Hope it's ok to copy'n'paste from wikipedia...

SSS "auction[ed] advertising space between the tracks on their first album Flaunt It, released in 1986. Advertisements that did sell (including spots for i-D Magazine and Studio Line from L'Oréal) were complemented by ironic spoof ads including one for the Sputnik corporation itself".

....came with ads for Miner's make-up on the back. This is nothing new. And bear in mind that the Mariah Carey CD is on sale for exactly half of what it would have cost ten years ago. Which is why they're looking for get any additional revenue they can.

Why are you opposed to the idea of advertising paying some of the bills? Would you rather be given the choice of buying a magazine or newspaper without advertising? I would expect you would be paying at least twice as much as we do for the standard version.

is barely literate. I think what I was trying to say was that I was suprised that albums were now coming with little books of advertising included in the asking price. They seem to be advertising it as a good thing and, as all good punks know, you should never wear commerciality with glee.

I think it was the smug money-wank of selling the 'Mariah Brand' alongside brands of perfume and champagne. Like in Tesco. It's not really what I think of as a proper way to go about making music. I'm also not mega-keen on young Miss Carey. That may have fed into the sheer feel of revulsion deep in the pit of my stomach. For some idealistic reason I tend to naively see music as an artistic endeavour. Forgive my indulgent bluster, with hindsight, it's just economics, eh?

On a diffrent note, I wasn't trying to imply that I would pay more an ad-less Word, I tend to find there advertising unobstructive and well-targeted. They don't have those PhoneTug adverts that you get in Empire for a start, so that's something to be said.

What might these be?

Pukka Pies?

MD 20/20?

Heat magazine?

And which "Prestige Products" would want to be associated with La Carey, I wonder?