UMusic Tells Winehouse No New Record If You Don't Stop The Drugs

Posted almost 2 years ago

Winehouse may be "working on some new music with her Back in Black producer Mark Ronson":http://mog.com/mollifire/blog_post/156335, but that doesn't mean fans are gonna be seeing a follow-up to the album anytime soon. Seems Winehouse's label Universal has given the neo-jazz singer "(and boozer)":http://mog.com/Pop_Savant/blog_post/156138 an "ultimatum.":http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/article1045510.ece If she doesn't stop abusing and using they will NOT release her next album, despite her five recent Grammy wins.

Plans to record a follow-up to Back In Black in Bahamas were scrapped when Winehouse returned. “Amy has been reminded of her responsibilities. Unless she is clean she will not be allowed to release another album" a source told the UK tabloid The Sun. This isn't the first time Universal has stepped in. Earlier this year the UK boss Lucian Grainge sent Winehouse to rehab after video of her smoking crack hit the Internet.So how is it that Universal can threaten Winehouse to clean her act or ruin her career? "They would never release her from her deal, they would just not put an album out,” a source claims.However, Winehouse remains one of the only cash cows in the recording industry. For Universal music to not release an album would only be putting themselves in the hole. The label now doesn't think another Wino album will hit stands till 2009.Will Universal's ultimatum help Winehouse clean-up her act?

Comments (21)

Add To My Trusted Moggers

Scotch says Maybe it's actually about the love, and not the money? Or maybe it is - what kind of work is she gonna do all strung out?

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Bartleby says Algorithm of Ms Winehouse's rehab decision after Universal Music PR operation:

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Cinful says Bartleby ... you forgot ... after the 3rd "NO" ... there's the new box of "Change record labels". rich, messed up girl ...

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

MrFrost says I'm actually proud of Universal for doing this. Even though they might just be doing it to cover their own ass in case she were to overdose.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Shud33 says Is it bad to say that I hope she OD's? My opinion she is a waste of frickin' space.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

MrFrost says aww thats mean... I dont want her to die, but I think she really needs to get her shit together. She has an opportunity man sober/sane people would kill for. and up to this point shes throwing it all away

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Bartleby says Not sure she wrote "change record labels" in her "Rehab" song, Cinful. @Shud33: She is only a waste of space because of the tabloid-like and perverse attention people tend to dole on her.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Shud33 says Yeah, I am harsh. I usually offend people in that aspect. But I have never been a fan of hers and I agree, she does have a chance of sobering up. So if she doesn't respect herself, why should I? (I know...I know...I am brutal! Sorry guys...)

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

zarpex says I seem to recall reading somewhere that the "they" who tried to make Amy Winehouse go to rehab were the suits at her record label, which she promptly walked away from and signed with whatever label she's signed with now, so my own guess is that the same threat will avail them little. I expect she'd have no trouble finding a new label, or putting out her own records. And the libertarian in me emerges when the subject of drugs comes up; I think it's nobody else's business if you take them, and that the whole lot, pot to angel dust, should be decriminalized, quality-controlled, and taxed reasonably. In any case, there's an obvious, longstanding symbiosis between drugs and the creative arts, especially music, and Universal is acting like a narrow-minded, self-righteous schoolmarm.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Scotch says Well, if she's under contract, she can't just leave. That's the point of the contract. I agree with you when it comes to legalizing drugs, but mainly as it pertains to laws. As long as your doing drugs only effects you, the government should find better things to worry about. Case in point: DUI. If you kill someone, or destroy property, the gov't should nail your ass to the wall. If your family/friends, who have a real interest in keeping you alive, because they care for you, it is indeed their duty to butt in. As far as Universal is concerned, they aren't really making her do anything - they are simply saying if she wants to release more music, she'll have to chill out. Maybe they are concerned with her well-being, but more likely they are concerned with their bottom line. At any rate, they aren't making her do anything, other than make a choice. That's life. Though I would never argue that drugs make music/musicians better, it's a little hypocritical of music fans do demonize Ms. Winehouse because she abuses her body with drugs, especially since she doesn't seem to be hurting anyone else. That is unless those music only listen to music made by folks who never used drugs, which isn't likely.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

milkshake says She wasn't supposed to record the Quantum of Solace theme either unless she stayed clean, but look at what happened there... I'm sure her label do care about her health, but it kinda seems they're making a statement like this to look "good", but whatever happens they'll keep her. What's their option? Drop her and someone else'll pick her up?

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

mitchy says Im with shud on this. Why do we and indeed so many others keep devoting time and space(i'm doing it now) to this stupid talentless cow.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Sturgell says she looks like such a wreck in that pic

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Scotch says "Talentless"? Obviously someone hasn't heard Amy Winehouse... I still maintain that holding her drug abuse against her, but not other musicians is awfully hypocritical.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Charley Rogulewski says britney was able to get back on track and winehouse can't? that's sad.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Scotch says Is she? I hate to see either of them go down the toilet. Bratney, because of her kids. Amy, because of her talent. And because neither of them have really hurt anyone but themselves yet.

Permalink posted 04/16/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

AA Coppertop says God, I wish Universal had threatened not to release "Baby Mama" unless Tina Fey were remotely funny...

Permalink posted 04/17/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Scotch says heh Did Tina Fey and Jimmy Fallon sell their souls? Because as far as I can tell, neither of them are funny, or particularly good actors, and yet both are famous and doing well.

Permalink posted 04/17/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

drewfonts says Record labels telling artists not to do drugs? This sets a dangerous precendent, people. Why, without the heaven-made marriage of artist and narcotic, we'd have no Dark Side of the Moon from Pink Floyd, no Revolver from The Beatles, and no Heartbreaker from Ryan Adams. And we'd have nothing at all from Cypress Hill. This is a interesting intersection of business obligation and artistic expression. At what point exactly should a music label be concerning itself with an artist's misbehavior and taking steps to ensure they clean it up? When they wreck one car? Two? When they're physically unable to perform? When they can't string together a complete sentence, much less write another hit song? Is there any real difference between Cypress Hill's "I Wanna Get High" and Amy Winehouse's "Rehab"? Well, yes. In the case of a band like Cypress HIll, their drug use and purportedly decadent lifestyle are inherent to the appeal of the music. And Sony/Interscope probably wouldn't have it any other way. If B-Real gets busted again for drugs, it only adds to his rep. But when it's the case of Amy Winehouse--someone with much higher pop music visibility who's winning Grammys left and right--Universal gets concerned. Even though Back To Black is an album constructed upon a foundation of heartbreak and subsequent intoxication. And even though Winehouse's drug use and purportedly decadent lifestyle are keeping her in the news, it seems Universal has now decided that not all publicity is good. Are Universal's concerns noble? Do they actually care for the health and well-being of an artist in their fold? Or are they simply motivated by the almighty dollar, simply trying to keep their soul-singing cash cow alive long enough to trot her out for another hit record?

Permalink posted 04/22/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

AA Coppertop says Attack of The Fifty-Foot Skank.

Permalink posted 04/24/2008
Add To My Trusted Moggers

Sturgell says Rich, AA.

Permalink posted 04/26/2008