA]
Here’s the trailer for Welcome to Plathville’s Season 5. [Starcasm]
Here’s some info about the Montgomery brawl. [Buzzfeed]
Dumbasses are going to boycott Best Buy. [Towleroad]
Surprise!! 1989 (Taylor’s Version) is on its way to you 🔜! The 1989 album changed my life in countless ways, and it fills me with such excitement to announce that my version of it will be out October 27th. To be perfectly honest, this is my most FAVORITE re-record I’ve ever done… pic.twitter.com/JFYOWhBxhj
— Taylor Swift (@taylorswift13) August 10, 2023
Another re-recording? Why is she re-recording this album? Was this one recorded under her orginal record label too?
all the album masters from reputation (2017) and prior were bought by Scooter. she’s re-recording all of them. the ones left for her to re-record are Reputation (2017) and Taylor Swift (2006).
October 27th.
The Montgomery brawl is the very definition of FAFO.
The memes coming out of that incident are HILARIOUS!!
Not ashamed to say I can’t wait for Taylor’s Version of 1989. Love this album.
Same
That was the first Taylor album that interested me and I bought and enjoyed it. How different are her versions from the originals? I’m a Tay Tay fan but not like a die hard, own all the different colors of the record albums Swiftie.
I am not a diehard either. I actually hated her until Red came out. She wore me down. Lol. I really like her re-recordings. She includes new songs with them and some extended cuts. I think they are worth it.
They’ve gotten more different as she’s gone on in the process – more noticeable differences between the versions of Speak Now than there were with the Fearless re-release. 1989 will probably be more similar because it’s not as old though and her sound is still poppy.
Lainey’s post about the Jen Garner – Regina King issue is exactly the way I feel about it and why I was not one of the folks calling Jen a Karen for it. What we now know in 2023 is that that structured discussion should have been structured differently. And that wasn’t Jen’s fault. We now know having a white woman ask a Black woman such a loaded question has incredibly racist and tone deaf undertones.
Sorry, but your rationale that being White should by nature preclude you from asking a person of color where their ancestors are from, is in itself a racist premice, suggesting that a White person’s freedom of speech must be limited by fear of being labeled insensitive.
People are so proud to say they’re Irish American or Italian American or Jewish American. How do you know that Black people aren’t looking as well for the opportunity to say my ancestors are from Senegal and the Ivory Coast? Well, as an avid genealogy amateur myself, I ask the question to everyone. I once asked it to a Black woman sitting next to me in the train while we were commuting, and the lady was thrilled to tell me about her ancestry DNA test and its ramifications. So fascinating I almost missed my stop.
Perhaps we should stop assuming that people of color will feel systematically offended or excluded. I think it takes more than a candid question about ancestry to undermine the confidence and self-awareness of people who take pride in their identity. I just speak the same to everyone, irrespective of their ethnic background. So far so good. I wouldn’t have ot any other way. But I’m curious about the rhetorical precautions others might be taking.
I recall the Duchess of Sussex claiming in the most joyful and relaxed way that her DNA test revealed she was 41% Nigerian. So my initial assumption is that an overwhelming majority of people are proud to discuss their origins.
I am mixed and I absolutely hate being asked that question especially when I was born and raised in Canada and saying Canada does not seem suffice. If you are white just err on the side of hmm maybe it’s not my business and unless the person of colour asks where you are from or where your family is from don’t bring it up. It’s exhausting to have to have to answer what feels like invasive unnecessary questions about my existence because I look “interesting”
I just got my own DNA test back and spent a few hours yesterday doing a deep dive on my paternal relatives on line. I’ve also been discussing my test results with some other people who used the same company on an online forum. A lot of these people had African ancestry, as well as Middle Eastern, European and South Asian.
My family has been in the US for ten generations and I’m still interested in where they came from. I would think people of color would be interested, too.
As a white woman would I ask a woman of color that question? Probably not, for fear of being perceived as othering them. But that wouldn’t be my intention and I don’t see why it should automatically be perceived as such. A lot of people are curious about their origins. DNA testing is very common and popular right now. The ads for them show people of all races, which I think reflects the breadth of interest in them.
My parents are both immigrants and my Dad loves to ask people about their family history. But not everyone appreciates that question and it can be invasive and perceived as questioning whether that person “belongs” in their current residence. So I’ve gently encouraged him toward discussion in which he leads with his and my mom’s history (two different paths), which lets people contribute their own or not. He’s a super outgoing person so most people respond favorably but there are definitely some who are not interested.
I can only speak of my own experience, as a person that gets asked about once a week, it does make me feel othered. Especially since my white coworker never got asked. For the people that ask, it’s one candid question, for me it’s been a constant in my life, even though I was born and raised where I live. My ancestry test gave me more questions than answers.
Not a Swift fan (as evidenced by what I am asking) but I thought she was re-recording these albums in chronological order. I just checked over on Apple Music and songs from 1989 and Reputation are the SB/BMG albums that are ranked in Top Music. If there wasnt a chronological order to the re-recordings, why not start with the big albums first? Isn’t this the whole reason for this effort? To have fans stop listening to the old records and listen to these ones?
Also, super interesting to see what the long term effects are of this effort. I do applaud Taylor reclaiming HER art but I question what the financial impacts are actually. If radio and streams are still favoring the original edits, SB is still getting paid.
TS has said radio has been playing the re-recordings. TS (and her fans) have a quite a bit of power.
Good question! I’m sure there’s ~a~ reason, but who knows.
Maybe it’s as simple as she is just in the zone or has inspiration to work on a certain album and is going off that feeling versus trying to work on, say, Taylor Swift , just because it was first.
She has gone out of order and I do think there is strategy behind it. 1989 is her biggest album for streaming numbers so my guess is that she held this one in reserve as leverage for buying back the originals. The TS versions do now outperform the originals in streaming though obviously the originals are still being played. But the intent to devalue them has certain worked even if it’s up for debate what the financial success has ultimately been.
But I also think this re-recording project has become much bigger than sticking it to Scooter Braun or devaluing the original catalog. I think TS seems to have found this process to be creatively energizing and inspiring. It has deeply shaped the Eras tour (there’s a reason it’s not just a folklore/evermore/midnights tour) and I personally don’t think Midnights would have ever happened without the re-recording process.
Don’t forget Lover! She never got to your Lover.
Other than that’s, spot on Jessla!
I think Scooter sold the rights a few years back so this isn’t sticking to him, he got his money.
@MCG, as far as I know, in the industry, the profit part of the recordings mostly comes from licensing them to movies, series, etc. Streaming doesn’t make much money to the artists. So, Taylor was already recording and releasing some songs when they are requested for licensing. For example, she has already released “wildest dreams tv” from 1989 for some animated film. (Since she is the writer/co-writer of all of her songs, the original recordings cannot be used for licensing without her approval. It was such a bad investment to buy her albums without first seeking her support).
There were also copyright lawsuits both for Speak Now (for the name “speak now tv”) and 1989 (for the song “shake it off”). So, she couldn’t release them much earlier. If there was no lawsuit, I think the order of re-recordings would change.
Artists of Swifts tier make money off of streaming, they are able to broker actual deals with the services. Also thanks to streaming tv services licenses fees for music also are not as lucrative as they once were.
@Scotchy, I heard that Taylor’s licensing fees are very pricey. For the shows on streaming services like netflix, I read that big artists get one time lump sum payment + some calculated fee per stream (which is probably cents).
For the music streaming revenue, the profit is shared by multiple entities: songwriter(s), producer(s), performer, publisher. Even though the top artists make real money through streams, it is still not very much for the new owners after everyone got their pie, considering how much money is paid for the masters as an investment. Now, also consider that there is another version in the market for the albums as competition. The original versions don’t have the support of swifties, so they will not make money that they used to. I still believe it was a bad investment.
She isn’t recording then in chronological order and never said she planned too. She literally hasn’t rerecorded her debut album so it’s never been chronological
This will go down the history books.. especially for music majors. What Swift is doing is raising awareness on an issue not a lot of aspiring artists know about. A lot sign contracts without reading or having it explained properly. The music business is very predatory.
I really hope it features Harry Styles