How Should U2 Respond To The Tsunami Disaster?

[jick]

They didn't go out of their way to schedule their tour around what happened on Sept. 11 - it happened and they made a yes/no decision.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they added extra US dates to their post 9/11 leg of the Elevation Tour.

Cheers,

J

 

[starsgoblue]

You are right there, Jick. They did add extra dates...the tickets for the show I went to did go onsale after 9/11 and Bono made mention of it during the concert too. BUT I am sure many factors went into that decision and it wasn't for that one reason alone....most likely the fact that the Elevation Tour was very successful and there was a legit demand for tickets.....

 

[Liesje]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they added extra US dates to their post 9/11 leg of the Elevation Tour.

Probably, I honestly wouldn't know. I was so caught up with what happened then, I wasn't paying any attention to what U2 were doing. I was helping with the National Relief Network and Red Cross in New Jersey and Manhattan about a month after it happened - I'm pretty sure I was in Manhattan the same week U2 were playing at the Garden - so I wasn't really thinking about U2 then even though they were so close.

 

[doctorwho]

Several things:

1) The third leg of the Elevation tour was planned well in advance of 9/11. Not once did I hear any marketing claim it was a "healing" experience. And Bono used the "church" aspect of the concert well before 9/11. If extra shows were added, it was due to demand - this happens at all points of a tour (see the extra show added in Ireland), not just because of 9/11.

2) If you feel people are twisting your words, then you should be more careful at how you phrase your words. I find most of your posts highly amusing as you often throw in a "wrench" to our collective thinking. But now you are suggesting you are very innocent - hardly. To say things like U2 "added extra shows" suggests they did this only to make $$ off of 9/11. That is not true at all. But your words are implying it and your crying "innocent" is fool-hardy at best.

3) I'm not sure U2 or anyone else needs to have a concert for this event. Americans are actually very generous people. We give a lot. I'm not talking about the government, I'm talking about the average Joe/Josephine. Because the U.S. is such a melting pot of cultures, there are people who can relate to any tragedy. For example, I'm sure we all know people or have friends who are from that part of the world. Hence our generosity is high. A special concert may not be needed.

4) If a group decides to hold a concert, similar to what was done for 9/11, that's fantastic. Any extra $$ raised is a good thing. If U2 are involved, even better. However, U2 should NOT be the ones to launch such a project.

5) Rather than focusing on U2 or any individual donations, why don't you ask why the Bush administration is being ridiculously cheap in its donations?!?!?! Some U.S. companies have donated more than the U.S. government. We might have a generation of people in that part of the world growing up to hate the U.S. because they think we are cheap - which isn't true at all (see point 3 above) - but the Bush administration is coming off this way. To spend billions of $$ on a war, but then to donate in the mere millions for a natural disaster that has claimed over 100,000 lives is asinine. Bush needs to show the world the U.S. cares, and his administration should be leading the charge, not doing a "survey" and a "let's properly assess the situation" campaign.

 

[Lisa71]

I am seriously not trying to be mean to you, Jick. I don't know you as a person and I haven't been here at this forum with an regularity before last the few months. I do remember when you were on Wire, though. I think why people "Twist" your words is because you always seem to be trying to tick people off. I can't believe that you don't understand why people would be upset by how you say things. You get people all in an uproar and never seem to care that you do. So, that's why so many people label you a troll. Perhaps you aren't, but I don't see how after ALL these years (at least 7 or 8) you can still not get why people get upset by what you say. I try to ignore you most of the time becuase you made my blood boil many times over on WIRE but this is unbelievable that you would say some of the things you are saying about U2 at a time like this. One of my best friends lost her good friend in Sri Lanka. She was a good and caring person and all I can think about are the 100,000 people and the millions more that have no where to go. I'm sure U2 are the kind of people that have given money for this. They seem to be, but to suggest that it means money in their pockets. That's too much for me to take at this point. If you must continue on with your posts, then so be it but leave this disaster out of it, please.

 

[Yahweh]

The 3rd leg had nothing to do with 9/11 it just happened to fall on dates that coinsided with it.

U2 doesnt have to do much to respond to the disaster in my mind, they arent politicians, although they probably will make a statement about this tragic event it isnt necessary that they do....and if they do make a statement the short sighted people of the world would call them pompus for trying to do something or say something as they always do.

 

[indra]

Im buggered if I know either. But it happens a lot of your posts. It does seem to be primarily USA people who get offended. Theres a number of Australians who are not offended by your posts, we have discussed it.

Thats what I meant by cultural differences. Not that Im saying all USA people are offended by you, just most of the people who are offended are from the USA.

The good old US of A has a disproportionate number of pricks -- that's why.

 

[beli]

The good old US of A has a disproportionate number of pricks -- that's why.

LOL. Thats not what I meant. Australia has its share too. I just meant somethings dont translate well across countries. Its actually something I have been pondering on a broader level. Perhaps I will start an fym thread about it... hhmmmm...

 

[indra]

LOL. Thats not what I meant. Australia has its share too. I just meant somethings dont translate well across countries. Its actually something I have been pondering on a broader level. Perhaps I will start an fym thread about it... hhmmmm...

Ah. You might not have meant it, but I did.


And before y'all start whining about me bashing "Americans," I am one, so I can comment on what I see here.

 

[U2girl]

Have U2 ever done a concert in Africa? I don't think so too.

From u2setlists.com:

03/16/1998 Greenpoint Stadium - Cape Town, South Africa
Intro (Pop Muzik), Mofo, I Will Follow, Gone, Even Better Than the Real Thing, Last Night On Earth, Until the End of the World, New Year's Day, Pride (In The Name Of Love), I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Stand By Me, Bad, Staring at the Sun, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Bullet the Blue Sky, Please, Where The Streets Have No Name, Lemon (taped mix), Discothèque, If You Wear That Velvet Dress, With or Without You
encores: Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me, Mysterious Ways, One


03/21/1998 Johannesburg Stadium - Johannesburg, South Africa
Intro (Pop Muzik), Mofo, I Will Follow, Gone, Even Better Than the Real Thing, Last Night On Earth, Until the End of the World, New Year's Day, Pride (In The Name Of Love), I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Stand By Me, All I Want Is You, Staring at the Sun, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Bullet the Blue Sky, Please, Where The Streets Have No Name, Lemon (taped mix), Discothèque, If You Wear That Velvet Dress, With or Without You
encores: Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me, Mysterious Ways, One, 40

They DID play in Africa before.

I find your constant 9/11 money-making U2 comments horrible.
As far as I know, U2 always had the plans to play the second leg - because they usually do.

If there will be a charity concert for Asia - wherever it will take place, of course U2 may very well be playing.
Whether they will go to Asia on their tour(s), I don't know.
But I don't think your argument that the band would not do it because there isn't a market holds any water. Asia is a huge music market, it only needs to open up more to musicians. Red hot chili peppers played in Russia, Rolling Stones played in China.

 

[jick]

I'm sure U2 are the kind of people that have given money for this. They seem to be, but to suggest that it means money in their pockets. That's too much for me to take at this point. If you must continue on with your posts, then so be it but leave this disaster out of it, please.

I am not sure if U2 have given money but I am certain they are the kind who would help in whatever way they can. The precise point of this thread was to ask what kind of involvement or in what kind of capacity would U2 help the disaster victims. If you look at my original questions I posed, they read:

-What involvement do you expect U2 to have in aid for the Asian Tsunami Disaster?

-Should U2 take a leadership role among musicians of our generation to help? Or should musicians even help at all?

So I don't get all these comments about my implying that U2 are out to make money out of this disaster. Please do not twist my points. I would rank that equivalent or even worse than personal attacks because they take the form of innocent and subtle character assasination.

I started the post because I am an Asian. I have been to Thailand aso. It is out of concern for the disaster and my fandom for U2 that I am trying to link the two and theorize in what ways U2 can help my fellow Asians cope with this tragedy.

Cheers,

J

 

[jick]

From u2setlists.com:

03/16/1998 Greenpoint Stadium - Cape Town, South Africa
Intro (Pop Muzik), Mofo, I Will Follow, Gone, Even Better Than the Real Thing, Last Night On Earth, Until the End of the World, New Year's Day, Pride (In The Name Of Love), I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Stand By Me, Bad, Staring at the Sun, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Bullet the Blue Sky, Please, Where The Streets Have No Name, Lemon (taped mix), Discothèque, If You Wear That Velvet Dress, With or Without You
encores: Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me, Mysterious Ways, One


03/21/1998 Johannesburg Stadium - Johannesburg, South Africa
Intro (Pop Muzik), Mofo, I Will Follow, Gone, Even Better Than the Real Thing, Last Night On Earth, Until the End of the World, New Year's Day, Pride (In The Name Of Love), I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For, Stand By Me, All I Want Is You, Staring at the Sun, Sunday Bloody Sunday, Bullet the Blue Sky, Please, Where The Streets Have No Name, Lemon (taped mix), Discothèque, If You Wear That Velvet Dress, With or Without You
encores: Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me, Mysterious Ways, One, 40

They DID play in Africa before.

Thanks for the info. I just remembered I even have Johanesburg on vid.

Cheers,

J

 

[JOFO]

it's incredible that in a thread regarding this disaster people are arguing the same bullshit they always do; "jick drops a bomb then leaves", "americans are pricks", blah blah.

what a bunch of

shame.

 

[Liesje]

It is out of concern for the disaster and my fandom for U2 that I am trying to link the two and theorize in what ways U2 can help my fellow Asians cope with this tragedy.

Well, that's certainly interesting considering before all you were posting about was whether U2 though Asia would be high profile enough or where the best market was for making the most money....you weren't saying anything about the band simply wanted to help those in need. You twist your own words; you post something and then later say something totally different or contradictory.

 

[starsgoblue]

It is out of concern for the disaster and my fandom for U2 that I am trying to link the two and theorize in what ways U2 can help my fellow Asians cope with this tragedy.

I'd personally would spend more time worrying about what I could do to help Asians cope with the tragedy rather than worrying about what a rock band is going to do about it.

 

[bonosleftone]

U2 got beaten to the punch thankfully. Linkin Park have taken the role as "music" ambassadors to the Tsunami disaster...

http://www.nme.com/news/110939.htm

 

[jick]

U2 got beaten to the punch thankfully. Linkin Park have taken the role as "music" ambassadors to the Tsunami disaster...

http://www.nme.com/news/110939.htm

I hope U2 will sign up to Linkin Park's cause. It is a very noble thing for Linkin Park to do and I hope U2 set their egos aside (perhaps they have issues playing second fiddle to Linkin Park) and join in on the cause.

Cheers,

J

 

[starsgoblue]

...and I hope U2 set their egos aside (perhaps they have issues playing second fiddle to Linkin Park) and join in on the cause.

Oh honestly now!

 

[financeguy]

There are plenty of historical examples of U2 "setting their egos aside" in the interests of charitable events.

 

[LyricalDrug]

In the United States, Bush has been widely criticized for not making a statement publicly after the disaster, to show empathy, and to lead the relief efforts. And it's true -- at first the US only offered $35 million, and then quickly changed and offered $350 million after everyone accused the White House of being stingy.

Bush really screwed up, which is embarrassing, frankly. How hard is it to flub looking charitable?! Bill and Hillary Clinton announced today that they're making a large personal donation, and then they appeared at a Buddhist temple in NYC that has a largely Indonesian congregation, to show their condolences. Why Bush didn't do something like this, and instead just stayed on vacation in Texas, is beyond me.

The lyrics from "Crumbs from Your Table" have never sounded more appropriate!

 

[yimou]

I hope U2 will sign up to Linkin Park's cause. It is a very noble thing for Linkin Park to do and I hope U2 set their egos aside (perhaps they have issues playing second fiddle to Linkin Park) and join in on the cause.

Cheers,

J

Jick,, Why not just say you hope U2 will join in on the cause ???

When you add that you hope U2 can set their egos aside or maybe have issues with playing second fiddle,, then you are setting a negative and rather disrespectful tone. This is why it is hard to take your posts serious at times.
Your initial questions had alot of meaning, and i thought it was seriously meant from your side. But now it just seems like you wont accept anything else than U2 doing something in public. And if you could have your way, then it would probarly be a concert in your backyard.... Set U2 aside, and take notice in how many ordinary non-rockstars that really wanna help..
I really dont wanna sound like a total prick towards you.

Man,, This thread sucks big time, and its your own fault Jick.

 

[Dalton]

I am not sure why you all let Jick work you up. the way I see it there are only two ways to read him and his posts:


1. he is here to wind you up by posting nonsense in which case the best thing to do is to ignore him and he will go away or..

2. he is socially retarded and doesn't know whats going on in which case we should all have compassion on him and try to help.

Either way arguing with him does little good.

 

[mofo82]

What good is the image of a rock band helping the relief effort really going to do for one person? Open your eyes and ears and realize there is a much larger effort being put forth by millions of people who don't share the spotlight and wouldn't want to anyways. Plus, I will go out on a limb and say the world is quite aware of this catastrophe. Personal gratification to see a band perform some hit songs to aid a serious problem just doesn't hit the heart of the problem- IT IS AN AID, a means to the end. Anyways, let the band make that decision- if they want to do a concert, they will, but come on, it needs some valid reasons to be carried out. That's what makes an even like Live Aid so special. The artists at that moment in time wanted to and felt the need to perform that way.

U2 is not as big or as important as what is taking place in the affected countries. They just aren't. This is way too big and too many people are suffering. Hell, I bet they'd say the same thing, knowing how humble they can be when a truly painful situation arises. Shift the attention away from the band right now In my mind, it is SO MUCH MORE AMAZING to see the people who are there NOW in aid and not giving up on themselves in such a desparate time.

And in regards to U2's involvement in crisis situations- 9/11 versus the tsunami, I'd have to say the American culture allows for entertainment to play its role in the healing process. I can't say that Asian culture would accept entertainment as a way to bring healing- I am not that familiar with foreign cultures. Another great difference, a HUGE DIFFERENCE between 9/11 and the tsunami is that people directly and deliberately inflicted pain and torture on other people with 9/11. There was at the time and still is a great lack of trust between foreign peoples, ill feelings about going out in public in fear of being attacked by creatures of our own species. On the complete other end of the spectrum, you have a natural disaster that just happened (granted environmental changes and industrialization might play into the way the earth reacts). U2 built up people's moral against an invisible enemy and their post 9/11 shows brought people out with one another to rebuild trust. There is no need to build trust with mother nature through a rock concert. If the Asian peoples survive this catastrophe without great risks of disease lingering for years, maybe then a concert would be fitting, because it could be a unifying force, building trust in individuals to go out again and not fear nature's wrath.

 

[jick]

What good is the image of a rock band helping the relief effort really going to do for one person? Open your eyes and ears and realize there is a much larger effort being put forth by millions of people who don't share the spotlight and wouldn't want to anyways. Plus, I will go out on a limb and say the world is quite aware of this catastrophe. Personal gratification to see a band perform some hit songs to aid a serious problem just doesn't hit the heart of the problem- IT IS AN AID, a means to the end. Anyways, let the band make that decision- if they want to do a concert, they will, but come on, it needs some valid reasons to be carried out. That's what makes an even like Live Aid so special. The artists at that moment in time wanted to and felt the need to perform that way.

U2 is not as big or as important as what is taking place in the affected countries. They just aren't. This is way too big and too many people are suffering. Hell, I bet they'd say the same thing, knowing how humble they can be when a truly painful situation arises. Shift the attention away from the band right now In my mind, it is SO MUCH MORE AMAZING to see the people who are there NOW in aid and not giving up on themselves in such a desparate time.

And in regards to U2's involvement in crisis situations- 9/11 versus the tsunami, I'd have to say the American culture allows for entertainment to play its role in the healing process. I can't say that Asian culture would accept entertainment as a way to bring healing- I am not that familiar with foreign cultures. Another great difference, a HUGE DIFFERENCE between 9/11 and the tsunami is that people directly and deliberately inflicted pain and torture on other people with 9/11. There was at the time and still is a great lack of trust between foreign peoples, ill feelings about going out in public in fear of being attacked by creatures of our own species. On the complete other end of the spectrum, you have a natural disaster that just happened (granted environmental changes and industrialization might play into the way the earth reacts). U2 built up people's moral against an invisible enemy and their post 9/11 shows brought people out with one another to rebuild trust. There is no need to build trust with mother nature through a rock concert. If the Asian peoples survive this catastrophe without great risks of disease lingering for years, maybe then a concert would be fitting, because it could be a unifying force, building trust in individuals to go out again and not fear nature's wrath.

So here are the rich and capable Americans (economy-wise of course), their two taller buildings get hit by a plane and some 6,000 (10,000?) people die and then there are tribute concerts everywhere to raise money (Tribute To Heroes, Concert For NYC, etc.). That is no problem at all. No matter how great your economy is, in a crisis like that money is always welcome.

But now here are poor countries in Asia, with a death toll pushing 150,000 - don't you think they'd need even more money than America? So whatever source, whatever means - anything to raise money would be great. And there is no greater way for musicians to raise money than through benefit gigs. It's more an issue of needing the cash, so the distinction between terrorist attack and natural calamity doesn't really matter.

The lingering effects of the disaster could be similar to Africa (God forbid), but the should stop musicians from making benefit singles and concerts. If U2 makes a silent donation, they are just going to use their own money. I don't know how much U2 can give -- maybe in the tens or hundreds of thousands, but with a benefit gig U2 can raise millions for the cause. There is more reach, more exposure and more awareness. It will surely help the victims. They need anything they can get in aid.

I totally disagree about your assesment of what a benefit concert should be. A benefit concert wouldn't be about building trust, but about building awareness that there is a disaster and that people can help (perhaps it will be televised with UNICEF phones lines flashed on the screen). Check out the awareness Live Aid brought to Africa, because of that Bono did the long term help for debt relief for Africa so the good there lingered. And Africa's problems are closer to Asia's current problems than they are to the 9/11 event.

Cheers,

J

 

[lauren430]

The last thing U2 needs to do is thrust themselves into the forefront of this disaster. That could easily be interpreted, rightly or wrongly, as added publicity to sell records. Lay low.

The essence of character is doing the right thing when no one is looking. U2 should do whatever they do for this cause, collectively or individually, on a private basis.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Lisa71]

The benefits for 9/11 happened months after the attacks. Give people time to do stuff. U2 may well participate in one but I don't think they have to be in charge of organizing it. I'm sure it will be addressed at some point. It just happened and I don't think rock stars rushing over to asia to do a concert is going to do any good right now.

To answer the orginial questions U2 should respond however they want to. But whatever way they do choose to will be critized I'm sure!

 

[indra]

I just want to note that when I first came across this site one of the first posts I read was one of Jick's. You know what my thought was? Aha! An intelligent poster.

I always enjoy his threads because they are interesting, even if I don't always agree with his views. I've found nothing offensive in his posts in this thread, and can't quite figure out what others have.

 

[indra]

The benefits for 9/11 happened months after the attacks. Give people time to do stuff.

The first televised music performances/benefit happened within days of the attacks(I'm pretty sure less than a week later) , not months afterward.

 

[Liesje]

This disaster has nothing to do with September 11, 2001. The events are in no way related so it's not even worth comparing the two.

I don't think it's fair to be criticizing U2 b/c they haven't announced plans to put on a grand scale benefit concert yet. The effects of this disaster will last years and years and if anything, IMO, monetary aid will be needed more and more farther down the road because people will forget about the tragedy and stop donating once the media moves on to it's next pet disaster.

 

[indra]

This disaster has nothing to do with September 11, 2001. The events are in no way related so it's not even worth comparing the two.

I don't think it's fair to be criticizing U2 b/c they haven't announced plans to put on a grand scale benefit concert yet. The effects of this disaster will last years and years and if anything, IMO, monetary aid will be needed more and more farther down the road because people will forget about the tragedy and stop donating once the media moves on to it's next pet disaster.

Has anyone criticised them? Asking if they should do it isn't the same as criticising.