Reading between the lines of the latest hatchet job on Bono
Timed to coincide with Bono’s latest appearance at the World Economic Forum, Richard Tomlinson and Fergal O’Brien have published one of the all-time hatchet jobs in the now yawn-inducing Bono-is-ultra-rich-yet-wants-everyone-to-give-away-their-money-while-not-
talking-about-how-much-money-he-gives-away theme of profiles we’ve seen so often in recent years.
The article says nothing new, and frankly isn’t worth the time it took them to research and write it. It’s also not worth the time I’m about to spend in reply, but I won’t lose any sleep over a few lost minutes. So, here goes…..
Bono, Who Preaches Charity, Profits From Buyouts, Tax Breaks
The headline already tells you where this one is going. Actually, it tells you where it’s coming from: How dare someone preach charity and make money at the same time! You could replace the name “Bono” with almost anyone else who’s trying to do something good with the world, like Gates or Buffett.
“One,” a song about a love affair gone sour
Not really, but we’ll overlook the lack of lyrical awareness.
While Bono was making his appeal, U2 was racking up $389 million in gross ticket receipts
Here we go again with that same myopic attitude from the headline, the one where it’s not okay to make money and still care about the less fortunate.
Revenue from the Vertigo tour is funneled through companies that are mostly registered in Ireland and structured to minimize taxes.
Every smart business on earth tries to minimize taxes. Every smart individual, too. I make sure to take advantage of every deduction the law allows. I’m guessing the authors do, too.
“Bono’s campaigns reflect a great amount of concerns that U2’s audience also has, such as AIDS and malaria in Africa, and that can’t help but have a beneficial effect on record sales,”
In other words, U2 fans are a bunch of sheep that will buy anything the band sells us because we believe what the Great Leader says and does.
Bono declined to be interviewed for this article.
The Great Leader is wise.
a special RED line of clothing, cell phones and other merchandise and donating 40 percent of the profit they make
Actually, different companies are donating different percentages, but let’s not let a little research get in the way of a good story.
Bono’s own dealings haven’t always followed the altruistic ideals he espouses, says Richard Murphy, a Downham Market, U.K.- based adviser to the Tax Justice Network, an international lobbying group.
And Mr. Murphy is actually privy to the details of “Bono’s own dealings”?
Murphy points to the band’s decision to move its music publishing company to the Netherlands from Ireland in June 2006 in order to minimize taxes.
PR-wise, perhaps not the best move. But minimizing taxes is completely within the law. It’s no different than me taking advantage of the U.S. tax breaks that are afforded to a married couple with two kids.
“This is somebody who’s exceptionally rich taking the opportunity to shift his tax burden to somebody else, but then asking governments around the world to spend that tax take in the way that he would like,” Murphy says.
This is somebody who’s spent the past 8-9 years of his life trying to do something for people who would otherwise be ignored.
U2’s move to the Netherlands is wrong, says Dick Molenaar, senior partner at All Arts Tax Advisers, a Rotterdam-based tax consulting firm for artists and musicians. “Everybody needs to pay his fair share of taxation to the government, and therefore we have roads and education and everything,” he says.
U2 pays more than its fair share of taxes, Dick. And since when is a tax rate hike from 0% to 42% called a “fair share”?
Bono’s empire encompasses real estate, private-equity investments, a hotel, a clothing line and a chain of restaurants.
LOL! Norman Hewson’s eateries aren’t about to challenge McDonald’s anytime soon…..
In addition, Bono shares three homes with his wife and four children,
He actually owns more than that and … get this … he pays taxes on all of them!
Elevation’s first investment was a stake in two computer game companies, Edmonton, Canada-based BioWare Corp. and Los Angeles-based Pandemic Studios LLC. BioWare makes a war game called “Destroy All Humans 2.” Pandemic’s catalog includes a war game called “Mercenaries 2: World in Flames,”depicting a mercenary invasion of Venezuela.
And did you know that if you play “With or Without You” backwards, you hear satanic messages?
While Bono promotes charitable causes, he doesn’t disclose whether he personally gives any money to them and, if so, how much. These include Amnesty International, the Burma Campaign U.K., DATA, which stands for Debt, AIDS, Trade and Africa, the environmental group Greenpeace and ONE.
Again, just a little research would’ve helped with this paragraph. U2’s policy is to not reveal the donations it makes. This goes all the way back, long before they were super rich. Jack Healey told us about the “very nice” donation U2 made to Amnesty International way back in 1984, and how the band demanded that the donation not be revealed. And just last year, we learned that U2 made a “sizeable donation” to Careflight in Australia, as thanks for a 20-minute helicopter ride to the Queensland Sports and Athletic Centre. And you can be sure there’ve been dozens more quiet donations — both from the band and from the individuals — over the years.
Whether or not Bono gives money himself is immaterial to ONE
And should be immaterial to all of us. It’s none of our business, even if our job title includes the words “reporter” or “writer.”
Bono has not said how much, if any, of his money he gives to DATA, of which he is a board member.
….
Bono doesn’t invest his own money in RED
As the Great Leader has said, it would be a lot easier to write a check and be done with it. It costs a lot more to give your time for almost a decade now.
Bono’s public charitable activities date to 1985, when the band performed at the Live Aid concert in London
If you want to get technical about it, the charitable activities date to 1978, when U2 did a benefit show for the “Contraception Action Campaign” and another benefit for a group called “Rock Against Sexism.” But let’s not split hairs….
The details of U2’s money making are out of public view
Which is right where they belong.
When he’s not touring or lobbying for charities, Bono spends time on his investments. “He gets more out of a week than most people get out of a month,”McGuinness says. “It’s hard to keep up with him at times.”
I’m 99.9% certain that Paul McG.’s quote was about Bono’s crazy schedule, not about how much time he spends “on his investments.” Sloppy and irresponsible journalism…..
Bono has an undisclosed stake in Nude, a chain of three Dublin cafes founded in 1999 by his elder brother, Norman. Business is brisk at the Nude cafe on downtown Dublin’s Suffolk Street on a Friday in December.
When you add in that last sentence, it’s like you’re saying … “Bono is making money from these people eating food. Tsk-tsk.”
It will be just one more landmark in Bono’s burgeoning capitalist empire.
Oh, please.
be54 said,
January 26, 2007 @ 4:03 am
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! Someone with intelligence and someone who has an understanding of U2 and what they are about has finally put something together in a concise and intelligent manner to address this issue. I really don’t get it! What does it matter how much money Bono makes?! Heck, I contribute to his wealth and am happy to do so. It is not about how much, it is about what you do with it. I like to believe that if I had a lot of money that I would be able to do half of what Bono has done. It is people who have the money, time, and resources that should put the word out there about those that have less than we because someone like me cannot. It would seem that Bono and the guys are damned if they do and probably damned if they don’t! Why do people loose sight of the greater issue? It is about people suffering and dying and doing something to change that. It is about doing the right thing and whether you have large amounts of money or not is meaningless. Personally, I wish I could amass great wealth myself. Seriously who wouldn’t if given the opportunity? People need to get over it and get on with business of helping those in need to live better lives. We won’t be judged on how much money we make that’s for sure.
Beth said,
January 26, 2007 @ 7:27 am
There are several things I would add to this but here are four:
1. “asking governments around the world to spend that tax take in the way that he would like.”
No, he’s asking them to spend it in the way they ALREADY PROMISED TO SPEND IT THEMSELVES before he was even involved in the whole issue.
2. All these rants, across the board, deliberately falsify something every campaigner from Jubilee through DATA through ONE has said over and over: this is not an appeal for charity, it is a campaign for justice. (There are certainly ways people can give charity to Africa, but Bono never calls for that when he speaks.) To try and critique someone’s own personal charitable practices in order to impugn their call for justice is apples and oranges. The correct benchmark to judge the hypocrisy of a campaigner for justice on would be whether their own practices are just. (Does Bono pay his employees fairly? Do the factories EDUN is sourced from treat their workers well? Do U2 deal justly with venues and promoters? etc.)
3. All these rants try and manipulate us into very black and white thinking, where we would brand as a hypocrite anyone who wants a fairer shake for the poor but does not embrace voluntary poverty themslves. (Those things don’t follow at all, if you think about it.) I’ve heard these kinds of attacks in the context of nonprofit work for years (where they’re exactly the same; the anger’s just focused on smaller amounts of money), and IMHO a major motivating factor in this “shoot the messenger” tactic is usually the desire to avoid taking the overall message seriously. The rhetorical device is to try to limit the right to care about the poor to highly exceptional, saintly heroes…. if you can’t be perfect, you shouldn’t be allowed to do anything. This would mean almost nobody would be doing anything, and certainly “I, a mere ordinary mortal” wouldn’t have to do anything. Well. How convenient.
4. Piggybacking on 3: the economic myopia of these critiques is really quite funny to me as someone who has worked in Africa. We’re talking about 3 billion people living on less than $2 a day. Compared to that, anyone who has heat, clean water, and a couple air and water-tight rooms to sleep in is rich. A car, several changes of clothes, and some household appliances: super-wealthy. Everyone writing (and reading) the article is super-wealthy in global terms, so the authors are in essence saying to Bono “well, you’re hypocritical because you’re a little *too* super-wealthy, a little *more* super-wealthy than us.” The difference between a BMW and a Toyota may seem significant to folks in the top 10% of the world’s wealth (which you are if you make over $25,000 a year), but that is completely distorted rich-country myopia. You might as well yell at me for having more than one pair of shoes as yell at Bono for accepting his 1/5 of U2’s ticket sales.
be54 said,
January 26, 2007 @ 2:56 pm
Bravo, Beth! I couldn’t agree with you more.
maziep said,
January 26, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
A fantastic rebuttal of everything in that horrid article! Bravo!
What I don’t understand is, why is it that if you are famous and want to help a charity, you open yourself to investigation of everything you’ve ever done in your entire life? If I was massively rich and famous, I wouldn’t bother to disclose anything I do for charity at all, seeing all the criticism and crap they have to take for it nowadays. However, I’m sure Bono is used to it now, he knows by taking such a visible role that certain people will always be ready to take shots at him for it. Just makes me admire him all the more. Guess I’m just a sheep! LOL!
MVC said,
January 27, 2007 @ 12:55 am
Aside from a couple of minor factual errors (i.e., the 40% statement and the explanation of “One”), the facts laid out in the article are generally accurate.
Why do so many U2 fans get upset when these facts are put out in the media? Why is it necessary to be so defensive? Bono is a public figure, and, like it or not, his business dealings are fair game for public discussion. Is it so sacreligious to even consider the possibility that U2 or Bono may have conducted some business deals that are even slightly reproachable?
be54 said,
January 27, 2007 @ 6:31 am
No it isn’t sacreligious to consider the possibility that U2 or Bono may have conducted some business deals that are even slightly reproachable. I for one do not consider them saints. I know better and they themselves don’t consider themselves saints either. I do question the facts in the article though. Again, to my way of thinking whether is it Bono, U2, Bill Gates, William Buffett or whoever, I say again, why does it matter how much money someone makes? Again, it is the end results of the use of that money that matters.
Bono really doesn’t need someone like me to defend him I suppose. I just get sick of it. Honestly, most of the time I just skip over that stuff. But just as a general question, with so much at stake, why is it someone cannot be the voice of those who have less without being seen as trying to get something out of it for themselves? That question applies to anyone not just Bono and what we should question is why we see the negative as opposed to the positive.
What it should really be about is creating change for the better for all people and we all have a stake in it. And with the help of people who amass wealth, as well as governments, we should be able to make it happen. That is the real issue - not how much money Bono or anyone like him makes for a for living.
Beth said,
January 27, 2007 @ 7:21 am
It’s not the facts, MVC, it’s the rhetorical misuse of them to try and emotionally manipulate uninformed readers into having generalized contempt for the campaign to end extreme poverty.
be54 said,
January 27, 2007 @ 10:02 am
Exactly! Thanks again, Beth for saying what I could not.
MVC said,
January 27, 2007 @ 11:45 am
be54, you said that you question the facts. What facts are in dispute?
And “emotionally manipulate uniformed readers”? I think you give too much credit to the writer of this article and not enough credit to the readers.
Income from royalties IS income nonetheless. In a country with a progressive tax rate, it is not unreasonable for the wealthiest to pay a 42% tax rate. And, as mentioned in an earlier Bloomberg article from last year, U2 could have kept their operations in Ireland and paid a much lower tax rate through incorporation: “The band could have channeled profits through a company to pay the 12.5 percent corporation tax.”
(http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&refer=home&sid=aef6sR60oDgM)
So the criticism that the Irish citizens in U2 are avoiding their tax burden has some validity. Would there not be an outcry if a profitable American company moved their headquarters to a tax haven to avoid paying U.S. taxes? According to the Edge’s terminology, such a move could be placed under the category of being “tax efficient.”
Maybe there is a reason Bono declined to be interviewed for the article. Maybe he doesn’t have a good defense.
m2 said,
January 27, 2007 @ 11:56 am
“I think you give too much credit to the writer of this article and not enough credit to the readers.”
Judging from the amount of people that share the myopic view of these writers, I would disagree. It’s obscene to cast a negative light on a decade of good works simply because the person doing them is wealthy, and performs in a wealthy band.
“Maybe there is a reason Bono declined to be interviewed for the article. Maybe he doesn’t have a good defense.”
What likely happened is that the others close to Bono did their interviews, saw the obvious slant the writers were taking, and suggested Bono not waste his time.
I respect your opinions, MVC, but we’ll have to agree to disagree.
chet said,
January 27, 2007 @ 12:14 pm
As Matt pointed out, Bono’s key contribution is in raising awareness and the TIME he’s devoted to the causes. Even if U2 and Bono donated the majority of their earnings or paid more taxes which would go to Africa, they couldn’t make a big dent. However, by them raising awareness about ONE, DATA, RED etc. there is a multiplier effect at work. I as a fan tell 10 people about these ventures, each one of them tells 10 more people, etc. Also, as Bono has said countless times, it’s not about aid but rather trade. EDUN shows that you can have a sustainable business based on manufacturing in Africa.
Plus, If I were in Bono’s shoes I’d rather have more control over where my money goes. The problem with governments is that they do not always spend funds in the areas they promised. Governments are terribly inefficient.
MVC said,
January 27, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
“Judging from the amount of people that share the myopic view of these writers, I would disagree.”
Maybe there are a lot of people who share this “myopic” view because there is some truth to it. It is also a bit much to call the criticism of Bono “obscene.” As I am sure you know, the Irish press has been much harsher on Bono and U2 regarding this issue because it is the government of their Republic that is being deprived of tax revenue. I have no problem with Bono’s activism, but I believe that the press (especially the Irish press) has a right to call Bono on his rhetorical inconsistencies.
You are right, Matt, we will have to agree to disagree on this.
be54 said,
January 28, 2007 @ 6:42 am
MVC we do agree to disagree. I hope that you have not felt insulted in any way by my comments. If so, I do sincerely apologize. I would never want to intentionally do that to anyone. It it is pretty obvious to me that you are an intelligent and informed person. You are probably more business savvy than I am too. I am not Irish and I cannot profess to know what it is to be an Irish citizen. I can only profess what it is like to be an American citizen. But we are all citizens of the world.
You had said something about an outcry if a profitable American company moved it’s headquarters to a tax haven to avoid paying taxes and fortunately or unfortunately I think that happens quite often here. Is it wrong? Maybe. Is it the best thing to do for that company and the people involved? Maybe. Is this a way to protect what you have worked for and protect your family’s future? Maybe. By making these kinds of decisions does this make them bad people? Does it make them any less caring about the world around them? On the contrary, I think sometimes it makes them more aware it if they are responsible and caring people my nature. And honestly, do we really know how much money they give to charity?
I don’t really know the answers to those questions as I do not have the money or investments that wealthy people around me do have. I probably never will. But as I have stated before, we are all citizens of the world and we must be the voices to the less fortunate. Bono and U2 have succeeded to raising awareness and Bono has literally (along with others) brought about change in that area. Why can’t it be about that? That is all I am saying.
The thing is, I guess, none of us should ever stop asking questions. It is what makes the world go around and it certainly leads to lively discussion! And sometimes it is how ideas are born. I hope we can agree, MVC, on how great U2’s music is. And thanks for the great dialogue. And Matt, thanks for the topic and the forum.
Peace to you all.
MVC said,
January 28, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
be54, no personal offense was taken. For what it’s worth, I’m a recent graduate in serious debt and far from business savvy. I just happen to be a little irritated when people dismiss so quickly any criticism of Bono or the rest of the band.
It is still surprising to me that so many people do not see the hypocrisy of Bono’s actions. Bono is asking the richer nations of the world to provide some of their wealth to poorer nations in Africa; in the same vein, the tax system in a country like Ireland is set up to help redistribute resources from the wealthy to the poor. Now that Ireland is attempting to get rid of what was an unusually lenient tax break for artists, it appears that the wealthy members of U2 are trying to avoid paying their fair share of federal taxes.
Is it unethical for U2 to move their operations out of Ireland so that they can avoid paying Irish taxes on publishing royalites? Maybe, maybe not; but it seems ridiculous to dismiss the suggestion so quickly. No U2 fan doubts that the band members give a lot of time and money to good causes; however, this fact doesn’t make them immune from criticism in their other business ventures. As you mentioned earlier, be54:
“If I were in Bono’s shoes I’d rather have more control over where my money goes. The problem with governments is that they do not always spend funds in the areas they promised. Governments are terribly inefficient.”
All of us feel that way to some degree (especially those of us Americans who’ve been opposed to the U.S. occupation of Iraq). Does that mean that we should all move our investment accounts offshore? I think it’s an topic worth discussing rather than dismissing.
Any-who, on Wisconsin!
inhisimage said,
May 1, 2007 @ 1:14 am
You have all lost the big picture. Bono is an admitted and committed believer in Jesus Christ who is also driven by a passion for social justice and world change - an area all too many conservative evangelicals in the U.S. and otherwise fall short in. The money (and Bono`s desire to convince others to spend it) is simply his way of sharing the Gospel - the only true way to change anything - most importantly the heart of humankind. Sadly…….the media tends only to cover Bono`s commercial success and his dinners with high ranking social folk rather than centering on an icon who from the very beginning new truth and how to share it in a culturally relevant and loving way. Spread the news……IN THE NAME OF LOVE!
inhisimage said,
May 1, 2007 @ 1:18 am
Can someone tell me how to start a blog topic in this forum rather then simply responding to a blog already begun? I am not very internet saavy. Thanks a bunch in advance.
lost poet said,
May 1, 2007 @ 8:03 am
With regard to U2’s taxation arrangements. If it was me in that position, I’d do whatever I could to minimise my tax. Going offshore? Why not? Then *I*, not the government, could decide what to do with the money. I might even give the government some of it if they committed to spend it sensibly, on health care, education, environment etc.
It occurs to me that if Ireland had not been a tax haven for musicians already, U2 may well have had a similar setup from the beginning.
@U2 said,
May 1, 2007 @ 9:24 am
Can someone tell me how to start a blog topic in this forum rather then simply responding to a blog already begun?
You can’t, sorry to say. On blogs, the site owners make the posts and others are welcome to comment. If you wish to start open discussions, click the FORUM link — but please read the Forum rules before you post. Spamming the forum with repetitive messages the way you just spammed this blog with repetitive comments will get you banned in a hurry.