Follow too much fandom, and one really starts wondering about simulations to do it better. While press has improved a lot since interviewers apparently lost interest in the dog's favorite color, I still look at it and shake my head at the apparent strategy, to the point that if a Sims-style Market Your Rock Star game came out, I'd play.

If I were in charge of the universe -- and I really should be, just for my own amusement -- here's what I'd be thinking about in placing David wisely.

1. Am I maintaining exclusivity? Celebrity fame-wh*res appear in every possible publication. Serious artists appear where other serious artists appear (so SNL, yes; but watch it with nonsense like Glamour). I'm presuming David's press is set up by his management or some permutation thereof -- and while I'm historically on the train for management being paid to act reasonably intelligent, there are divergent definitions of "doing a good job." If management defines David as an Idol-based phenomenon rather than as a serious musician, they will market him in ways that support that vision -- even if it's equally possible to market him as a more earnest rocker.
2. Am I reaching an audience that hasn't already bought the album or bought concert tickets? DCO feeds the fan beast. The purpose of press is to push product. If the show is already sold out, the only point of press in that town is to push the album or to elicit radio spins. And this calls for being in the largest local daily or the alternative weekly -- any lesser publication means the same effort for essentially zero marginal benefit.
3. Am I actively eliciting reviews? Newspapers that do interviews should be encouraged to print reviews. That's why God made it possible to set aside tickets for reviewers. Positive reviews sell albums to people who scoffed at the concert. If David and the band cannot garner a preponderance of positive reviews from non-Idol non-fans, then they don't belong in the business and won't survive in it for long, unless his ambition is to join Clay Aiken on the Home Shopping Network. That'd be more of a waste of talent and brains than designing greeting cards.
4. Am I defining a recognizable brand based on musical perspective? David's original appeal on Idol was that he offered a creative and unusual point of view. Judging from AH, that brand identity is legitimate and fits him. All the stuff with hair and looks and hotness -- okay, I'm less convinced than I'd like to be that all fans love him for more lasting qualities, but still -- one of these approaches points to a lasting career, and one doesn't. I'll give you three guesses and the first two don't count.
5. Am I creating distance from Idol? Sorry, Idol. But the continued connection defines a singer in a certain way, as Kelly Clarkson has struggled with for years. David is a serious musician who happened to be on Idol, not an Idol phenomenon.
6. Am I using media appearances to sell albums to new buyers apart from touring? With potential fans having fewer dollars for concert tickets, this is a critical question for any artist. If there's a dry summer on concert sales for everyone, there's going to have to be less reliance on touring; and with today's electronic new media, endless touring is so old-school that it could be obsolete in five years.

"But Eil," you say, "if David followed your strategy, he'd run the risk of failing." Yup. And he'd succeed or fail honorably, as a serious musician being judged on the merits of his music, not as a celebrity phenomenon. But I come from the perspective that honorable failure is preferable to dishonorable success.

"But Eil," you add, "what if David likes the celebrity lifestyle and is happy to succeed at whatever method works?" Then he'll have the fans and albums he deserves. That's not a slam -- plenty of people are happy with success by this method. This is a thought experiment; it clearly wasn't the label's agenda.