U2 and Salesforce two year plan

[KUEFC09U2]

Does any of this really matter?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Hollow Island]

Of course, the main reason that sort of impression would gain currency is because they've been so inept to date. If they'd jumped on social media earlier in the game, they would have looked ahead of the curve, the old guys who are still able to navigate the modern world. Some older artists have done that successfully, but it's much too late for U2 to get on board, especially after events like the cringey Apple launch or this Salesforce thing that really does look terribly corporate even if you think it could prove beneficial.

You look at someone like Neil Finn, who's been on Twitter for years and posts a sometimes baffling stream of thought; he's obviously an old guy who barely gets social media but he's having fun with it and it's just enhanced his status as the friendly grandfather and elder statesman of Aussie and Kiwi music. U2 doing the same is unimaginable. But then Neil is just recording and touring whatever the hell he likes because he's passionate about music and is genuinely delighted thousands of people still want to show up every night, while U2 have not yet realised that the more you try to chase and pin down this elusive "relevance", the less relevant you are likely to be.

But I'll forgive almost anything if they create an app where you can vote on parts of the setlist, include some exciting rarities, and actually follow through on it.

Thing is, U2 aren't old. They're in their mid-50s. It's not like they're 90. Surely they know how to use twitter and facebook. They just don't want to. It's funny how you mention how they look terribly corporate. I don't think it's just appearance: I think they are. Bono always talks proudly (why, FFS?) about how U2 are a corporation. Well, like all corporations, U2 Inc. has swallowed the people that make it move. I'm sure that Bono would enjoy twitter and be endlessly entertaining and interesting if he allowed himself to be himself, but U2 Corp. won't allow for that. Everything they do (or don't do) has to be mediated by their corporate goals, obligations, ties, and so on. They're too big a business entity to function successfully as artists.

It's not like they do things in secret like Boards of Canada - they want to be in our faces. But rather than communicate in a human way, it's done in a corporate way. In the ways that matter they're as faceless as any other brand. It contradicts the heart of their music.

If social media and the internet was around in the 80s and 90s U2 would have used it better than anyone else.

 

[brooklynmike]

I think a big reason they stay off social media for the most part is it takes away mystery and mystique.

 

[Hawkmoon269]

Well... Bono has invested money on Facebook, what more embracing do we want? I know, I know, that's the corporate way

 

[gvox]

Thing is, U2 aren't old. They're in their mid-50s. It's not like they're 90. Surely they know how to use twitter and facebook. They just don't want to. It's funny how you mention how they look terribly corporate. I don't think it's just appearance: I think they are. Bono always talks proudly (why, FFS?) about how U2 are a corporation. Well, like all corporations, U2 Inc. has swallowed the people that make it move. I'm sure that Bono would enjoy twitter and be endlessly entertaining and interesting if he allowed himself to be himself, but U2 Corp. won't allow for that. Everything they do (or don't do) has to be mediated by their corporate goals, obligations, ties, and so on. They're too big a business entity to function successfully as artists.

It's not like they do things in secret like Boards of Canada - they want to be in our faces. But rather than communicate in a human way, it's done in a corporate way. In the ways that matter they're as faceless as any other brand. It contradicts the heart of their music.

If social media and the internet was around in the 80s and 90s U2 would have used it better than anyone else.

Some interesting points and probably one of your better posts, but in the end...I think Bono - and for that matter all of them - are just too busy. When you're really living, the internet and social media are kindof a boring chore. Someone else's job, etc.

 

[brooklynmike]

Some interesting points and probably one of your better posts, but in the end...I think Bono - and for that matter all of them - are just too busy. When you're really living, the internet and social media are kindof a boring chore. Someone else's job, etc.

? that too.

 

[Hallucination]

People acting like facebook and twitter are the be all end all. Sure it would be cool if U2 had better presence on social media but it's not like thats the reason they aren't relevant. Maybe they should get an instagram account too? I get social media is a good way to market but at the same time that's not gonna make or break U2. Tweeting out pictures and clips of old performances isn't gonna chaneg the world for U2. Also if U2 suddenly did have a social media presence and started tweeting there would be nothing wrong with it. It's hilarious to see the people in this thread talk about how lame it is that U2 don't have social media presence and then in their very next sentence claim how lame and embarrassing it would be if they suddenly did. The only people who would care about the optics of them suddenly having a social media presence would be the dinosaurs posting here. The younger generation sure isn't going to give a shit and be like "oh how lame look at U2 trying to be young" That's just some weird insecurity older U2 fans have.

 

[Hallucination]

Does any of this really matter?

Nope and that's the funny part about it. People like to pretend they are above the corporate side of U2. It's embarrassing for them and for some reason when things like this, that in all liklihood are a necessity when you're as big an organization as U2 is, come up, people like to preach corproate sellouts and fuel that narrative. There's nothing wrong with what they do but certain fans would like you to think there is. The same fans that will bitch about them having corporate spnsorship to fuel the 360 tour yet jump on interference following a show they attended to say how incredible it was, not taken a single second to think how the whole thing was possibly funded.

 

[gareth brown]

Very good point I think. I'd prefer not to go to a gig that's plastered with BlackBerry logos or whatever but in this day and age its pretty much inescapable. They're as much a business/brand than they are a band nowadays and while I always hope it doesn't affect the music they write I understand with tours on the scale u2 usually operate on sponsorship is just a fact of life.

As long as I can just walk in and get to the arena floor without being stopped by someone wanting to ask me questions about my "u2 experience" I'm not fussed.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Nope and that's the funny part about it. People like to pretend they are above the corporate side of U2. It's embarrassing for them and for some reason when things like this, that in all liklihood are a necessity when you're as big an organization as U2 is, come up, people like to preach corproate sellouts and fuel that narrative. There's nothing wrong with what they do but certain fans would like you to think there is. The same fans that will bitch about them having corporate spnsorship to fuel the 360 tour yet jump on interference following a show they attended to say how incredible it was, not taken a single second to think how the whole thing was possibly funded.

yea okay.

no.

i've already stated that i've accepted that U2 are going the corporate route ever since the original iPod release back in 2004. "ohhh we're not taking any money from the commercial!! except for a percentage of every iPod sale and all the extra music we're gonna sell"

i understand full well that, with the state of music being what it is today, in order for U2 to do what they do in a live setting they'll likely need to bring on a corporate sponsor.

i'd just prefer if they didn't go the route of, ya know, working with a sponsor who's main purpose is to help you make more money.

at the end of the day? yea, you're right. i'm going to go to the concert, likely enjoy the fuck out of it, and not give a turkey about who the sponsor was in the moment. if that makes me, or anyone else who isn't thrilled with the selection, a hypocrite? okay. i disagree but fine. whatever floats your boat.

 

[corianderstem]

People acting like facebook and twitter are the be all end all.

Well sure, but when the band talks about wanting to be relevant, you'd think they'd realize that in 2015, social media would probably play into that.

Or, as U2 is a business, I'd say "U2 needs a Social Media Strategy."

 

[popacrobat]

I figured they'd really step their game up (and by they, I mean whomever -- not the band members) regarding social media when they changed managers.