Springsteen Too Steamy For Starbucks?

[Jahfin]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7738014/sit ... newsletter

Not Their Cup of Tea

Starbucks has backed away from plans to sell Bruce Springsteen’s latest album because of its graphic lyrics.

By Johnnie L. Roberts
Newsweek

May 4 - Bruce Springsteen’s lyrics are too hot for Starbucks. NEWSWEEK has learned that the nation’s favorite coffee chain has retreat­ed from a potential deal to sell the singer’s new album, “Devils & Dust,” be­cause of one steamy tune on the 12-song disc.

The song, “Reno,” is in part about an encounter with a prostitute. Springsteen includes a description of anal sex, including the price she charges for the act. Critics generally are hailing the CD, which was released last week on Co­lumbia Records, a Sony Music label. It is the only Springsteen album to carry a parental warning (Adult Imagery) due, ap­parently, to “Reno.”

The episode appears to be the first time Starbucks has declined to stock an album by a major act because of concern over lyrics, notwithstanding the warning sticker. The java juggernaut, with almost 6,400 outlets in the U.S., has be­come an influential link in music distribu­tion in just a few short years, especially in 2004. Starbucks boldly demonstrated its power in music last year when its outlets accounted for at least a third of sales of the million-selling album of Ray Charles duets, “Genius Loves Company.” Record labels increasingly view Starbucks as an attractive outlet for reach­ing fans of adult contemporary music, in­cluding baby boomers flush with disposable income but who’ve long since stopped browsing record-store aisles. What’s more, the mix of coffeehouse and music has a nostalgic appeal.

People familiar with the Springsteen sit­uation say they doubt it will raise any general alarm within the music indus­try about censorship. Still, it remains to be seen whether the caffeine-beverage giant’s move becomes another stimulant for First Amendment advocates and others con­cerned about free-speech rights. In recent years, Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer, has come under frequent criticism for what detractors believe is censorship involving books, CDs, books and other packaged me­dia. And now the ubiquitous brand-name coffeehouse could find itself swept up in the broader indecency debate that’s been raging since Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction at the 2004 Super Bowl.

Starbucks declined to comment on the flap, refusing to elaborate on a statement issued by the chain after a NEWSWEEK query. “When considering new projects, our pri­mary goal is always to help our customers discover and acquire quality music,” Star­bucks said in the statement. “To that end, Starbucks is currently in discussions with many different artists and labels and therefore, we do not comment on rumors and speculation.”

According to those involved in the matter, Springsteen was never involved directly in the potential deal, which was han­dled by Columbia Records. Columbia also refused to comment. However, those close to the deal—speaking on condition that they not be identified—told NEWSWEEK that Starbucks initially wanted a promotional link be­tween the new Springsteen CD and the Starbucks brand. But Columbia Records, apparently without consulting Springsteen, balked out of deference to the artist’s long­standing aversion to becoming a pitchman. The sources said Starbucks countered with a proposal to merely sell the CD at its out­lets. But after listening to the album, Star­bucks executives stopped negotiations after hearing “Reno.”

[Pencil Thin (inactive)]

It's not like your selling 50Cent at your store...come on Buckies. Be nice to the Boss.