I agree about what is said about Mark Simpson. Being a fan of his previous books, I had high hopes for his 'Saint Morrissey' biography. But i was disappointed... the constant cliche quotes got on my nerves after a while. He could barely write a line without using a song lyric.

It is definately true that The Smiths are the most complete band in history and fully deserve to be the winners of this particular (slightly pathetic and predictable poll). It is also true that it is likely that Michael Jackson or Prince will win.
However, Joy Division having no good songs is probably the most ridiculous comment ever posted on this site (since the poll for seeing Morrissey naked). I do admit that it was very strange that they were in the 1980's category as they were only Joy Division for less than half of 1980, probably more to do with their re-incarnation as New Order. They had to fit in somewhere and it has to be asked why some artists arent categorised in other decades i.e. Jackson et al.
But Joy Division having no good songs? (Love Will Tear Us Apart, Shadowplay, Isolation, She's lost Control, Transmission).
The most seminal band to have emeged from Manchester along with the Smiths and with as immaculate collection of songs.
There must have been some confusion between Joy Division and Joy Zipper by the postman

The people who were talking about The Smiths were idiots(apart from Joe Slee).Noel Galaghaaaa is just an egomaniacal monkey,not in a good way like Moz either.And Mark Simpson just seems like another idiotic cliche machine who seems to think he understands Morrissey,but really doesn't.At least Joe Slee had something interesting to say about The Smiths even if we didn't see her saying she liked The Smiths at all.And who the hell was the other genius who came up with the very interesting information about playgrounds.I was truly disappointed.

"Unbelievably, Joy Division were also nominated, in spite of having almost no good songs..."

Oh fuck off please. Like anyone here gives a damn about your opinion?

Balls knickers and arse. I missed it. Is it going to be on again? I'm not impressed with the selection entirely, and it hasn't exactly captured the 80s very well. I would like to think that the Smiths were beaten by better candidates than these! Mind you, you're right about who will probably win - in all honesty, the Smiths didn't make as much of a global impact as Michael Jackson or Prince did, which is neither a disadvantage nor a failure on their part. But they won't win the poll.
I rang up and voted by the way, and you can be entered for tickets to see the final show. The question's really difficult though, so here's a helping hand: Tina Turner's no.1 hit was a) Simply The Best.

I like most of them. Smiths, REM, Springsteen, Prince, Joy Division, Public Enemy. All great.

oops?!?

Given that Ian Curtis committed suicide in May 1980, I can't believe Joy Division were considered part of the '80s. Moreover, I just got really annoyed that once again, they are considered superior to New Order, who have better songs, a better singer, and a career stretching seven albums, all consistently brilliant. Anyone who considers Joy Division better is either a music journalist or up their own arse, or both.

And as for the Beastie Boys being nominated... deep breaths, calm down.

I thought it was weak to say the least.
If you were a neutral viewer of the programme it was pretty uninspiring stuff.
The trouble is, there is hardly any decent footage of The Smiths around..the usual Top Of The Pops clips and the odd video apart, nothing.
The T.V people love having Noel Gallagher on nearly as much as he loves appearing on these type of shows, and you always get the feeling that you've seen it all before.
It's not enough to have the same old faces spouting the same old lines about them being 'The best band in the world', and 'Musical Genius',etc.....
They should have just used the ten minutes up playing the actual music... it would'nt have won any more votes (most have their favourites already), but I would have enjoyed it much more.

what's wrong with prince? narrow mindedness again prevails on this website. fair enough, music is all about taste and opinion; if you don't like him, you don't like him.
but it's shame you can't appreciate music coming from a completely different place, you're missing out mate!
he's the only one for me who provides serious competition to the smiths.

Obviously Broken is upset because C4 interviewed Mark Simpson instead of him. The only thing that's 'nauseating' is how transparent his jealousy is.

Hmmm, much as I loves me some Smiths, proper credit must go to Lennon/McCartney. I doubt even Morrissey would argue that one.

"It was an interesting little clip, but apart from REM the Smiths are obvious choices to win. Unfortunately being on British TV, Michael Jackson or Prince are much more likely to win."

Sadly, I don't think this is an exclusively British phenomenon...however, I'd be lying if I said I didn't like Prince. In fact, I have this theory that everyone, whether they realize it or not, likes Prince.

The beauty of this theory is that there's no way to test it.

OK, first off, I want The Smiths to win. I voted for them. Of course, they are my favourite band (though REM come close too). But it is rather tiring when people do down other artists who so clearly deserve recognition. Here are the facts of the matter:

1. Lennon/McCartney - Broken, they revolutionised music. Whether you like it or not, that's the reality. Many, many people still enjoy their songbook because it has, for a great number of people, stood the test of time. All-time classics like 'Hey Jude', 'A Hard Day's Night', 'Tomorrow Never Knows', 'Rain', 'We Can Work It Out', 'Drive My Car' and many more have and WILL stand the test of time. I will bet you any amount you care to name on that one. So, Lennon/Macca bashing is both ill-informed and ill-advised. Marr was a huge Beatles fan (note he nominated George Harrison as an all-time favourite guitarist in Uncut) while not even Morrissey's waspish tongue could really provide any substantive argument why they weren't important, which is probably why he hasn't tried.

2. Micheal Jackson - guys, face it, 'Off The Wall' and 'Thriller' are superb pop albums, bar maybe one song from each. In the early days of his solo career Jackson made irresistable pop. 'Don't Stop Till You Get Enough', 'Thriller', 'Billie Jean' - all instantly memorable, brilliantly constructed and performed pop songs which, unlike many 80s pop music, have not dated. Jackson in his prime was a phenomenal performer and an absolute icon of his time. I'd much prefer the Smiths to win, but could understand it perfectly well if Jacko did.

2. Prince - this guy was a phenomenal talent. Innovative, eclectic, vastly influential, pushing at the boundaries, with a run of fantastic singles and at least two undeniable masterpieces in 'Purple Rain' and 'Sign Of The Times'. Look, if you're an RandB or dance act or hip hop act, Prince is probably gonna mean a HELL of a lot more to you than The Smiths ever did or will. Again, it's utterly blind prejudice on the part of some people. If Prince wins the vote, fine, I'll have no beef with that either.

3. Springsteen - sadly, the programme focused on his least interesting songs ('Born In The USA', 'Glory Days'), but Springsteen has an extremely rich back catalogue with some superb albums ('Darkness On The Edge Of Town', 'Nebraska', 'Born To Run'). The one thing the programme rightly and fairly highlighted was that 'Born In The USA' is NOT a fist pumping Reaganite anthem, though it was hijacked for these purposes. Springsteen is very often an astute, sensitive commentator on American society - anyone who can write 'Streets Of Philadelphia' or 'The Ghost Of Tom Joad' or 'Dead Man Walking' is both most definitely not a neoconservative and also worthy of respect.

4. Joy Division - no classic songs? Did nothing decent? Don't be daft!! (Though I agree New Order might have been the more appropriate nomination chronologically).

The only slight complaint I agree with is that I've preferred to see The Beastie Boys ('Paul's Boutique' is good, but i don't find them to be earthshatteringly great) give way to Elvis Costello - why he was overlooked is mystifying, unless they're saving him for the 70s, when admittedly he did much of his best work. Nevertheless, 'Trust', 'Get Happy' and 'Imperial Bedroom' are all 80s albums, and three of his best.

It was nice to see The Smiths recognised, but really this program is just an excuse to make money! 50p per vote!!?

OK so 16p goes to charity (to help the program makers feel less guilty) but if they really wanted to find out 'what the nation thinks' then it should be free for anyone to vote.

I think The Smiths should genuinely win the nomination. Guns N' Roses did release one of the best albums ever and, in some ways, in 1987 did exactly what The Smiths did in 1983, shook the music industry up. I think these two bands stood right out, but considering the entire body of The Smiths work was released in the 80's and the fact that Morrissey is the greatest lyricist ever, I think The Smiths deserve it.

As good as Joy Division were, I think they should have been nominated for the 1970's, along with Led Zeppelin, Sex Pistols and Bowie. I don't think anybody could argue with those four nominees.

Morrissey should definitely be nominated for the 90's and he may well be as there wasn't much else.

What's so ridiculous about saying that Morrissey and Marr were 'clearly in love'?

These things are not unusual. 'Clearly' Broken is in love with Mark Simpson. He pretends to be reporting on the Hall of Fame spot on The Smiths but devotes most space to his passionate feelings about Mark Simpson.

listen to tracks like:
atmosphere
transmission
she's lost control
new dawn fades

an amazing band which lives alongside the smiths in changing people's lives as a result of their music & lyrics.

did i forget to mention that love will tear us apart is an incredible song?

He knows that Joy Division did a few good songs -he's just joking with you. I blame the beer that he was drinking when he wrote that. Forgive him.

Strawberry.

Like I said, Joy Division barely existed in the 80s and had only one (or possibly 2) great songs. Therefore their inclusion in the shortlist was somewhat baffling. Springsteen is obviously far, far more moronic than Joy Division, but at least he released a few albums in the 1980s.

Joy Division are very poor musicians with weak songs, a singer with a complete lack of intellect or anything vaguely interesting to say, and a bunch of fans who hardly ever listen to the records, but just love saying they like the band.

How sad that pete/Moby/Sharon Needles has been posting as multiple IDs, all of whom happen to agree with one another. The benefit payments must be drying up this week - he has far too much time on his hands!

Does anyone have a good word for his book?? I was asked if I wanted it for Christmas and had to decline on the basis no-one defends it at all!! Cliche ridden nonsense?! or is it a fact filled and criticised unfairly fuelled by jealousy.. ??

Bang, bang, Maxwell's silver hammer
Came down upon her head
Bang, bang, Maxwell's silver hammer
Made sure that she was dead

Joy Division is one of the greatest bands of all time.

-Gregg Allinson

It might be ok in certain circumstances, but I think it's best if people's personal opinions are left out of the stories submitted. Maybe the relevant parts could be edited and made more neutral? We should be allowed to make up our mind on things and not have to listen to someone else's biases.

A lot of Smiths fans are obviously going to have a strong affinity with Joy Division and comments like that will just rile people and take up all the space on what we're supposed to be discussing. Opinions can and should be made in the comments section, not the actual stories submitted.