Arcade Fire criticise U2 ( and some others...)

[Habib]

http://www.nme.com/news/arcade-fire/26572


I think this article reeks of jealousy. Yes these bands probably spend huge amounts of money on their marketing and advertising, but no-one is holding a gun to people's head forcing them to buy their records and go to their concerts.

I like Arcade Fire, but this sounds like the green eyed monster. To put it in football terms, its the equivalent of Arsene Wenger persistently moaning about Chelsea's budget...

 

[Got Philk?]

hmm, is this Arcade Fire's marketing scheme?


I am a big fan of Arcade Fire...and U2. And I like Oasis. Dang it, now I dont' know what to do. Someone advertise something to me quick!!!

 

[corianderstem]

I dunno ... it's a valid criticism, but it doesn't bother me when bands are aggressive about getting their music out there.

So yeah, Win Butler. Gripe away. I'll still buy your CDs and U2's.

 

[U2Man]

well, we all know that arcade fire has never been hyped.

 

[Jeannieco]

Do they realize how many cd's they have sold thanks to U2?? WT??

I mean it's a joke around here now how many times have people asked that question, "who is that group playing at the opening of the Vertigo shows?" I know that doesn't equate sales for them necessarily, but it helped them with visability and one could argue free avertising....
Geez...
Where's the gratitude? That's really lame..

 

[LyricalDrug]

Oh, who cares. It wouldn't be rock and roll without a little trash talk between big bands.

 

[europop2005]

whoa wait...arn't they the LAST people to critizise U2???? I mean...what was that song when U2 comes on stage???? <----by the way I am perfectly aware of the question...its rhetorical lol

 

[GibsonGirl]

I love Win.

 

[Screwtape2]

I think he's right on and Arcade Fire has every right to be critical of U2's marketing strategy. He's attacking the business and not the music.

 

[Marko]

but he said nothing wrong - in terms of marketing and music industry working and functioning that way he is dead right.
He is naming U", Oasis and Rolling Stones because they are big bands and it hurts when they do it. I certain aspect I can agree because these bands used to have great music so there is no need for such heavy marketing.

On other hand he is not criticizing bands and singers like Britney Spearce or or Robbie Williams or whatever, and that is because they have to do it - they are part of this music industry and that is how they got on top. Sometimes some of these bands/singers have some quality tunes, but mostly they are pure marketing.

I have to admit that I don't like seeing U2 in the same arena playing by the same rules as those commercial and marketing bands. I liked them the most during AB and Zoo era, when they were still at least a little bit alternative (I know that The Fly video was premiered in Europe on MTV's alternative program, I forgot what it was called back then)

And to finish with fly - than U" could with no marketing come out fith first single of hugely awaited LP with a song like The Fly - no way that they still have those balls

but damn - I'm still buying their LP's

 

[LMP]

OH NOEZ,

they spoke ill of BONOE and YOUTWO.

I can never listen to them again.

 

[Liesje]

He's basically right and it doesn't bother me, but marketing is marketing, no? Yeah, every artist markets themselves and their music to some extent, that's how their music gets sold, genius.

 

[Rachel D.]

People just like to bash U2 lately.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

Lately? I think it's some sort of course you have to take if you want to get into the music business...

"Dissing 101: Chapter 1 - Take a shot at Bono and/or U2..."

 

[Aygo]

Arcade Fire using the same marketing strategy that Noel Gallagher uses for Oasis? That's not very low-profile, like they want to be...

U2 helped pushing them into knowledge using them as openers... is that gratitude? Certainly not.

And what's the problem with these marketing promotions? This exists since the 1960's! It just suffered evolution with the times, but it's the same shit! What are those complains for?
Because it's getting fashionable not to be commercial, to be undergound? Fuck off!

 

[GibsonGirl]

every artist markets themselves and their music to some extent

Yes, but usually never at the extreme level that U2 does. I think what Win is saying is that you don't need to ram your music down society's throat in order to sell a few records. If the music is good, people will find out about it without needing it to be delivered to them on a platter. Honestly, the only way to avoid the U2 Hype Machine around the release of a new album is to lock yourself in a sensory deprivation tank.

 

[Diemen]

I don't understand what the fuss is over his comments. They're completely valid - and maybe it's just me but I see no U2-bashing in those comments, just comments on the business side of things. I think I've read on more than one occasion that U2 consciously made a decision to play the marketing-blitz game because they felt rock needed to get back out there in the days of rap and pop. And that's a valid argument too.

OMG! Can there actually be two sides to an issue that aren't diametrically opposed???



NOOOOooooooooooo!!!!!

 

[U2Man]

win butler is a hypocrite.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

^ I was waiting for that... Can you post in one thread without calling someone a hypocrite?

Yes, but usually never at the extreme level that U2 does. I think what Win is saying is that you don't need to ram your music down society's throat in order to sell a few records. If the music is good, people will find out about it without needing it to be delivered to them on a platter. Honestly, the only way to avoid the U2 Hype Machine around the release of a new album is to lock yourself in a sensory deprivation tank.

This argument can (and will ) go back and forth untill the genetically-altered cows come home!

I understand what Win is saying and I agree that the current state of the music business is just that, business.

However your argument doesn't entirely work, because for every shit musical act that is over-hyped to the extreme and rammed down our collective throats, there is 10 other incredibly talented artists who only reach a small audience or worse - never go anywhere because they had no exposure at all...

 

[J_NP]

Is this the same very band that

- Had their song used as the opener of every single show of the V tour around the world
- Played with u2 , Love will tear us apart
- Appeared in the WITS video
- Without mention the lots of great thing u2 said bout them

Yeah , talk about beautiful gratitude

Now I ask , as much as he's not bashin u2 or is pointing out a valid argument , Why didn't he said this before ? Why Exactly Now ? Why didn't he complain about it during the Vertigo Tour ? If he was so upset bout this , He should've come out and said "Hey I don't want this band using my song " .......

 

[Canadiens1131]

I think he's right on and Arcade Fire has every right to be critical of U2's marketing strategy. He's attacking the business and not the music.

OH NOEZ,

they spoke ill of BONOE and YOUTWO.

I can never listen to them again.

I was going to post but these guys have said it for me.

 

[LMP]

Yes, but usually never at the extreme level that U2 does. I think what Win is saying is that you don't need to ram your music down society's throat in order to sell a few records. If the music is good, people will find out about it without needing it to be delivered to them on a platter. Honestly, the only way to avoid the U2 Hype Machine around the release of a new album is to lock yourself in a sensory deprivation tank.

I agree.

It's true, the only way to find new music nowadays is to actually look for them. I found a huge batch of good songs through a torrented playlist, if I hadn't of looked there's no way I would've heard them without someone planting them on my lap.

With bigger acts, they're so easy to get to. Their music will be on iTunes, at stores, on MTV, on the radio, etc... etc...

There's a very limited number of bands in the world that can get into a global market, U2, the Rolling Stones, and Paul McCartney just to name a few. And while the quality of their work still remains at a decent level, bands like The Killers and Coldplay are hyped beyond belief before they actually deliver consistent work. You know what I mean, Verne?

 

[vaz02]

Whats it got to do with Win ? doesnt matter what bands do marketing wise its up to them.

 

[Canadiens1131]

Whats it got to do with Win ? doesnt matter what bands do marketing wise its up to them.

Heaven forbid someone be asked their opinion on a particular topic, perhaps in a one-on-one sit down conversational format....

Oh, right it's called an "interview"

 

[shart1780]

The only thing I care about from that link is that Graham Coxon might get back together with Blur for a final album.

 

[Zoots]

Yes, but usually never at the extreme level that U2 does. I think what Win is saying is that you don't need to ram your music down society's throat in order to sell a few records. If the music is good, people will find out about it without needing it to be delivered to them on a platter. Honestly, the only way to avoid the U2 Hype Machine around the release of a new album is to lock yourself in a sensory deprivation tank.

 

[U2Man]

^ I was waiting for that... Can you post in one thread without calling someone a hypocrite?

no, they're all over the place.

and i'm actually being sincere. i cannot open a music magazine without seeing the words neon bible and arcade fire on several pages. yes, they have been and are being hyped a lot. try to compare that to how much u2 were hyped when they released their second album, october.

when bands grow as big as u2 they naturally turn into money machines, so the marketing thing shouldnt surprise anyone.

the same thing will happen to arcade fire if they keep growing, and win won't be complaining then.

 

[Canadiens1131]

Do you mind if I use Sensory Deprivation Tank as a title for a song?

 

[ntalwar]

Yes, but usually never at the extreme level that U2 does. I think what Win is saying is that you don't need to ram your music down society's throat in order to sell a few records. If the music is good, people will find out about it without needing it to be delivered to them on a platter. Honestly, the only way to avoid the U2 Hype Machine around the release of a new album is to lock yourself in a sensory deprivation tank.

I think a middle ground is good. A band doesn't need to ride around Manhattan on a flatbed truck. On the other hand, some good bands make it big on myspace.com and remain only on myspace.com.

 

[U2DMfan]

no, they're all over the place.

and i'm actually being sincere. i cannot open a music magazine without seeing the words neon bible and arcade fire on several pages. yes, they have been and are being hyped a lot. try to compare that to how much u2 were hyped when they released their second album, october.

when bands grow as big as u2 they naturally turn into money machines, so the marketing thing shouldnt surprise anyone.

the same thing will happen to arcade fire if they keep growing, and win won't be complaining then.

There is a big difference between a music magazine trying to sell copies of their magazines by talking about the hipster band of the day and a band itself trying to forcefeed a public that is probably already overexposed to said band.

The difference being who is trying to sell what.