books | contact us
Home » user blogs » anne elizabeth moore's blog

In Continued Condemnation of Opting In

by anne elizabeth moore | 07/11/2007 | in independent culture | UNMARKETABLE | Unmployment

Of all the wacky responses I got from the announcement of Punk Planet’s closure (“Have you considered going online?”, “Why don’t you just move to Canada?” and “Why didn’t you warn me?!”) by far the most prescient was this one:

“Sucks. Does it have anything to do with this?”

In fact it does. Not in the sense that I’m so disgusted with Sonic Youth for signing with Starbucks that I must give up on the idea of supporting autonomous music cultures (although I sympathize with those who are), but in the sense that Sonic Youth is willing to do what I was not. And soon, that may be what it takes to survive in culture. Which does, indeed, disgust me.

All the hubbub about this being a revival of the question of “selling out,” though, misses the point. In the early 1990s, when bands jumped from an independent label to a major label, they did so for direct and indirect financial gain. Major labels offered wider access to a bigger audience and crazy fat advance checks that allowed members to quit shitty day jobs, no second thoughts. It was a faster track to the success all artists envision, and the big labels—hot for the next Nirvana and gearing up for the Telecom Act of 1996—were willing to make promises they’d never have to keep in pursuit of providing all culture. But what these bands left behind were the friends who’d brought them onto the independent labels in the first place, nurtured their smaller (or medium-sized) audiences, and provided them an autonomous but supportive environment in which to explore their sound. Sometimes, the labels were OK with it; they couldn’t keep up with runoff demand for their product anyway. But mostly, people were angry and hurt: the labels, the bands, and sometimes the major label reps whose bosses had promised to shepherd their picks through the process. Thus: “sell-out” became an insult, a trading-in of community for money.

Now, though, we’re not dealing with as clear a transaction: a band does not as frequently leap from an independent label to a major—the independent labels have been shoved out of the business or forced to cut back on releases or are unable to support their records with advertising. Since media consolidation kicked in full-bore eleven years ago, radio play has homogenized around Sony and Time Warner subsidiary releases. Online this has seemed a more natural process, with the integration of iTunes into our daily music discussions, but not a discussion of what may not be made available on iTunes—or what may not be available online at all. Licensing deals are more common for lesser-known bands on independent labels, and now taking them is one of very few options available for musicians who would actually like an audience to hear their music.

In short, there is no more “selling out”; no one gives up anything to participate. There is only opting in. If you wish to play, now, you play by their rules.

This was a cultural shift, yes, and one a long time coming. But it was brought about by specific changes in legislation that deregulated all media (meaning, allowed more of it to be owned by single sources) in acknowledgement that the pursuit of profits was a goal shared by all. Yet keep in mind: this legislation was not written by a coalition of indie music labels. In fact, it was fought tooth and nail by them, as well as by other independent media producers and keen political activists agitating for the protection of the nation’s supposed democratic ideals.

At Punk Planet, this cultural shift was brought into increasing focus over the last three years as major media became comically aggressive in trying to procure our ad space. “Corporate connections are never [as] cut-and-dry as we would like them to be,” one CableVision-owned hack explained, seemingly reasonably. He was on his third round of emails, the point of each having been to demand that we throw our 13-year-old ad policy (stated simply: no major media) into the toilet for his corporate-owned product. “But I’m a subscriber!” a similar exchange had ended some months beforehand.

Despite CableVision’s assertion (and earlier, Nike’s, Victory Records’, HarperCollins’, and so many others) that these things just don’t matter anymore, there is a small and confused group of us who believes that they do.

But we’re being drowned out by our peers in the supposedly independent media. Not just by Thurston Moore, who laughingly crowns Starbucks “the new record store,” but by music journalists like the Chicago Reader’s Miles Raymer, who short-sightedly argues that the music industry’s recent decline can be “rescued by corporations that make everything but music.” Even if, he also acknowledges, it means a venue containing “no possible sight line that [doesn’t] intersect a poster, placard, or video screen carrying one or more sponsors' logos.”

The recently-sold-to-a-parent-corp-itselfUtne takes a stab at more thoughtful criticism, postulating that the naked consumerism of bands who do the deal may overshadow their musical accomplishments. “While bands stand to profit from advertising's exposure in the short term, will their openness to corporate patronage eventually leave them an unwanted legacy of being ‘the band that made that song from that car ad’?” Eric Kelsey asks. But this supposes a future where marketing and culture are not merged, and a distant past, foggily remembered, where such things mattered. Most significantly, it ignores the giant forces, so overwhelming as to appear invisible, that have narrowed our cultural offerings into a seeming monoculture.

So history is being rewritten. “Punk rockers are supposed to be especially hostile to the Man, but music consumers in the 15-24 demographic grew up watching punk, emo, and metalcore bands on the Vans Warped Tour, Rockstar Energy Drink's Taste of Chaos tour, and the Honda Civic Tour,” Raymer states, ignoring the vast debates that took place surrounding each of these sponsored tours—and oddly ignoring the one that started it all: Jones Soda. Now in a Starbucks near you.

Fully designed at the outset to “co-opt” the “counterculture”—as well as shuttle in egregious new marketing ploys like Proctor and Gambles’ possibly illegal Tremor youth word-of-mouth marketing program—Jones Soda brought product placement to those who hated products. And marked a cultural shift from the age of “selling out” to the age of “opting in.”

Unfortunately, the spaces devoted to drawing that line—to reminding us that, in fact, corporate sponsorship is an option we can refuse—have been forced to succumb to this cultural shift themselves. Punk Planet is only one of many spaces for corporate criticism no longer available, and although it may have been the last canary in this particular coalmine, it was still a canary in a coalmine. If Raymer is right—and why wouldn’t he be? If the worst bands have to fear is that they will be remembered as ad fodder instead of artists, at least they know they will be remembered—more independent cultural production will fall sick and die off. And the level of debate used to check it: brought to you by Starbucks.

“Old-timey indie ideals,” Raymer calls this line of criticism, and he’s right: I remember when it was feasible to think of something, tape it or write it down or paste it up, and put it out into the world without having to go though a profit-minded distributor, music label, or ISP. I remember autonomous cultural production done for the sake of promoting ideas and not achieving fame or fortune, independent publishing devoted to engaged and critical journalistic writing, and a day when I could find some music somewhere that didn’t put money into the pockets of the corporate giant that shut down the coffeeshop where I used to paste up my zines. I remember democracy. Ah! Those were the good old days.

--
Thanks Eric Kelsey. Thanks Rob Walker. Thanks whoever emailed me that first Sonic Youth link, and the 48 people who have emailed it to me since. More on this topic available in November from Unmarketable: Brandalism, Copyfighting, Mocketing, and the Erosion if Integrity.

anne elizabeth moore's blog | login or register to post comments
(**)
r.john's picture
Submitted by r.john on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:10am.

if you think all that is tough and trying and difficult - Try being a bedroom run publishing company of ONE, without established publisher support, who can not even get a decent review for the book he published in any of the fiercely independent magazines.


login or register to post comments
As a side note to the "old-timey" bit
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:13am.

I will add that I was recently giving a talk about independent culture, and the dwindling viability thereof, and an attendee posed the query, "but, someday you're going to turn 35, and then it's all going to change for you. Don't you think you're going to grow up and want different things from your life?"

To which, at the time, I could only respond "going to turn 35?" but to which I really should have responded, hey: the notion that the ability to do things outside of corporate sponsorship is primarily a debate about youthful ideals may, in fact, be forwarded by the corporations who are against it.

It may be idealistic, and it may be held primarily by youth—and I am totally willing to admit that it may all be a dream impossible, right now, to achieve—but there continue to be segments of our population that do not agree to corporate sponsorship.


login or register to post comments
r. john: ummm, you are arguing that
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:16am.

PP didn't give positive reviews to your books and zines? Really?


login or register to post comments
(88)
r.john's picture
Submitted by r.john on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:27am.

No, my point is that if one is too independent then the larger indies tend to distrust or ignore you.

Punk Planet and Razorcake were the only two to even review BLISTER PACKS - despite sending out over 100 review copies!

All the others ignored the book and most of the zines.


login or register to post comments
yes, that's where i was going to go
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:46am.

another friend complained to me recently that "no more magazines out there even review independent books anymore." And guess what? I know that already. It's kind of just a bummer that other people just seem to be figuring it out now.

Elsewhere I'm writing up an argument that even democracy, in the eyes of the media reformers supposedly agitating for it, contains a pretty narrowly defined range of cleaned-up, professionally produced, over 10,000-copy distributed books, films, or magazines. And it's not. It's the DIANE FILES *and* BLISTER PACKS *and* PUNK PLANET *and* ANNEZINE. And every other silly thing we ever wasted our time on.


login or register to post comments
Hey here's a front-lines question for r. john:
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:50am.

what's going to happen next time you want to release a book? will you even send out that many copies? and to who? will you even make one? if so, how will you get word out?


login or register to post comments
(**)
r.john's picture
Submitted by r.john on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 11:01am.

I have a new book coming out any day now. And Yes, I will probably send out just as many review copies. Just to different people. Smaller zine folks, they are the audience anyway.

I hope with some word of mouth, trade copies, and the connections I have maintained with the people who have gotten zines in the past the book will do fairly okay.

I guess, I see this as an opportunity to forge new alliances and collaborations. As discouraged as I can be, I am incredibly hopeful as well, for now we are getting our underground back.


login or register to post comments
I should be asleep
KPunk's picture
Submitted by KPunk on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 12:18pm.

I should be asleep, grabbing a few precious moments of rest while both kids sleep. But, no. I decided to take a quick gander at PP.com. And now I'm kind of regretting it.

AEM, I feel your frustration and rage so profoundly. Like you and R.John, I've been trying to navigate these treacherous waters for decades now -- whether it be in bands, with an indie record lable out of my bedroom, with a smattering of comix and zines, or just trying to avoid a horrible corporate employer. But for some reason, I'm not in that place of despair that you seem to be this hot, humid morning. Granted, I didn't just watch my magazine go under, so I'll give you as much room to vent as you need. But, I feel like I've been here before, and I'll be here again. Being a punk DIY dumbass means that I have dedicated my life to struggle. Sometimes its hard, and sometimes it is really hard. And right now, it seems extremely hard. But I'll keep on keepin' on because it seems even more important to do so now. As you know, I'm trying to start up a whole indie zine/comix scene in this little neck of the woods precisely because it seems so important to do so now. And I'm gonna be happy to review R.John's new book, even if it does suck. Like R.John, I see this process as organic and worth the high cost of admission. I'm not sure what he means when he says "for now we are getting our underground back" because it seems to me that it was never ours and never not ours.

Damn, I really needed that nap.


login or register to post comments
major threat
Alan Lastufka's picture
Submitted by Alan Lastufka on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 1:05pm.

R. John has me all scared now.

This fall I'm working with Alex Wrekk to have Fall of Autumn publish a new edition of Stolen Sharpie Revolution. We've already been in talks with AK Press for distribution to places way above our little zine project website. But I was also counting on reviews to help spread the word. I can only spam so many websites and take out so many classifieds in MRR...

R. John, if you have AIM or Skype it would be great to chat about some of the things that worked and didn't work for Blister Packs. Anne, if you have the time one of these days, I'll probably hit you up too.


login or register to post comments
semi o/t tangents
steve's picture
Submitted by steve on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 1:10pm.

The way things are going, I'm increasingly hesitant towards compiling another chapbook of my poetry. After all
-isn't it expensive to get an ISBN?
-would lack of an ISBN decrease the likelihood that someone's product is carried by a store?

Also, I recall roughly 12 years ago, MMR had an extensive article (complete with organizational charts) about the multi-tentacled arms of major media outlets, which, if memory serves right, was shortly before (and I could be slightly off here) the whole Seagrams/EMI/Capitol/BMG/Warners incestuous circle jerk of cross-ownership.

and as a sidebar:

plummeting literacy rates
folding of indie magazines
us newspapers shutting down their foreign bureaus

..also, at an open mic I attended last night, someone's poem about our crumbling school system contained a line to the effect of, "we don't have spelling bees, when we have spell check.." sad, and I really wish I was able to get a copy of the poem in question.


login or register to post comments
vent
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 1:24pm.

KPunk wrote:
I'm not in that place of despair that you seem to be this hot, humid morning. Granted, I didn't just watch my magazine go under, so I'll give you as much room to vent as you need. But, I feel like I've been here before, and I'll be here again. Being a punk DIY dumbass means that I have dedicated my life to struggle.

You know, I totally dig that my frustration about these matters is super personal right now, and reads as such. But I'm also aware that there's a whole debate going on in our culture about how acceptable all of this corporate sponsorship is, with very few voices speaking up against it. I am against it.

I am also against: the USPS marketing movies to me, Toyota renaming DIY, and your nap. Although this last only because I gotta back one winning horse.


login or register to post comments
clarify
KPunk's picture
Submitted by KPunk on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 1:56pm.

My comment about your personal investment was in no way meant to minimize the seriousness and correctness of your anger and frustration. Rather it reflected my own position of privilege, since my livelihood doesn't depend on my indie cultural production, as yours does. And yours is an important voice speaking out against the dangers of corporate sponsorship. I just don't want to see you get so frustrated you walk away before you're 35 (insert gawd-awful emoticon or whatever they're called).

All naps now over.


login or register to post comments
sad and heartbreaking
Nora Rocket's picture
Submitted by Nora Rocket on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 3:00pm.

Great piece, Anne.


login or register to post comments
You know
lewis's picture
Submitted by lewis on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 5:40pm.

r.john wrote:
I have a new book coming out any day now. And Yes, I will probably send out just as many review copies. Just to different people. Smaller zine folks, they are the audience anyway.

You could always send me a copy and I'd review it for... my friends? Oh, that's right, I don't have any... guess I could go by the local starf*cks and make some? No, sleep seems so much easier.


login or register to post comments
.
steep's picture
Submitted by steep on Thu, 07/12/2007 - 12:21am.

the notion that the ability to do things outside of corporate sponsorship is primarily a debate about youthful ideals may, in fact, be forwarded by the corporations who are against it.

I'm certain that this idea is promoted by the corporations. There is such widespread cultural acceptance of youth rebellion and resistance as a phase, one around which the corportions have built up large markets and systems of production - including a very useful 'old school vs. new school' demographic division, which I suspect actually helps the corporations by making it easy to mock the anti-corporate stance of 'those jaded old punks' and thereby pander to the fresh-faced new school kids with the naiive tastes and the disposable income.

But...when you get older, and start to develop more varied and fully individuated tastes that steer you way from the easy appeal of commercial music, and might cause you to delve down into the independent world to find your own people and your own thing...then all of a sudden, your alloted time for resistance and countercultural production is up and you are supposed to be interested in new things. Like, say, white goods.

I know that's all too neat and formulaic to be entirely true, but I think there is a little truth in it.


login or register to post comments
steep
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Thu, 07/12/2007 - 1:06pm.

steep wrote:
I'm certain that this idea is promoted by the corporations.

me, too: and i'd really be interested in figuring out *how*.

In the choice vs. life abortion debates, it's pretty clear: the new right stepped in, made the argument not about women's health care but about the life of something they decided would be called "an unborn child", and then accused anyone who didn't use their life vs. choice dichotomy of killing babies. freaking brilliant, that.

i *know* there's something similar going on here: that somehow the idea of living without big corporate support is cast as frivolous, youthful, and passing is not coming from those of us who aren't 22 anymore but still involved in this stuff. but i can't think of one specific example.

anybody?


login or register to post comments
MOVIES
PAUL M DAVIS's picture
Submitted by PAUL M DAVIS on Thu, 07/12/2007 - 2:42pm.

Quote:
i *know* there's something similar going on here: that somehow the idea of living without big corporate support is cast as frivolous, youthful, and passing is not coming from those of us who aren't 22 anymore but still involved in this stuff. but i can't think of one specific example.

I don't watch 'em that often so I can't think of a great example off the top of my head but I feel like this a point that is subtly made in plenty of films of the past decade or so--especially, egregiously, shitty romantic comedies. Aren't people **like us** who are over the age of 22 usually the foils, either the male character's buddy who refuses to grow up, or the "edgy" female protagonists that, despite their beliefs and best interests, find that what they're looking for is some young actor from a TV sitcom to re-introduce them into normalized capitalist consumption? Wasn't this one of the underlying themes in that recent Maggie Gyllenhall romantic comedy that was filmed in Chicago (I didn't see it, but the basic plot was recounted to me in such a way)?

Just a sideways thought.


login or register to post comments
(**)
r.john's picture
Submitted by r.john on Thu, 07/12/2007 - 3:26pm.

Anti-Marketing Marketing

NO MEDIA KINGS

cokemachineglow - sellout


login or register to post comments
AEM
steep's picture
Submitted by steep on Thu, 07/12/2007 - 4:00pm.

I guess my net was a little wider than yours - I'm not talking secifically about sponsorship, but about the whole spurious idea of punk (or any sub-culture) as a phase of youth, which therefore signifes immaturity and fooolishness when continued in later life.

In terms of what you are talking about, I can't think of any examples either, outside film and TV. It's possible that there isn't any specific corporate activity that undermines the image of a non-corporate stance in our culture - although as I write that, I know it can't be true. Maybe much of it is subsumed is the general marketing of rebellion and resistance as a youth activity.

This is what came to my mind: movies / tv shows in which:

A character who is taking a moral, anti-corporate position is shown that s/he needs to play the money game in order to get results, and that not doing so is being 'too proud' (happened several times on my beloved 'Scrubs', actually). Such episodes usually end with the character getting good results by playing the money game, for the benefit of others. If you are anti-big money, you are supposed to be selfless, right?

The portrayal of older 'artistic', unsettled charcaters as narcissistic snd needing to hang out with younger kids in order to inflate their own egos. (Six Fet Under?). Their anti-establishment rhetoric is made to look like a cover for their real motives.

The general focus in movies on decisions made in the early twenties (who am I?; do I realy want to be an accountant like my Dad? Can I really live my dream? do I want Julia Stiles or Selma Blair?) and the suggestion that these decisions are final. Once they have been made, a kind of 'personal settlement' has occured, and issues of lifestyle, career and family should proceed naturally for the fully-fledged adult. Anyone still struggling with this stuff in later life is presumably immature or somehow got it wrong the first time.

So, if the stuff that comes into the line of fire is mainly movies and TV, and we must rely on saying that TV execs and movie-makers are the tools of corporate sponsors in order to directly blame the corporations. While I'm totally comfortable saying that, unfortunately, the writers of these shows might have those crappy attitudes anyway. Either that, or they cynically recognise their broad appeal in audiences who are probably being confornted with similar 'opt in' decisions in their own lives, and like to see the decision to 'opt in' being taken by 'good' characters' for noble reasons.

I can't help you with the marketing side of things. I'll continue to keep my eye out for stuff that portrays 'opting in' as a necessary evil, a thing we must do in order to get results on behalf of others. Anyone who refues to do so is overly idealistic and unlikely to actually acheive their goal, and so therefore is letting other people down. That is how I suspect it is being done.


login or register to post comments
OTHER DISCONNECTED THREADS COMING TO MIND...
PAUL M DAVIS's picture
Submitted by PAUL M DAVIS on Thu, 07/12/2007 - 5:33pm.

I feel that there may have been a window of time in which aging while continuing to live an independent-minded life (as much as is possible) was a bit more acceptable, but that there has been a huge backlash against that among people between the ages of 25-35--"the creatives," as the marketers call them--the one-time punks and zinemakers and the like who now make bank working for Internet companies or doing graphic design or working in marketing or advertising have this attitude that pervades and perpetuates that can be boiled down to "oh yeah, I know where you're coming from, you shitbag, I was all about that when I was 21--but now I make six figures and drive a SUV and it's time to grow up, bro!"

For a good example of this, go to any robust online community such as Digg or Metafilter and read the tone of the responses to anything that talks about DIY or independent culture.


login or register to post comments
yeah, i mean
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Fri, 07/13/2007 - 1:45pm.

maybe it's just too common a storytelling trope in our culture to try to locate a single specific media example where we are told through visual metaphor that youth is silly and age is necessarily corporate, but i feel like there has to be one shining example somewhere. I refuse to believe that it's all the douches who used to go to punk shows now sitting in their fancy offices or hummers talking about the good old days when they believed in doing it themselves. i refuse to believe those guys have that much power, or that little self-awareness.


login or register to post comments
where the flowers went
juju's picture
Submitted by juju on Sun, 07/15/2007 - 1:13pm.

I've suffered through a couple of commercials that do this with Babyboomers, but for the life of me I can't remember the products being hocked- life insurance? investments? I think... They depict sixtyish- looking men standing in fields of wild/sun?flowers, or playing a guitar, in a desperate attempt to channel the Who or something... these references predate me so I may be mixing eras of rock history or, what's more likely,the marketers watered down the "message" grewel to the consistancy of pureed applesauce. If I have the misfortune of seeing this ad again I'll let you know who to hold responsible.

The sunflower ad's voiceover goes something like "You're smarter now..." It really pissed me off when I saw it. I did a pretty decent job of pushing it into the darkest regions of my brain until now.


login or register to post comments
(**)
r.john's picture
Submitted by r.john on Mon, 07/16/2007 - 4:46pm.

anne elizabeth moore wrote:
I refuse to believe that it's all the douches who used to go to punk shows now sitting in their fancy offices or hummers talking about the good old days when they believed in doing it themselves. i refuse to believe those guys have that much power, or that little self-awareness.

I came to the sick realization a few years ago, after running into this dyed-in-the-wool punk rocker - one of those elect few who, back in the day, were sceneter overachievers (cooking up great bands, writing for amazing zines, touring with bands in europe as a roadie, popular radio show, everything!) - who was now this gray flannel suit ad man. Took me to a cigar bar in NYC and tried to get me laid by one of his corporate escorts (which is another story).

Anyway, listening to him talk about how he what he had learned from doing it himself was that DIY was bullshit. That it was totally limited, frustrating and was only able to achieve so much. That DIY was always doomed to failure because at a specific point the project got too big or too much work which then made the person making it lose interest and give up. DIY was for people who were still unable to figure out how to turn their dreams into work for employees.

Basically, punk taught him he was a leader with a strong vision and conviction, that once applied into the "real" world, as opposed to how he spent his high school/undergrad years, would make him a lot of money.

He had always planned on getting a professional job. He was a careerist in the most obvious sense. And I realized listening to him slurp cognac and huff his 45 dollar cegar, that this kid had always been a douche. I was just too enthralled by his glimmering success as a scenester and his connections to see it at the time.


login or register to post comments
. . . another delayed response
anne elizabeth moore's picture
Submitted by anne elizabeth moore on Wed, 07/18/2007 - 5:13pm.

yikes, is about all i have to say about that. good story, though. albeit one about doches.


login or register to post comments
In These Times,
my_disease's picture
Submitted by my_disease on Sat, 09/08/2007 - 11:16pm.

(Um, I'm going to pretend for just a moment that we are on a first-name basis.)

Anne, this blog entry looks awfully familiar to an article in a certain magazine called "In These Times" - yeah, I think you know what one I'm talking about. Know what would be cool? It would be awesome if you could occasionally shamelessly self-promote yourself using your blog, for instance letting us know the different publications that you are being published in.

Oh, and as an unrelated side-note, the article about the SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) in the September 2007 issue of Z magazine is ALMOST as good as the article about the SDS in the May/June 2007 issue of PP.


login or register to post comments

Recent blog posts

  • Off To London
  • It will happen soon
  • Streaming Revolution #10 (Punk-Radio.Net)
  • Self Portraits
  • Going Back To Brooklyn
  • So I can blog on PunkPlanet?
  • Me on Misty's XXX Girls
  • London Details
  • Eating contests I could win
  • My New Practice Space
more

New forum topics

  • Just dropping in to say hi to Aaron
  • Obama the Weatherman
  • i'd like to score some weed...
  • The Market Will Take Care of Us All
  • Bridge and Tunnel
more

Active forum topics

  • So yeah like who is totoally hotter? Jessica Rabbit or Erin Esurance?
  • Just dropping in to say hi to Aaron
  • i'd like to score some weed...
  • Obama the Weatherman
  • The Market Will Take Care of Us All
more


out now

Navigation

  • user blogs
    • blogger list
    • see all tags
  • forums
  • reviews
  • advertising

User login

  • Create new account
  • Request new password

Who's online

There are currently 1 user and 14 guests online.

Online users

  • Ben
all text and images © 2006 Punk Planet | Punk Planet is a project of Independents' Day Media