© Ken McKay/Chiaki Nozu/Rex/FilmMagicRage against the pop machine ... Zack de la Rocha gives Simon Cowell the finger
What a lot of outrage over something so silly. In the fight for Christmas No 1 (and that's a phrase we've not heard in a long time), familiar battle lines have been drawn.
In the rock corner, we have those who are "protesting" against Simon Cowell's parade of X Factor winners hogging the top spot, and want to unleash something loud and sweary on the charts - Rage Against the Machine's "Killing in the Name."
In the pop corner, we have those who think RATM fans are being pathetic, especially as the song is ancient and the band are hardly rock rebels these days (you can read some good points about the irony of using "Killing in the Name" for this campaign on Luke Lewis's NME blog).
Personally, I'd love RATM to get to No 1, not because I think it would be a victory for "proper" rock. I actually think a RATM victory would be a triumph for pop. The song might be old, but having a fan-powered campaign propel it to the chart summit against the might of an entertainment powerhouse like SyCo would tell you more about the democratised, downloadable and downright free-for-all nature of the pop charts in 2009 than anything else. And besides, surely any kind of scrap for the top spot is better for pop lovers than none at all?
Critics have pointed out that Sony is behind both acts, and that ultimately the money will find its way to Cowell whoever wins. But that's missing the point. Cowell hardly needs the cash that a Christmas No 1 would generate. But he does need - at least to some degree - to show that the X Factor brand can guarantee its winner a chart topper. Besides this, Cowell's claim that a RATM No 1 would "spoil" it for the other contestants betrays a certain arrogance, as if the Christmas top slot is now reserved for his acts alone and that any other artist actually selling more records is cheating.
One familiar message-board criticism is that RATM fans are being childish and should "protest about something serious", presumably landmines, climate change or youth unemployment. That's a perfectly fair point, but if you're going to take that viewpoint you could apply it to the act of buying pop singles in general. You're paying 79p for a Joe McElderry ballad? Give the money to Katine instead, you thoughtless twerp! Again, the point is to not take it all so seriously. The Christmas chart is a bit of a laugh. People like to spend their money on having a laugh.
So, do I think RATM have the X(mas) factor? I can't quite see it happening, but it would certainly be amusing if they did (the song has a special place in my heart, as I first heard it during that infamous Bruno Brookes chart rundown in 1992, shortly before picking up the shattered remains of my jaw from the floor).
When we look back in a decade's time, and ask why an old rock song from the early 1990s went to No 1 in 2009, sticking out in a long line of overblown ballads like the proverbial sore middle finger ... to me, that's what the pop charts were made for.
I'm glad, cracking tune too!