Why all of the negativity????

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Anyone else think this is exactly what U2 wanted to have happen?

We all know their obsession with being "relevant". They hated the fact that, after the initial (and very brief) buzz, NLOTH Barely registered on anyone's radar and was quickly forgotten.

So maybe they look at the music industry 6 years later, and their age, and the state of rock music in general, and determine there is very little chance they can be "relevant" unless they do something so unconventional and so polarizing, that everyone out there is talking about it...whether for good or bad.

Welcome back to relevancy Bono. Nicely played.
 
I remember an interview Bono did a few years back, in regards to how the band promotes itself. He said there is a poverty of ambition in what rock people do to promote their work he said it was exciting to see your favourite band promoting their work on TV shows. The greatest moments of rock and roll were never off in the corner of the music world.
 
Goo or Bad, U2 is usaully bad now a day, At least they didn't take safe road. That should comfort a lot of here on 'interwebs'
 
Earnie Shavers said:
The funny thing is, the 'biggest' way they could have sent this (on an all positive direction) would have been to just quietly out of nowhere load it onto their iTunes page, for free, and not said a single word. Nothing from U2. Nothing from Apple. Nothing from Universal. Just wait. It would have taken minutes to be discovered. The news goes everywhere. No word from anyone. Is it a mistake? Grab it quickly just in case.And then wait some more. Like, a week more. Let people just take it and listen and wonder wtf is this all about. Would have generated an almost equal level of noise because it's new and unusual and kinda funny - and entirely positive.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Int
Click to expand...

Haha that's a great idea, man! I can't believe that U2's record company geniuses didn't think of that first. Or maybe they did and it didn't make sense in their heads. Makes sense to me though.

ozeeko, I agree with what you're saying in general. I said something similar in another thread. U2 should just get a new album out there without creating a big noise through a partnership with Apple or whatever.

Stop creating hype! The hype will create itself by word-of-mouth between fans.
 
This a real comment from The Verge

TroyRig
Well if Bono wasn’t such a self-righteous ass and they concentrated on their music more than saving the world they might still be popular.
Click to expand...

Like Bono once sang "There is no Army in the world that can fight a ghost"

The problem with U2 is neither music nor how they are selling, distributing the music. The real problem is with what U2 signifies in the current music scene, which is proliferated in niches.

The idea of U2 that stamps kind of an authority in terms of ideas it communicates (we see it as passion though), tells people how things should be... this idea is obnoxious, repulsive and obtrusive for what Bono calls interwebs.

I think choice in front of U2 is very clear if they still like being full time professional musicians...Stop Giving Fcks...stop making them like you more.

Maybe that will give them a chance of getting some puppy love they seek from interwebs.
 
How can these articles still claim the band are no longer popular? Has the 360 tour totally been forgotten now?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Martinski said:
Not sure if this was posted but apperantly U2 is Nickelback now as well.

How U2 became the new Nickelback
Click to expand...

This just has to be the WORST offense to U2 and their fans EVER :no:


I'm having aggressions against people who are like "I love U2 but I hate being forced to listen to their new album". I mean how can you hate a free album from a band you claim to "love"? I think we are experiencing a really inflationary use of the words "hate" and "love" in this whole debate. People should be banned from using these words when talking about U2. They have no idea what they are talking about.
 
You know, if all of this album's negative press also reflects terribly on Apple, it's all for the greater good.

If one of my favorite bands has an indirect part in denting one of my least favorite companies, I've got to say it's been a pretty good year. Fuck Apple. I'm glad they spent $100m to piss off their consumer base. Plus, I got a new U2 album.
 
I'm getting my 6 Plus today LM Would you like me to send you my own personal unboxing video? ;)


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
That article titled "How U2 became the new Nickelback" says absolutely nothing about Nickelback in the article itself. Pretty dumb! :down: The writer seems to be a fan but he/she seems more focused on Bono's antics and stunts than the quality of the music itself. Typical.

When somebody has decided that this band has done nothing good since Achtung Baby, it is very difficult to change their mind. Fuck 'em.
 
BigMacPhisto said:
First, you would have to define "today" as a specific time period. If we're just saying 2014, then you can only compare a single previous year like 1986 or whatever.

My argument is that there's more great music coming out today than in years past. It certainly doesn't mean that the top albums are on par with the top from a certain year three decades ago, but it means there's more branches coming out of the tree if you will, they just might not be as sturdy as the ones in the past. I'd rather be in an era where I can add 50 or 75 great albums a year to my library than, say, 25 from 1984 or whatever. Granted, the top five choices from 1984 probably will slay the top five favorites of mine from 2014, but I'd rather have more than less because great music is great music. Not everything is going to be Pet Sounds.

If you look at this way (and something a lot of listeners of modern music can agree with me on), look at the top 100 albums from 1965 on RateYourMusic and compare them to 2010 or whatever (remembering to take out all the metal recordings since they're overrated to an extreme on there). Obviously, you won't like every title since this is a combined list of thousands of other people, but you'll find that the lists tend to run a little deeper/stronger the further you go down in 2010 whereas 1965 starts with wall-to-wall classics and then enters "meh" territory a lot faster.

But my argument in the first place wasn't that I personally think music is better now than before. My argument is that there's certainly a ton of great music coming out nowadays and to think Bridges to Babylon would even to deserve to be ranked in the Top 1000 of recordings from 1997-onward is an absolutely ludicrous statement. I'm just so sick and tired of people saying modern music sucks when they don't actually go out there and listen to it and only hear a sampling at best of awful modern rock and album rock radio - which now has the most static play lists it has ever had, full of dinosaur acts repeating themselves (Chili Peppers, Foo Fighters) and a lot of untalented newbies. The mainstream music scene is worse than ever before, that's unquestionably true both from a rock perspective and in general, but that doesn't mean there isn't a ton of great stuff bubbling under the radar of those who aren't looking much further than in front of their own noses.

Anyway, my main point is that it's a lot easier to impress people that listen to five albums a year and are now hearing a free record from one of their favorite bands than it is to impress some of us that listen to hundreds of albums of year and have admitted somewhere on Interference that there are dozens (or 50 or 100) that we find better from 2014. Doesn't mean you can't think what you want about the album or absolutely love it (I'm glad for all of you, if not also jealous), but it does mean some of us aren't being needlessly critical when we just find it boring compared to the overload of intriguing ideas we're hearing in the modern day all of the time. To call the new U2 record risk taking in 2014 shows that a lot of people aren't listening to the music of 2014.
Click to expand...

Ok, I won't go further in the discussion of which era of music is better, etc. I wont even continue discussing the lack o respect for the dinosaurs you show.
I wont lie, I don't give music much time anymore. Maybe I would want to spend more time to dig into the real good music of today but I don't know how and even don't have the time. So of course a guy like me wont have access to music that's out of the mainstream. And with the mainstream so rotten like it is today, yes, I don't listen to more than 3 to 5 new albums a year. Now you got my attention.
Tell me the names of the bands and artists you think are great since aprox. 2004 until now. I really, really could use some (good) new stuff. I really cant remember when I bought a new CD. Thanks in advance!!!

Ps.: Keep in mind I am a U2 fan ok?
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
That's actually a really good article with a really bad title... they hardly even discuss Nickelback, let alone say U2 are them now... but they do make a lot of good points.
Click to expand...

The problem is that these are not real articles or probably even the opinion of who wrote them. I see these "click-bait" articles every day on my Facebook. They aren't there to convey a truth. They are there to get people to click on their page.
This is the same "publication" That wrote about the Worst, most overrated albums of the 90's, only to go on and list most of the best albums of the 90's. Just to piss people off to click and comment.
It's stupid and very transparent to anyone who spends even a little time on social media.
 
BoyOnTheHorizon said:
Ok, so music today is better than the music made by?
80's U2, REM, The Police, Michael Jackson, The Smiths, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Queen, Joy Division, New Order, Led Zeppelin, Guns n' roses, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Phil Collins and the Genesis, Peter Gabriel, The Cure, Dire Straits, Metallica, Jesus and Mary Chain? Maybe i am not that ignorant...

Well, I know in the end its all a matter of a taste, but, and this is not a simple opinion of mine, people in general put those legends way above today's artists in terms of musical quality.
So, when I say that I think an album by the great Rolling Stones is better than many of the current albums, i believe I'm not a complete ignorant as you said. Think twice before calling somebody ignorant.
Click to expand...


I don't like everyone of the artist that you listed. But I agree that there is not one on the list that I wouldn't say is better than most of the crap that is out today. There examples, maybe Coldplay, Radiohead Muse. The music today is so disposable.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
K... Did you read it?
Click to expand...

I did. And the article of course does not match the title. Which is why I call it click-bait. It just puts out a horribly negative slur on the band, but then the article goes on to not relate U2 to Nickelback in any way.

Hell, I agree with some of the sentiment, but the one thing that's missing is the fact that they forget to mention that the new album is actually really good, and NOT filled with "middling commercial jingles". And if the author thinks NLOTH was that either, he is so far off base it's hard to take anything else seriously.

I am NO fan of ATYCLB and also Bomb because of the fact that they backtracked in my opinion from their experimentation.

But I just don't think that the band that recorded AB, Zooropa, POP, NLOTH, and now SOI, is ALL about being everything to everyone.
Do you really think that a halfway decent song about hearing the Ramone's for the first time is really a way to gain popularity and radio play? I do not. I think they released it because they liked it and it sort of set the theme for the album.

So I guess my point is that, I find it sort of tacky and lame to put a title on an article that doesn't carry the same sentiment. That to me is just click-bait and conveying something very negative for the hundreds of thousands of people just scrolling through their FB feed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dan_smee
I listened to No Line on the Horizon right through tonight for the first time in about 10 years…
2 3
Replies
83
Views
2K
lazarus
lazarus
D
Looking for the best storyteller of U2 - Garage to Stadius
Replies
0
Views
118
Dave A
D
Achtung_Bebe
IO: It's been a while...
Replies
2
Views
748
mikal
mikal
M
Ticketmaster app
Replies
3
Views
515
rosephile
R
O
Better late than never “they” say…
Replies
1
Views
301
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom