(06-15-2006) U2 on Forbes' Celebrity 100 -- Interference.com*

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

dsmith2904

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Apr 17, 2002
Messages
12,290
Location
Just keep me where the light is
U2 on Forbes' Celebrity 100

U2 ranked fourth on Forbes magazine's Celebrity 100, a listing of the most powerful celebrities. The rankings, according to Forbes, are generated using the following process:

To generate the list, we used a combination of factors including income, Web references as calculated by Google, press clips as compiled by Lexis/Nexis, TV/radio mentions from Factiva and the number of times a celebrity's face has appeared on the cover of 26 major consumer magazines. Earnings estimates are for June 2005 to June 2006 and are dollars earned solely from entertainment income. Management, agent and attorney fees have not been deducted.

Of the band, the magazine writes:

The Irish rockers made more money in 2005 than any other musicians on the planet. Their album "How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb" debuted at No. 1 on the U.S. and U.K. charts last year and earned five Grammys, including one for Album of the Year. But U2's prominent position on the Celebrity 100 list is owed largely to the media exposure of front man Bono, who has become an influential activist on behalf of AIDS awareness and debt relief in Africa. He has enjoyed audiences with such world leaders as George W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and the late Pope John Paul II, as well as a slew of other global leaders, and has pressed them to increase aid to Africa. Last year Bono, who is rarely photographed without his trademark sunglasses, was even nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.


U2, who Forbes estimates took in $110 million, ranked behind list-topper Tom Cruise, The Rolling Stones and Oprah Winfrey. The band wasn't on last year's list.

For more on the Celebrity 100, click here.
 
So if U2 "made more money in 2005 than any other musicians on the planet", and Bono (as we know) wields considerable political influence, then why are the Stones ranked higher than they are? (And the Forbes note makes it sound as if Bono had never been nominated for a Nobel before last year. It's actually his fourth time, I believe.)

:shrug: Lists are stupid.

And I'm soooo sick of the "trademark sunglasses" line.
 
Very cool recognition ... and very merited.

Congratulations U2. :dancing:
 
That $110 million income estimate seems way too low, based on the huge tour gross for last year.
 
Back
Top Bottom