A Quick Note About The Pack's Vans

Michael Miraflor posted about the Vans song called Vans by The Pack aka The Wolfpack who are a young group out of the Bay Area.  My first impression was that it was a Vans product placement posing as a spontaneous song, not because they mention Vans, but because some of the lines read like ad copy.

However, I touched base with Adisa Banjoko and his impression, without knowing a whole lot for sure, is that they just did the song cause that's where they're at.  He also said that he used to wear Vans and caught total hell in the rap scene.  Now he realizes he should have made a song about it.

I checked in with another source who's talked to The Pack but didn't really talk much about the song.  This source's impression was that they just did it, would love to have Vans' endorsement, but didn't necessarily do the song with that in mind.

I don't know, if I was a smart post-My Adidas kid, I'd do the song hoping to get the endorsement.  In any case, it's blowing up in the Bay.

You can find the song Vans at The Pack's MySpace page.

Update:
Apparently there's now a response song dissing Vans.  murketing has the info.  In case you get confused, you have to hover over words to find the links.  But otherwise it's a great blog.

Related ProHipHop Coverage:
Got My Vans On: Summer Single Of The Year?
Got My Vans On: Programming The Sneaker Freak

Comments

[r]

my opinion/hunch is that there's no way this song isn't a commercial in disguise.

the songs gives:
graphic product detail (price, styles, locations to purchase),
is played all the time (paid spot),
the dj's on the radio never talk about it (why attract more attention),
and no one knows who the wolfpack is...

in effect this is grillz II but orchestrated by Vans...now if i could only prove it....

[Clyde Smith]

I think you'd need a source inside Vans to find out. It's possible Michael will pursue that but I'm not sure how that will work out. Since he's in marketing, he could end up finding out and then realize it's not in his best interests to say more. But I haven't talked to Michael directly, that's just a guess on my part.

It does read so strongly as a product placement that it's hard to believe it's not either that or a plan on their part to get Vans attention.

The sad thing is, it didn't take long once attempts to secretly do product placement were exposed to make it virtually impossible for someone to write about a brand without us assuming that it's paid, even if the artists deny it.

But, yeah, that stuff's way too specific to assume anything but the worst. By the way, I'm not opposed to product placement, but I am opposed to secret placements.

[Clyde Smith]

On the no one knows tip, Tamara Palmer has apparently interviewed them and may or may not be doing a piece on them soon however I don't have any info from her to report.

[eric arnold]

ok here's the real deal on this topic:
Vans apparently have become the hot shoe among the inner city teen crowd. don't ask me why, it just happened. i've seen turf dancers at youth uprising in east o rock them, and mistah fab recently wore a pair at hip-hop in the park. as for the wolfpack, it is similar to the pre-my adidas days, in that they did the song just to do it, because that's their steelo.

what's interesting, though, is that vans, a southern california-based company with roots in bmx, skating and surfing, evidently had NO IDEA they were reaching this demographic. i know this for a fact because my homie smoke1, a dj and promoter who works with vans, told me that they didn't know what to make of this urban phenomenon, they're scratching their heads, goin, HUH?

Smoke1 and myself have discussed proposals for trying to get something going with vans and the hip-hop audience, but so far it hasn't happened.

But in any event, it's interesting reading this thread because the skeptisim and pessimism about corporate commodification is readily apparent, even when that's not actually the case. i know i know, i heard busta made "pass the courvoisier" without an endorsement deal, but that's hard to believe, since the song basically had the effect of a commercial played in clubs. not too many protests on the dancefloor, though.

bottom line: in this day and age, selling out ain't what it used to be. we got mad agitated when krs redid gil-scott heron for nike, but when lyrics born did diet coke, we were like, hell yeah, that's fresh.

music industry people have told me that for indies, licensing is a solid source of revenue that allows them to compete with majors, so from an economic standpoint, it makes sense.

i think the issue here really is, do corporations control the content of our culture? in the case of 50 cent and all his product tie-ins, the answer is yes. but for independent entrepreneurs like the team, who have this energy drink called hyphy juice that actually kicks butt on red bull, the answer is no.

it's a trip, because everything is so commodified these days, and clear channelization is just one after-effect of all the deregulation during the reagan era.

at the end of the day, we can't put the genie back in the bottle -- corporations are gonna do what corporations are gonna do. but maybe we can have some say in how our culture is represented by getting smart about self-marketing and self-promotion, which hasn't always happened. we need to take back ownership, or at least make sure that we get a piece of the pie.

i mean, would anyone really be upset at a Keak da Sneaker line? let's not hate on the wolfpack, because it's a dope song. if it was wack, that'd be another story.

oh, and tamara palmer's piece is coming out in the east bay express (for whom i also write) pretty soon.

one.

[Clyde Smith]

Eric, thanks so much. I'm not hating on anybody. I'm just suspicious for reasons that you clearly understand.

You make some great points. Thanks again.

[Clyde Smith]

By the way, these exchanges are ProHipHop at its best, drawing on the shared expertise of the readers.

I think that's much more worthwhile than yet another expert holding court. I embark on these projects to develop an expertise on the topic but then I move on when I'm done learning. That's one of the reasons I need to move to the book writing stage, one that I've put off for the last 5 years, in order to flesh out what I've learned and leave something behind.

But it's blogging that's allowed me to tap into the distributed intelligence of the network of interest that's emerged in relationship to this blog.

That's much cooler than playing Mr. Know It All.

[ian]

I know the kids in The Pack. It's not a commerical but they are trying to lock down some kind of x-promo arrangement with Vans when they sign their deal which apparently is very imminent.

[Clyde Smith]

I hope Vans go goes for it. They couldn't have gotten a better opportunity to hit what sounds like a new market.

[r]

on second thought, irrespective of whether or not there's actual Vans money behind the song, i'm just not feeling the overt hard-sale tactic. i don't have a problem with artists plugging products intentionally or otherwise in their songs, but i just don't like the hard sale.

while there is a ton of tie-in money going to popular artists, there's still that unsponsered (although it's now a rarity)influence that the music/artists carry which inevitably helps products/clothes etc. some would just call it being "up on game." the problem is that there's a megaphone and magnifying glass on trendsetters, which results in too many people following a trend too fast (think high end denimn or trucker hats).

staying ahead of the curve gets harder and harder. a complete song about Vans just kills the trend for early adopters.

i wouldn't act too surprised cats are found rocking Vans, hip hop at its core is still a counter culture. what's more "counter" than 1970's skater shoes? or college shirts (pre Kanye) or dress shirts with jeans (pre Usher/Jay Z)? see a pattern here?

[erin]

It is just a song. You people are taking it way too seriously!

[Clyde Smith]

Erin, we're not just talking about a song. We're talking about the implications of a song at a particular point in social and musical history when marketing is having a growing impact on our daily lives.

Since I know something about all of the people who've commented, I know they take the relationship of society and music seriously, each in their own way.

That's a good thing, in my opinion.

[Clyde Smith]

Rawj, aka r, there's no such thing as a core of hip hop. Hip hop is a dispersed field of social and musical activity, much of which is barely held together by the concept of a musical genre (how's that, Erin? i bet we both feel right now!).

But I know what you mean by trends. I was in Austin when trucker hats became a hipster trend. By the time I was thinking about getting one, or something based on one to be more accurate, the trend was already being dismantled, yet it continues.

I'll probably get one right in time for a self-consciously retro return to the trucker hat long after the fact.

Some people will make the trends, others will surf them, many will follow, others won't notice, still others will turn against anything that is labeled a trend while following their own subcultural group.

It's almost like a force of nature. And it's speeding up just like social change across the board.

Not that I don't think you should criticize that process but, given that we live in a consumerist society, it seems legitimate to rap about the things we consume. Even my own desire to point out where marketers are mimicking and leveraging human processes like word of mouth while covering their tracks is far less about stopping that process and far more about raising awareness in order to sharpen perception.

Sharpened perception will allow you to cut through a lot of nonsense and avoid being a toy. But it also cuts down on your ability to party in toyland, where Erin's probably having a great time right now.

[erin]

Well, you make a lot of assumptions about me so knock yourself out....

[Clyde Smith]

Erin, I'm just using your comments to make a point. I don't know anything about you.

[Shariffa]

I first heard this song about 6 months ago. I currently reside in DC however had gone home (Oakland, CA) for the weekend. My teenage brother played the song for me which I immediately loved. I loved the beat, the hook, and the style in which the young men rapped. Not once did it ever occur to me that this was a publicity stunt by Vans Shoe Company. I guess there is no way young African-American youth can possibly want to have anything to do with Vans unless they are receiving something for it. There is no way that they truly enjoy the stylish shoe that is inexpensive, comfortable, and comes in a variety of colors and styles. That is just too weird.

In the last two years I have watched the Vans shoe go from a "skater" shoe to one worn by hip hop heads, fashionistas, and every other kind of person in between. Just like converse did about four years ago. I think it is interesting how there is an uproar about this song, with MTV saying that they refuse to play the video. I am certain that I remember them playing "Air force ones". I also remember "Grillz". Hell damn near every song today is an advertisement. They just had a whole season of promoting Teen Vogue through their show "The Hills".

I think that people need to stop picking and choosing. The young men made a song that is relevant to them and what they experience.