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
Hollow Island said:
It's not that I care that people are pissed off at U2. I didn't really understand the problem, and I think it's overblown, but they can be angry about whatever they want. I just don't like that a good piece of art is being overshadowed by how it's delivered. I was annoyed by all the talk about In Rainbows being free, too.

But the reason I posed the twatter evidence here is because you and Headache were rather condescendingly saying that nobody was angry at U2 any more. Which is demonstrably false. I personally hope it stays this way because it might lessen demand for concert tickets, though that's unlikely because 33 million people listened to the album, and it's U2...they'd sell out the Sun if there were gigs up there.
Click to expand...


A 14 year old girl who pays no attention to anything just discovered that there was an album by a band she doesn't know on her iPhone and she finds it to be icky, so she typed a 30 word tweet about it.

Her life is over, she is ruined forever.

Your point is proven. Congratulations.
 
mattverhalen said:
Just listened to the album again and realized (again) how much I love it. It's not the same animal as some of my past favorites (AB, Pop (!)), but it is its own thing and I enjoy it on its own terms. Reality is, the Apple deal was a big blunder from a PR perspective, and I can understand people not wanting unwanted music inserted into their collection or clogging up their limited phone space (even though I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread). Both Apple and the band must have been suffering from some tunnel-vision on this one. I just hope the music wins out in the end because it's great. I think it will, at least as far as the fans are concerned.

Interesting that Bono will be on KROQ -- anyone know if KROQ is playing the single or anything else from the album ?
Click to expand...


I agree that the music is what is important, but it seems that the reviews focus more on the supposed PR blunder more than the album itself. After multiple listenings, I am liking this album more.
 
david said:
I find incredible hypocrisy in the people on Instagram who I see complain via Instagram about invasion of privacy because a U2 album appeared in their iTunes.. As I scroll through their non private Instagram and view pictures of literally every aspect of their life that they photograph and have no problem sharing online.
Click to expand...


You hit the nail right on the head!!!
 
Nick66 said:
Yeah but everyone already knows that.

The question is not if people are pissed at U2...the question is why do you care?
Click to expand...


Tommy WM said:
Paul McCartney - White Album comment - YouTube

Just pretend it's Bono speaking and he's referring to SOI.

'It's great, it's free, it's U2's bloody Songs of Innocence...Shut up!'
Click to expand...
:up:

I like this quote from Salon:
"Bono has spent the last three and a half decades trying to get everyone to like him, but the greatest PR coup he could ever pull is to finally stop caring."

Not speaking for Bono, of course, and deep down I know he may be hurt by some of the backlash but he/U2 and management didn't get where they are by listening to wanna be music critics and haters.
They have and are going to do whatever the fuck they please.

How U2 became the most hated band in America - Salon.com
 
Mrs. Garrison said:
So Salon says that people really hate U2, and that SOI might be their last album, yet TIME states that people still really, really like U2. Now im confused. What ever do i do?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGNdnlCbfMs
Click to expand...

I'm afraid there can only be one option:

Chris-morris-jumps-out-window-o.gif
 
I can't help but agree with most of what is said in that Salon piece.

While I'm not crying myself to sleep at night wondering why people hate U2 (it's pretty obvious why)...part of me DOES selfishly desire to see a change in their approach to the music business, and i'm not talking about another technologically innovative future release stunt, I'm talking about their attitude.

I know,
"fuck the haters, as long as the music's good, they could care less, they know what was going to happen, blah blah etc. etc"

However....I personally selfishly desire to see them turn down the volume on the next album. Not the music volume. I mean the volume of the hype. I would love to just have them release a song, then an album, or an album all at once, but please...do away with the media circus. Don't do a commercial. Don't play a huge sporting event. Don't take over late night talk shows. Don't open the Grammies. Don't do anything besides maybe have a video, a video that doesn't feature the band. Keep it modest. Keep it about the music.

Oh, and also...Bono grows his hair out and takes off the shades. Edge shaves and wears a new hat. Larry and Adam can keep doing their thing.

Yes, this is the solution. Who's with me?? :D
 
U2 should not change anything. They should go on the way they want and do what they want instead of trying too hard to fit into people's concepts. No matter what they do, there will always be a lot of people (and media) out there who hate them. U2 should remain true to themselves and follow their vision. If they radically changed their attitude at this point in their career, it would make them look even more pathetic and insincere. Same goes for their looks.

That Salon article is an exaggerated piece of crap, seriously. Some media make it sound as if there's no greater evil in the world today than U2 and a free album distributed by Apple. People need a reality check. All of this has become so pathetic. Let's wait and see the massive "hate" for the band when they're going on tour again.
 
last unicorn said:
U2 should not change anything. They should go on the way they want and do what they want instead of trying too hard to fit into people's concepts. No matter what they do, there will always be a lot of people (and media) out there who hate them. U2 should remain true to themselves and follow their vision. If they radically changed their attitude at this point in their career, it would make them look even more pathetic and insincere. Same goes for their looks.

That Salon article is an exaggerated piece of crap, seriously. Some media make it sound as if there's no greater evil in the world today than U2 and a free album distributed by Apple. People need a reality check. All of this has become so pathetic. Let's wait and see the massive "hate" for the band when they're going on tour again.
Click to expand...

Of course there will be people who always hate them. I'm suggesting a theory that would potentially make less people hate them. Excuse me, but I'm just masturbating here with what I think U2 should do. None of us will ever make U2 do anything. But saying U2 shouldn't change anything is kind of preposterous considering some of the best moves they've made were complete 180's. I think their "biggest band on the planet" phase is way past the point of staleness; a quieter approach could work wonders for the band (assuming that any future material would be strong). What's your suggestion? Doing another loud advertisement? Or something different? Or we could all just say "U2 will do what they want", feel good about stating the obvious powerlessness we all have, and not have an opinion on anything.
 
ozeeko said:
Of course there will be people who always hate them. I'm suggesting a theory that would potentially make less people hate them. Excuse me, but I'm just masturbating here with what I think U2 should do. None of us will ever make U2 do anything. But saying U2 shouldn't change anything is kind of preposterous considering some of the best moves they've made were complete 180's. I think their "biggest band on the planet" phase is way past the point of staleness; a quieter approach could work wonders for the band (assuming that any future material would be strong). What's your suggestion? Doing another loud advertisement? Or something different? Or we could all just say "U2 will do what they want", feel good about stating the obvious powerlessness we all have, and not have an opinion on anything.
Click to expand...


They kept everything under wraps, were able to give us a free album (and they got paid for it), we were able to listen to the whole album with "virgin" ears... That is pretty different from past releases, don't tell me that you really believed before that a band like u2 was gonna do that?
 
Hawkmoon269 said:
They kept everything under wraps, were able to give us a free album (and they got paid for it), we were able to listen to the whole album "virgin" ears... That is pretty different from past releases, don't tell me that you really believed before that a band like u2 was gonna do that?
Click to expand...

The execution of it was very very U2. If they had just put the album online and said it's there if you want to go get it, different story. How they went about it though did not help their "U2 (Bono) are (is an) Egomaniac(s)" media problem or "U2 (Bono) are (Is a) Corporate Sellout(s)" problem.
 
No matter what they do, there will always be a lot of people (and media) out there who hate them. U2 should remain true to themselves and follow their vision.
Click to expand...
:up:
They have always done this and it's worked out so horribly for them, hasn't it? I just wonder what they could have done differently to be more popular, relevant or loved. Not to mention, rich. Maybe they should have remained poor and struggling to become more accepted in the music business.

That Salon article is an exaggerated piece of crap, seriously. Some media make it sound as if there's no greater evil in the world today than U2 and a free album distributed by Apple.
Click to expand...
:up:
That article is shared from another online site, the Daily Dot?? Just another opinion from some feature writer who thinks they have U2 and the music business all figured out.
With that said, the kind of vitriol U2 have always garnered is usually only reserved for politicians/heads of state's and of course my President, of course. lol You're spot on about one thing, it is totally pathetic. In the end, I may hate some of the politics of the music business but I'll just continue to love the music.
 
Hawkmoon269 said:
If they did that then they would be hated because Radiohead did it first. Looks like it is a no win for them
Click to expand...

Maybe they'd be called out for not being original but it would've paled in comparison to the U2 SPAMMED MY IPOD AND RUINED MY LIFE! backlash.

Maybe they should change their name back to The Hype.
 
I don't think Bono is too worried. From the KROQ interview:

“The punk rock thing to do is annoy people and get in their faces,” he said. “If people have a problem with the way we released the album, I’m sure they’ve read about it online.”
 
TheEnd said:
I don't think Bono is too worried. From the KROQ interview:

“The punk rock thing to do is annoy people and get in their faces,” he said. “If people have a problem with the way we released the album, I’m sure they’ve read about it online.”
Click to expand...
:applaud:
 
TheEnd said:
“The punk rock thing to do is annoy people and get in their faces,” he said. “If people have a problem with the way we released the album, I’m sure they’ve read about it online.”
Click to expand...

LOL. Only Bono could make partnering with one of the world's biggest corporations "punk rock".

Way to turn it around Mr. Hewson. I swear if you weren't a rock star you'd have an amazing career as a salesman or PR flack. :)
 
TheEnd said:
I don't think Bono is too worried. From the KROQ interview:

“The punk rock thing to do is annoy people and get in their faces,” he said. “If people have a problem with the way we released the album, I’m sure they’ve read about it online.”
Click to expand...

Getting paid a shitload of money from apple to force your product on people who didn't ask for it doesn't really seem like punk-rock.

But that's just my opinion.
 
Again, I have to say it, those of you who are twerked out by the release and the ridiculous..."I got a free U2 album, and now my life is screwed"...backlash need to step back and understand that, like it or not, U2 are back and BIGGER than ever. Even if the hipsters and kiddies aren't excited...:rolleyes:

There is a bigger picture going on here, and the Time Mag piece starts to offer a tiny bit of insight to what's going on. The tour will be HUGE...in terms of excitement and attendance. SOI is a VERY GOOD album...SOE will be here sooner than later...U2 wants to save the world (still)...and no matter what they are not going to compromise their beliefs or principles.

They are being true to who they are and what they want...and they'll get it, even if some people are annoyed...what did you expect?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
I'm selling a collection of early U2 7-inch vinyl records
Replies
9
Views
2K
Achtung Ya'll
A
A
Hello!
Replies
1
Views
405
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
O
New to U2 - Would like to start collection.
Replies
4
Views
486
Registered Dude
Registered Dude
dan_smee
I listened to No Line on the Horizon right through tonight for the first time in about 10 years…
2 3
Replies
84
Views
5K
melon
melon
P
Info on a U2 vinyl boot?
Replies
0
Views
520
Packetofbensons
P

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom