Defending Bono
Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic has come to the defense of Bono’s New York Times recent op-ed column in today’s edition of Seattle Weekly.
He explains why he agrees with Bono about compensation for online content providers and expresses disappointment about how Bono has been crucified on Twitter.
Whatever your position on the issue discussed, it’s nice to see a fellow musician standing up for our favorite front-man.
Last 4 posts by Tassoula
- Live Tomorrow Night: Daniel Lanois (via Ustream) - February 16th, 2010
- Square Dancing May Give Some "Vertigo" - January 28th, 2010
- Man Charged for Impersonating Secret Service at U2 Gig - January 8th, 2010
- 'U2 3D' Director to Helm 'Orphanage' Re-make - January 4th, 2010
12 Responses to “Defending Bono”
Leave a Reply
I love U2, I love Bono, my favorite band of all time, spent thousands over past 20 years on concert tickets all their tours, bought them on vinyl, tape,cd, itunes. That being said, when it comes to the issue of ISPs and illegal downloading…on this ONE issue….Bono sounds like a complete ass …as does Paul McGuiness. P.S. I’m also big Nirvana and Chris Noveselic fan as well, really respect him.
I’m a big fan of both artists, but even that said, I find it extremely hypocritical for Bono to talk about how file-sharing hurts aspiring songwriters when he is about as far from the the ground as you can go. Bono is right on top of the musical corporate ladder, so please don’t give us bullshit about how young aspiring songwriters are gonna suffer. He is completely ignorant about how the Internet Revolution has democratised music distribution.
yukona – I’d much appreciate it if you wouldn’t swear on our blog. We do have young visitors. I also think it’s presumptuous of you to call someone who is one of the most successful musicians in history “ignorant” about music distribution. I’m pretty sure he knows more than any of us how the business works.
Anyone reading this – I don’t believe that just because an artist has had prior success (and made heaps of money) in the industry, they are exempt from making an argument on behalf of those just starting out, or artists in general. I completely agree with Bono and not just because I’m a fan of his – because at the heart of the matter, stealing is stealing and that’s the issue here.
If a builder constructed a house and the day it was completed, someone came and removed all the windows and doors, we’d consider that stealing, right?
When musicians (or filmmakers, or writers, etc.) create a work of art, why is that any different than any craftsman building something? Why are we entitled to take that from them without offering compensation?
I like technology as much as anyone, but never for a moment do I feel as if I don’t owe it to the artist to pay for their work. If I download a song or a film, I pay for it as I would a CD or a DVD. Simple as that.
regarding the comment above that “..[Bono] is completely ignorant about how the Internet Revolution has democratised music distribution”
Bono is not ignorant about anything he talks about in public. U2 offered its last album for $3.99 and U2 shows more interest in helping young artists aspire to greatness than anyone else I know. While Eric Clapton is touring with Jimmy Page, Tom Petty with Steve Winwood and Elton John with Billy Joel, U2 invites the Black Eyed Peas, Snow Patrol, Kanye West, Keane, Coors and other much younger acts to join them on tours. Until recently, they ran a record company that incubated young talent (Bjork owes her success to that company, as does Sinaed O Connor)
The Internet has not ‘democratized’ music distribution, it has given people the impression that music is free, which means less music will be made and fewer new superstars will emerge.
It’s only a matter of time before Movies, Software, Books, Games and other larger media are destroyed as well.
Bono is a multi-millionaire, probably a billionaire by now, and does not need the money. He has actively encouraged U2 fans to tape live concerts.
Take his work on Africa as a great example of his personality. When all the other live aid acts packed up and went home after a day, he went to Africa and lived in a tent for two months. He used his learnings to set up organizations that helped secure $15 Billion inAIDS relief, $45 Billion in debt writeoffs, he got Bill Gates and Warren Buffet to donate their vast fortunes to the cause and continues to advocate for it, year in, year out.
Calling him a hypocrite for anything exposes you, not him.
You wrote: “It’s only a matter of time before Movies, Software, Books, Games and other larger media are destroyed as well.”
Really?
Last time I checked ‘Avatar’ made 1 billion dollars at the box office in a month, the fastest gross for a movie in history. Sherlock Holmes doing great at the box office. Sandra Bullock movie brought in over 200 million dollars. This is box office receipts cable distribution, syndication, and merchandising which is where the real gravy will come in. Not even counting dvd sales which still make money regardless of how many people rip movies online. Incredible wealth from just 3 films no matter how many people have pirated them on the internet. I don’t think movie theatres are going away anytime soon regardless of what happens online.
Music destroyed? Have you checked out the number of artists available now on the internet who publish their music globally who don’t have to sign contracts with the big record labels? There are more choices now than there have ever been. Some will make money some won’t. Besides alot of artists who have been on record labels are still screwed anyway but thats another discussion.
Games being destroyed???? You should research a little company near Silicon Valley called Zynga who is ‘KILLING IT’ on Facebook. They are earning hundreds of millions of dollars through their online games.
Big media is doing fine. Fox is doing great. Sony is doing great, etc..
Bottom line, I think Paul McGuinesses statements and Bono’s are more about the old guard protecting their wealth at anything that chips away at it (like illegal downloading) than it is about looking out for young artists. And if that’s what it is fine. But lets get honest here.
nebbie, perhaps do a little research before you make claims that the entertainment world is doing fine. There is plenty of proof to the contrary:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10240672-93.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2009/06/layoffs-to-hit-fox-interactive-updated.html
http://www.riaa.com/physicalpiracy.php
http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2010/01/dvd-sales-tank-in-2009-as-americans-head-to-the-cinema.ars
Also, citing Avatar’s success as representative of the entire movie industry is dead wrong. There was years of hype and marketing, coupled with new technology that brought in folks who wouldn’t normally like sci fi to see that movie. Plus, the last time that director made a film, it sweeped the Oscars and became the most profitable movie of the decade. Of course Avatar made millions of dollars. But not even a fraction of the films made in a year can dream of doing that well and more and more studios are halting projects and no longer greenlight new films as a result. I agree with you that movie theaters aren’t going away – but if popcorn tentpole flicks are the only ones attracting folks, the good quality films will.
Same for music – in U2’s day they could make three albums before they hit their stride and their label would still support them; in today’s world, that’s just not how it works. Our biggest music stars (those not already established at least) come from reality TV shows; not from years of playing in clubs or building their talent.
I still firmly disagree with any statments above that illegal downloading will destroy music, games, books, etc..
In the 19th century people said that the distribution of sheet music would destroy live music cause people could just play the songs on their own. In the 20th century some folks claimed that film would destroy radio..that TV would destroy films, that VCRs would destroy TV….that “video killed the radio star” and on and on and on. The major shift is in the form of distribution. Its all content and there will be shift in the way its consumed, watched, distributed, but no way will it be destroyed. And yes it will be monetized.
As far as those articles you’ve cited, well there are also plenty of success stories in this digital age regardless of the illegal downloading.
Look at the hip hop community over the past 10 years and the wealth that’s been created by artists like 50 cent, Lil Jon, JayZ Lil Wayne, etc. The hip hop community got it right in this new age. These guys are all huge stars now and they have something in common before they were commercially successful and created their own labels. Distributing their casette tapes from the backs of their cars AND seeding the peer to peer networks with their mp3s. they built an audience before they got big money making deals. They told folks take our songs and distribute them to everyone you know. They didnt look at their audiences as pirates but as co-marketers for their passing along of mp3s distribution. I think what they did worked. And now in addition to people ripping their stuff illegally they also have plenty of marketshare, some people still pay for their music, and they have become huge stars.
Fast forward – Paul McGuiness is lobbying on behalf of his acts like U2 and PJ Harvey saying that “free is the enemy of good”
When I hear statments like that (from McGuiness speech in Singapore last year) I REALLY disagree. He also said Radiohead’s last album (at that time the pay what you want model) was a failure. Nonsense!! Radiohead created an incredible piece of work whether it made any money or not, to call it a failure is ridiculous. And yes by the way it DID make Radiohead money.
The big corporate music business is filled with greed. So as much as I love Bono I am going to have to disagree with him and the rest of the U2 corporate machine on this one issue.
Of course illegal downloading is having an effect. At the heart of these matters that’s not the issue. At stake here is something bigger – Privacy. And people and ISPS sniffing around as to what you are listening to and doing.
And unfortuantely Privacy will lose in the end. It already has. But music and movies, games, those things won’t be destroyed.
When musicians (or filmmakers, or writers, etc.) create a work of art, why is that any different than any craftsman building something…
Big difference : one million people can download the same mp3 file whereas one million people can’t share one house…so the way you calculate the value of these products is totally different
As nebbie described very well the music industry faced a couple of revolution in terms of new media but there was still music loving people who spend money to get good music. The point is now to know which artists / firms will find a good business model in this numeric revolution
In a recent ‘Column of the record’ there was a link to an Harvard study about bundling and it’s brilliant about how an artist should manage his catalogue…that’s what McGuinness and Bono have to focus on rather than wasting time on ISP tax
Popraph – I completely disagree with your dispute of my analogy.
What difference does it make how many people can enjoy a product, good or service?
Stealing is stealing.
If the music industry (or any creative arts model) used your analogy, charging only a modest percentage of those who were going to “use” the product (especially if they are a new or emerging talent), no one would be able to make a living doing it.
@Tassoula: I was swearing? Sorry, I didn’t intend to throw out any f-bombs, but I didn’t catch any reading back my post either. What are you referring to?
Bono is treating file-sharing as if it will completely cripple young singer-songwriters. As one myself, I can tell you that what he’s said is seriously untrue. Without the Internet, many of my songs would have gone unheard. There is a local band from my country who have sold thousands of records in Europe (we’re in Southeast Asia) because of the Internet. Without the power of song file-sharing acting as an effective marketing tool, the albums would never have been sold. I say Bono has no idea what he is talking about because he is too deeply entrenched in the existing model of the music industry. He is right to a certain extent, the money is drying up–but for record executives and record companies. The MUSIC INDUSTRY is dying, but music itself has never been more accessible and easier to distribute than it is today.
Yukona – yes – when you say the long form of “BS” as you did in your original post, that is considered swearing.
As for the rest of the stuff, I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree. I know plenty of up-and-coming musicians using the Internet to market themselves, but I know longer know any who can make a living at being just musicians.
I’m sick and tired of the whole argument. Stealing is stealing. File sharing is basically robbing a work of art of it’s value, there’s no arguing around that. The music industry as we’ve known it for decades is basically dead and has to find new ways of marketing. Musicians/songwriters have to find a way to be paid fairly for what they are doing, even – and especially – in times of the internet. Saying that Bono is far up that ladder and a rich established musician is true but it doesn’t take away the weight of his argument. No one has the right to tell him to shut up, because he has every right to say his opinion on that issue, just like everyone else has the right to disagree with him.
Basically, he’s right. Being an artist myself, I’m very concerned about the way copyright issues are handled today with the internet and all.