We see you're not registered!

By creating an account on Exhale, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

breatheheavy

Kelly Clarkson Won’t Headline The Super Bowl Because She’d Have To Pay To Do It

Recommended Posts

"You pay me!"



Kelly Clarkson says she won't headline the Super Bowl halftime show because artists have to pay out of pocket for it.



If you were hoping to hear "Since You Been Gone" and "My Life Would Suck Without You" at any Super Bowl halftime show, you're out of luck. Clarkson says she refuses to do it because they make the artists fork out the cash to put it on. That seems ludicrous, but think of how many millions of people tune in.

In a new interview on The Kane Show, Kelly was asked if she’d ever perform at it. “No you have to pay to do it! I’m not paying, you pay me,” she says. “I heard that and I’m like, ‘wait… I’ve been doing this too long y’all. I ain’t paying people.’”

She goes on to say how much of a football fan she is and what a technical and “hard” performance it would be because the artists are “so removed” from the audience. The "Love So Soft" singer also touches on her fav performance of the past.

Kelly, sis, love you, but this is absurd.

Listen below:



Thoughts on Kelly Clarkson performing at the Super Bowl (or not)? Let us know in Exhale.



And while you're at it... leave a comment and follow us on Facebook, Twitter & Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that the SB is a huge promo opportunity for artists and a way to expand beyond their core audience, it doesn't seem weird at all to me that the artist would have to pay to be there :mhm: 

Maybe that's why Britney doesn't do it after all. Homegirl buys her clothes from Target. A Superbowl would be way beyond her budget :mattafact:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IUSAtonight said:

Considering that the SB is a huge promo opportunity for artists and a way to expand beyond their core audience, it doesn't seem weird at all to me that the artist would have to pay to be there :mhm: 

Maybe that's why Britney doesn't do it after all. Homegirl buys her clothes from Target. A Superbowl would be way beyond her budget :mattafact:

She probably knows her current performances are not up to par for the Super bowl neither. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like her new material, it's really incredible and when I hear her old songs now, I can't help but sing along. However, for the SB, I didn't imagine her a second being the headliner. Coldplay was already surprising to me but they took Beyonce and Bruno Mars and then it made sense in my opinion. For the paying part, It's really shocking, because it takes away the part where you think an artist earned the right to perform because of their hard work and popularity, and it goes on to show that everything can be earned with the right amount of money. Pretty disappointing actually. :yaknow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Chris88 said:

I really like her new material, it's really incredible and when I hear her old songs now, I can't help but sing along. However, for the SB, I didn't imagine her a second being the headliner. Coldplay was already surprising to me but they took Beyonce and Bruno Mars and then it made sense in my opinion. For the paying part, It's really shocking, because it takes away the part where you think an artist earned the right to perform because of their hard work and popularity, and it goes on to show that everything can be earned with the right amount of money. Pretty disappointing actually. :yaknow:

Maybe certain ppl can get promoters? Like Pepsi and they will pay for a chunk? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, It'sSamB!tch said:

kinda b!tchy how she said it tho... "you have to pay me". i thought she didn't do it for the money? if she can give up writing credits for My life would ... then why won't she pay this?

sounds messed up and I do love her...

The writing story is from 2009 and that's such a different matter... It's not because you can put the hashtag #money that it's all the same.

She refused to earn money for something she somewhat found disgraceful, sth she was forced to do with someone she didn't want to work with. So in the end, she couldn't escape but tried her best to stay away from it as much as she could. 

Here for the SB, she would love to perform, it's her job and that's what she does as a professional, so as you would rather be paid for the job done, she wouldn't perform + give them money. Makes no sense... You end up having a negative balance money wise. It is good publicity to perform at the SB, but if she's glad with her fame status and her audience, I get why she wouldn't pay to get more, if she doesn't want more.

That reminds me of a French festival of theatre (Festival d'Avignon), where it's sooooo expensive to perform, to pay for your hotel, for your props, for your travel that in the end if the artists don't get a contract out of it (because it is actually good publicity), half of them sadly end their career here, the companies close if they don't get a contract afterwards because it's so expensive you finish comply broke. 

 

So it's not just about "not to care for the money", you gotta give the proper context before judging. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MissDarcy said:

The writing story is from 2009 and that's such a different matter... It's not because you can put the hashtag #money that it's all the same.

She refused to earn money for something she somewhat found disgraceful, sth she was forced to do with someone she didn't want to work with. So in the end, she couldn't escape but tried her best to stay away from it as much as she could. 

Here for the SB, she would love to perform, it's her job and that's what she does as a professional, so as you would rather be paid for the job done, she wouldn't perform + give them money. Makes no sense... You end up having a negative balance money wise. It is good publicity to perform at the SB, but if she's glad with her fame status and her audience, I get why she wouldn't pay to get more, if she doesn't want more.

That reminds me of a French festival of theatre (Festival d'Avignon), where it's sooooo expensive to perform, to pay for your hotel, for your props, for your travel that in the end if the artists don't get a contract out of it (because it is actually good publicity), half of them sadly end their career here, the companies close if they don't get a contract afterwards because it's so expensive you finish comply broke. 

 

So it's not just about "not to care for the money", you gotta give the proper context before judging. 

you missed my point. it's about HOW she said it. she came off like a diva saying something like "you have to pay me". she could have adressed that waaaaay better and that is my point. It's like i saw a side of her that I never knew was there...... probably just a bad choice of words but yeah she kinda came off like a Mariah kind of diva to me... which ain't good 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, It'sSamB!tch said:

kinda b!tchy how she said it tho... "you have to pay me". i thought she didn't do it for the money? if she can give up writing credits for My life would ... then why won't she pay this?

sounds messed up and I do love her...

Kelly Clarkson tours theaters. I love her but she isn't even making a quarter as to other pop stars. The Super Bowl would cost so much money. 

It has nothing to do with loving money, its logical that she can't afford it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.