U2's Bono to become the world's richest musician tomorrow - NME.com

[BVS]

MTV and VH1 sponsored all U2 tours in the 90's, at least here in the States.

 

[Von Schloopen]

Her soulful whinnying at the end of the first verse communicates profound emotions that I've never felt before. I also particularly enjoy the
mounting bombast and screeching. It makes me picture Oprah hugging herself and weeping. Over-singing wins every time. Now if only Xtina and Celine would do a duet arranged by Mutt Lange and David Foster. Then finally the song would be conveyed properly.

Nah. It's a brilliant reading. Loved the live versions as well. Great, great stuff.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

MTV and VH1 sponsored all U2 tours in the 90's, at least here in the States.

Sellouts.

 

[popacrobat]

False. I have nothing against big gigs per se, although I would prefer them to be saved for special occasions

U2 made that halftime show pretty special, and to many non-U2 fans, it's their favorite halftime show period.

 

[Von Schloopen]

U2 made that halftime show pretty special, and to many non-U2 fans, it's their favorite halftime show period.

perhaps none of those people have integrity? I mean, our first clue about their character is the fact they're watching the Super Bowl. So, it's a
pretty good bet they're dishonest to begin with.

 

[Hollow Island]

Oprah Winfrey lost all fucking credibility when she did the collaboration with Tom Cruise.

How Bono could ever lower himself to subsequently be on her show is sickening to me as a Real U2 Fan. I mean, its not like they have anything in common in music or social causes. Blatant cross culture marketing grab, clearly.






(PS that was BS)

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. I forgot how emotionally raw the followers of the Sanctimonious Mother of Tears, Feeling, and Triteness are.

@ BVS: MTV never sponsored U2. It's pretty well known that U2 never received corporate sponsorship until they got Blackberry to pay for their tour. Radio and video channels promote shows, they attach their names to them (like the local modern rock station "presenting" Sigur Ros even though they've never played a Sigul song). That's different from getting a phone maker to pay for your tour and having adverts around and inside the venue.

 

[Von Schloopen]

ok

 

[gvox]

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. I forgot how emotionally raw the followers of the Sanctimonious Mother of Tears, Feeling, and Triteness are

You didn't offend me, what?? lol. One needn't be a fan of Oprah's (and believe me, I'm not) to see how ridiculous what you wrote was.

 

[BVS]

@ BVS: MTV never sponsored U2. It's pretty well known that U2 never received corporate sponsorship until they got Blackberry to pay for their tour. Radio and video channels promote shows, they attach their names to them (like the local modern rock station "presenting" Sigur Ros even though they've never played a Sigul song). That's different from getting a phone maker to pay for your tour and having adverts around and inside the venue.

Sponsorship is sponsorship. Money is still paid. Is there really a difference between 'Bud Light Presents', 'MTV Presents', or 'Blackberry Presents'?

 

[Hollow Island]

perhaps none of those people have integrity? I mean, our first clue about their character is the fact they're watching the Super Bowl. So, it's a
pretty good bet they're dishonest to begin with.

I don't think anyone is itimating that people who watch the NFL have no integrity.

Some people find the Super Bowl (and NFL football) to be vulgar and don't like to see music they like, particularly if it is music that strives to mean something, associated with it. It's perfectly understandable.

There are plenty of reasons to hate the NFL and to be unhappy that U2 played the Superbowl. I thought it was stupendously jingoistic. The American flag jacket and the running of the names of those who died in New York was ... cringeworthy, to say the least. I mean, we all know that a single American life is worth at least 400 non-American lives, but a more balanced commentary would have been appreciated. It could be used in a ad when US War Corp decides to attack another country of heathens.

 

[gvox]

Sponsorship is sponsorship. Money is still paid. Is there really a difference between 'Bud Light Presents', 'MTV Presents', or 'Blackberry Presents'?

Cmon BVS, there's a big difference. I mean, you could conceivably forget that MTV was presenting the Popmart tour, I mean, it's not like MTV would have adverts or other indications posted around the venue reminding fans that they were involved. It's not like MTV would have been advertising the tour leading up to it with commercials or hours of specials promoting the tour or anything, amirite?

Good god, the wild theories presented around here sometimes..

 

[digitize]

There are plenty of reasons to hate the NFL and to be unhappy that U2 played the Superbowl. I thought it was stupendously jingoistic. The American flag jacket and the running of the names of those who died in New York was ... cringeworthy, to say the least. I mean, we all know that a single American life is worth at least 400 non-American lives, but a more balanced commentary would have been appreciated. It could be used in a ad when US War Corp decides to attack another country of heathens.

The cynic in me completely agrees with you, but I wish that wasn't the case.

 

[Hollow Island]

Sponsorship is sponsorship. Money is still paid. Is there really a difference between 'Bud Light Presents', 'MTV Presents', or 'Blackberry Presents'?

There is because MTV, at the time, was part of the music industry. The music industry presenting music in a bit different than a phone company presenting music.

U2 were trying to get people to watch MTV and support music, and that is completely different from U2 trying to get me to buy a phone, and users of that phone (or mp3 player) getting content that other fans can't.

 

[BVS]

Cmon BVS, there's a big difference. I mean, you could conceivably forget that MTV was presenting the Popmart tour, I mean, it's not like MTV would have adverts or other indications posted around the venue reminding fans that they were involved. It's not like MTV would have been advertising the tour leading up to it or anything, amirite?

Good god, the wild theories presented around here sometimes..

You're right, U2 put their names on the tickets out of the goodness of their hearts.

 

[Von Schloopen]

I don't think anyone is itimating that people who watch the NFL have no integrity.

Some people find the Super Bowl (and NFL football) to be vulgar and don't like to see music they like, particularly if it is music that strives to mean something, associated with it. It's perfectly understandable.

There are plenty of reasons to hate the NFL and to be unhappy that U2 played the Superbowl. I thought it was stupendously jingoistic. The American flag jacket and the running of the names of those who died in New York was ... cringeworthy, to say the least. I mean, we all know that a single American life is worth at least 400 non-American lives, but a more balanced commentary would have been appreciated. It could be used in a ad when US War Corp decides to attack another country of heathens.

Yeah, I was joking.

 

[BVS]

The music industry presenting music in a bit different than a phone company presenting music.

Do you know how much music is being listened to and bought on phones today?

 

[gvox]

The next U2 tour should be sponsored by megaupload or hulkshare, the true champions of Music Industry Integrity!

 

[BVS]

Excellent idea

 

[Hollow Island]

Do you know how much music is being listened to and bought on phones today?

On Blackberries? Probably not much.

I have a feeling that if U2 were sponsored by Ford you'd say the same thing, or if they were selling blenders you'd say "Do you know how much music is being listened to in the kitchen these days?"

It's still completely different from a music channel promoting them (and not, might I add, paying for the tour). The scale and type of advertising was completely different.

MTV was in the business of advertising music 24/7, so music advertising the medium that delivers it (TV, radio) is logical. You cannot make a valid argument that Blackberry fills a remotely comparable role as MTV or radio.

 

[Hollow Island]

The next U2 tour should be sponsored by megaupload or hulkshare, the true champions of Music Industry Integrity!

"Was MegaUpload‘s sudden fall at the hands of the US government in part pushed by Universal Media Group and fears the file sharing site was about to launch a DIY record label of its own? That’s the latest speculation in the ongoing digital download saga, with suggestions that MegaUpload was readying an upgrade to MegaBox, turning it into a hybrid cloud-locker, distribution platform and pseudo-label that would actually pay artists for offering their tracks for free."

MegaUpload DIY record label plans made it a target tip conspiracists - SlashGear

Actually, this is technically a relaunch of an earlier concept, and a perfect re-stab at major label opponents. "UMG knows that we are going to compete with them via our own music venture called Megabox.com, a site that will soon allow artists to sell their creations directly to consumers while allowing artists to keep 90 percent of earnings," MegaUpload founder Kim 'Dotcom' Schmitz told Torrentfreak this week.

Digital Music News - MegaUpload Is Now Launching a Music Service Called MegaBox...

 

[U2girl]

On Blackberries? Probably not much.

I have a feeling that if U2 were sponsored by Ford you'd say the same thing, or if they were selling blenders you'd say "Do you know how much music is being listened to in the kitchen these days?"

It's still completely different from a music channel promoting them (and not, might I add, paying for the tour). The scale and type of advertising was completely different.

MTV was in the business of advertising music 24/7, so music advertising the medium that delivers it (TV, radio) is logical. You cannot make a valid argument that Blackberry fills a remotely comparable role as MTV or radio.

Having had the exact same role...sponsoring a U2 tour. Get over it.

 

[BVS]

On Blackberries? Probably not much.

I have a feeling that if U2 were sponsored by Ford you'd say the same thing, or if they were selling blenders you'd say "Do you know how much music is being listened to in the kitchen these days?"

It's still completely different from a music channel promoting them (and not, might I add, paying for the tour). The scale and type of advertising was completely different.

MTV was in the business of advertising music 24/7, so music advertising the medium that delivers it (TV, radio) is logical. You cannot make a valid argument that Blackberry fills a remotely comparable role as MTV or radio.

Your feeling would be wrong.

Music TV is dead, and right now there is no single equivalent. So all kinds of media and mediums are advertising music, with phones being one of the bigger markets. Now I won't argue that blackberry was the wisest choice, but at the time Palm was trying to take on that market.

Was the scale different? Sure, but to argue that somehow U2 had more integrity accepting money from this entity vs that one is pretty silly to me. It usually comes down to; I liked their music more then so obviously they had more integrity then.

 

[Hollow Island]

Having had the exact same role...sponsoring a U2 tour. Get over it.

No, the role was actually very different. Nevermind that fact that...

Blackberry was actually U2's first corporate sponsor. It was the first time U2 had a tour paid for by a company in exchange for pimping their product.

 

[BVS]

Blackberry was actually U2's first corporate sponsor.

if you keep repeating it, it may come true.

It doesn't matter the amount, sponsorship is sponsorship.

 

[gvox]

No, the role was actually very different. Nevermind that fact that...

Blackberry was actually U2's first corporate sponsor. It was the first time U2 had a tour paid for by a company in exchange for pimping their product.

What are you talking about? In actual fact, it's more accurate to say that ZOO TV is the last time U2 bankrolled their own tour (and even that was sortof co-sponsored by MTV). Whether or not you want to call Michael Cohl a corporate sponsor, they essentially sold the tour to him for $100 million. Fairly confident Cohl thinks of his enterprise as a company - it is incorporated, as were the other potential suitors to the U2 popmart deal.

 

[Hollow Island]

Your feeling would be wrong.

Music TV is dead, and right now there is no single equivalent. So all kinds of media and mediums are advertising music, with phones being one of the bigger markets. Now I won't argue that blackberry was the wisest choice, but at the time Palm was trying to take on that market.

Was the scale different? Sure, but to argue that somehow U2 had more integrity accepting money from this entity vs that one is pretty silly to me. It usually comes down to; I liked their music more then so obviously they had more integrity then.

I recognize that artists have to do things now that they would not have done when radio and TV ruled. I understand why bands do stuff like that.

It just amazes me that you can't see a difference between taking money (not a full-on sponsor) from a TV channel that's part of the music industry and taking money from a phone company.

When MTV presents a show, the artists essentially takes money from an entity that promotes them and does nothing in return aside from tell people to watch their videos on MTV. When they take money from a phone company, they tell people to buy a phone. The phone might promote U2, but it is not analogous in any conceivable way to radio or MTV, which solely existed to play music (from artists with labels that paid to have music played...). It's apples and oranges.

 

[Hollow Island]

What are you talking about? In actual fact, it's more accurate to say that ZOO TV is the last time U2 bankrolled their own tour (and even that was sortof co-sponsored by MTV). Whether or not you want to call Michael Cohl a corporate sponsor, they essentially sold the tour to him for $100 million. Fairly confident Cohl thinks of his enterprise as a company - it is incorporated, as were the other potential suitors to the U2 popmart deal.

They did, but did they show up on ads on City TV telling me to go see his theatre productions?

 

[Hollow Island]

if you keep repeating it, it may come true.

It doesn't matter the amount, sponsorship is sponsorship.

tautology is tautology

 

[corianderstem]

I'm still laughing at the idea that U2 partnering with Bon Jovi would have some sort of integrity by Mr. Panther's argument.

Didn't Jon Bon Jovi more or less sell himself to NBC? I think Bon Jovi would be dying to partner with U2 to get some shred of integrity back.



(Please note, I honestly don't give much credence to the "sell out"/ "integrity" argument. I just thought it was funny. )

 

[gvox]

They did, but did they show up on ads on City TV telling me to go see his theatre productions?

They didn't have to; his (and the advertising media's) subsequent ability to list U2 as a major production reference when advertising other productions added weight to his growing resume/credibility...at a time, I might add, when he really needed a credibility boost in that scene due to his own troubles/investigations...it was win-win for both sides, for a number of reasons.

It doesn't change that he's a corporate sponsor who financed a U2 tour, in exchange for considerations. Now you're just splitting hairs over what those considerations were.