any of you "ONE" peeps able to explain this?

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
mama cass

mama cass

Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
6,293
Bono: the celebrity who just keeps giving | Life and style | The Guardian

just read this, and, have to say, find it pretty disturbing... especially this bit...

But let's not be facetious. Naturally, naturally, the business of activism is more complicated than that, and indeed, ONE has since been forced to remind confused civilians that it is an advocacy organisation and not a grant-making organisation. This became necessary after the New York Post revealed that in 2008, the most recent year for which tax records are available, ONE took $14,993,873 in donations from philanthropists, of which a thrifty $184,732 was distributed to charity. More than $8m was spent on executive and employee salaries
Click to expand...

wonder if the donations were perhaps channeled into the Global Fund and given to charity that way rather than thru One itself?

don't look so great though...
 
I have to say that a lot of the intelligent criticism (i.e., those with actual points, rather than just whining about Bono) I hear about the various campaigns make very good points.

Of course this stuff is rarely very black and white, and there are probably some amount of "necessary evils," but reading it, all I could do was kind of shrug and think "Not bad points."

I do personally find it hard to criticize people who, as far as I can tell, are really trying to make a difference in the world. But that doesn't mean their methods shouldn't be questioned.

And the article gets points for at least identifying the whole "clap hands" story as an urban myth. ;)
 
yeah, i'm absolutely not questioning B's motives and intention and heart and everything... but those figures there were a bit scary...

i've also heard quite a bit of criticism coming from pretty established and credible NGOs as well... often hard to argue with too lol...

oh well...
 
The article is unnecessarily snide, but the part of it that I completely concur with -- and I think I wrote something about this maybe last week -- is here:

"I hate to break it to you, kids, but philanthropy is no longer its own reward. How else to explain the rash of gala nights to honour celebrity humanitarians, which one can't help feeling fosters the perception that no entertainer is capable of a truly selfless good deed?"

This is exactly why I, personally, think it's a mistake for people like Bono (i.e., celebrities) to head, chair, accept awards on behalf of, or pose on magazine covers for major humanitarian and/or charitable organizations. Although the entertainers can easily justify their actions by arguing that they're using their celebrity currency to raise awareness of said organizations (which they are), the larger and -- so I think -- more important response from the general public is to eventually infer that the celebrities are the point of the organization (there is also the inevitable sniping that the celebrities are doing it for their own benefit, but that is entirely irrelevant anyway). To use a comparable example, the main criticism of Live Aid, and indeed of 1980s' celebrity culture in general, was that events with a purpose were actually more about the celebrities than about the event. Bono himself thought this way in the aftermath of Live Aid, feeling that the whole thing might have been a sham (he soon reversed his opinion, but I think his initial instincts were actually correct).

Thus, in the present, the danger is that the celebrity aspect overwhelms the organization itself, which I think is what has now happened to the "ONE" campaign. And this celebrity affiliation can come to have a negative impact on the otherwise noble organization.

Finally, I've said before and I'll say it again -- U2's moving part (yeah, I know, it's only part) of their tax base overseas was a terrible move, and one to which they deserve to be held accountable. I lost some respect for their organization with that move.

None of this is to criticize Bono personally -- he clearly works hard and has good intentions. But I think celebrities do less damage and, eventually, more good if they lend their names to supporting noble organizations -- for example as U2 did Amnesty International in the 80s -- rather then heading or leading (or, the equivalent, which is appearing to head or lead) those organizations.

Just my opinion.
 
yeah the "Lost in Showbiz" blog is often written in that kind of sneering style, and i see thru that... just the figures really i find a bit shocking...

i agree with you about the U2 tax thing... think it had very damaging repercussions on B's humanitarian work... even if it was out of his hands personally it's always going to come back round and bite him on the a s s every now and then lol :D
 
Exactly. While I do still get kind of knee-jerky about the tax thing (i.e., it wasn't their entire business that got moved; it doesn't mean BONO doesn't pay any taxes in Ireland; and U2 is 4 people and a manager, not just Bono), it frustrates me because they/he HAD to know there was no way that was going to reflect well on what he was doing outside of the band.

But maybe in this case, he was outvoted, or the business sense of it just won out.

I mean, I get it - but just made him an easier target for people to point at and yell "hypocrite!"

Oh well.
 
corianderstem said:
But maybe in this case, he was outvoted, or the business sense of it just own out.

I mean, I get it - but just made him an easier target for people to point at and yell "hypocrite!"
Click to expand...

That's a good point -- Bono himself, for all we know, may have objected to moving that tax base abroad. In the end, we don't know, as U2 always put up a united front (which is to their credit). Actually, it doesn't matter vis-a-vis the celebrity activist issue -- it's entirely separate and irrelevant -- but, as you say, it's just another thing for people to bitch Bono about.
 
i remember that B said, a while back, that the tax decision wasn't anything to do with him... it was around the time he received his Chevalier de la Legion d'honneur from Sarkozy (??) or some meeting at the Elysee at least, and someone challenged him about it... i can believe that... guess he's just an easy target really... that's why it bothers me i guess... the charity side needs to get the figures right and be completely transparent otherwise it just makes for more ammunition...
 
@ uberbeaver lol!

my initial reaction to this article was :yell: hehe
 
gvox said:
Is the NY Post considered a tabloid/trash journalism type deal like some of those British/Irish rags? (I honestly don't know)
Click to expand...

The New York Post is a Murdoch-managed worthless piece of garbage.
 
Does anyone know why the ONE peeps have been posted outside of NBC's 'The Today Show' broadcast for the past 2 weeks?

Is it because of the UN meeting in NY?
 
The optics are bad...but it's an advocacy group, not a charity.

The average salary per employee is about average for the sector.
 
1. Yes, there is a ton of unjustifiable mismanagement of funds in nonprofits the world over. (I will never give money to the Red Cross because they are a huge octopus of an organization with no accountability, every time a huge disaster strikes they're the ones that everyone throws money at, and without fail a month or so later the word comes out that people can't seem to figure out what they've used the money for).

2. Bono was an idea man behind ONE and a spokesperson, not an executive in the organization, he's simply the target because the world loves to tear him down and he's the name in the organization that everyone knows.

3. Yes, ONE is an advocacy group that makes no claims of being a charity fundraiser/donator, that's what DATA and (Red) are for, that money was probably spent in securing spokespeople, marketing and travel.

Is it a faultless organization? Of course not, but is it a hypocritical monster doing more harm than good? No.
 
financeguy said:
it's an advocacy group, not a charity.

The average salary per employee is about average for the sector.
Click to expand...



I think this is the part people don't get. Often they get thrown under the same umbrella.

ONE was never about giving money.

If they really wanted to be serious they should have done a serious breakdown.
 
At the very least, giving a figure for how many employees that $8m covers would have been a good start. If it's 50, somethings gone very wrong. But if its in the hundreds... what's the problem?
 
digitize said:
The New York Post is a Murdoch-managed worthless piece of garbage.
Click to expand...

:up: The Post is a crude, horrible excuse for journalism. A tabloid magazine disguised as a newspaper and not fit to wipe someone's ass :angry:

That article is so sensationalist and ignores so many facts. I'm pretty sure One has always presented itself as am advocacy campaign and I don't ever remember hearing them state they were giving out oodles of money. People will search for anything to attack Bono over...and I just don't get why.
 
powerhour24 said:
1. Yes, there is a ton of unjustifiable mismanagement of funds in nonprofits the world over. (I will never give money to the Red Cross because they are a huge octopus of an organization with no accountability, every time a huge disaster strikes they're the ones that everyone throws money at, and without fail a month or so later the word comes out that people can't seem to figure out what they've used the money for).

2. Bono was an idea man behind ONE and a spokesperson, not an executive in the organization, he's simply the target because the world loves to tear him down and he's the name in the organization that everyone knows.

3. Yes, ONE is an advocacy group that makes no claims of being a charity fundraiser/donator, that's what DATA and (Red) are for, that money was probably spent in securing spokespeople, marketing and travel.

Is it a faultless organization? Of course not, but is it a hypocritical monster doing more harm than good? No.
Click to expand...

Hate to point it out powerhour but your points wildly contradict one another and Bono is in fact the co-founder of ONE and one of the most prominent members of the board of directors. Also, I think the Red Cross has got just a lil bit more legitimacy (and, likely, transparency/accountability) than ONE at this point. While it may be some bloated two headed monster of charities as you claim, it's also done a hell of a lot of good relief work in just about every country in the world, the US included.

Why are people rushing to judge this article so harshly? Are the figures stated within it true? Does anyone have any hard countering facts other than "I'm sure there's more to it" or other similarly vague statements? Isn't this IRS stuff a matter of public record or something?

Please note: I'm not criticizing Bono. Let he who is without blame...and all that. But he has set himself in a certain position, and it's not unfair to expect to be accountable for what the money's spent on..maybe he isn't even aware! I sometimes get this notion that my favorite rock star ain't all that good with keeping track of money..he certainly doesn't seem the 'accountant' type personality...at any rate, whether he's aware or not, if there's mismanagement of funds, his best move is to get it sorted out and/or distance himself as much as possible from it, for his own good :shrug:
 
Yeah… I thought ONE was about getting governments to give aid/medicine/debt forgiveness to poor countries and not about gathering up money and giving it to poor people, i.e., a charity.
 
BVS said:
I think this is the part people don't get. Often they get thrown under the same umbrella.

ONE was never about giving money.

If they really wanted to be serious they should have done a serious breakdown.
Click to expand...

maybe they did and the NY Post just cherry-picked the figures which would cause a stir... who knows eh...
 
also, re. the controversial gift boxes... i can sort of see the point... maybe people will be so offended, shocked, and outraged by them, by the kind of strange and almost unethical idea of being given a lavishly presented cookie in fancy packaging claiming it cost as much money "as African children have to live on a day", that it gets people to focus on the situation... i guess it glaringly presents the stark unethical nature of the north-south divide though doesn't it...
 
mama cass said:
i remember that B said, a while back, that the tax decision wasn't anything to do with him... it was around the time he received his Chevalier de la Legion d'honneur from Sarkozy (??) or some meeting at the Elysee at least, and someone challenged him about it... i can believe that... guess he's just an easy target really... that's why it bothers me i guess... the charity side needs to get the figures right and be completely transparent otherwise it just makes for more ammunition...
Click to expand...

Yeah he gave some complete bullshit line about Ireland having a history of encouraging tax innovation, which is complete politico spin. I have to say I was a little bit ashamed of him that day, he should have come out and been like 'yeh it doesn't look good on me, but at the end of the day the band is a democracy, what are you gonna do?!' type thing.

As for these figures, I saw an article in a UK newspaper the other day and it did make me cringe. Just more fuel for the raging bonfire of contempt for Bono in this country i guess.
 
MikeyJB said:
Yeah he gave some complete bullshit line about Ireland having a history of encouraging tax innovation, which is complete politico spin. I have to say I was a little bit ashamed of him that day, he should have come out and been like 'yeh it doesn't look good on me, but at the end of the day the band is a democracy, what are you gonna do?!' type thing.
Click to expand...

no, that wasn't the one i saw MikeyJB... it was just a v. short clip of B being approached by someone outside the Elysee - the person gave him a what you call it, one of those little glass snow domes with a palm tree inside it, pretending it was a gift and then made some comment about tax havens ("paradis fiscal" in French)... the person came across as pretty mean and out of order actually... it wasn't very nice...
 
I’m actually genuinely surprised that this little campaign hasn’t yet gotten a wrenching in the media. When I first saw this I really thought, shit-storm landing in 5,4,3,2… No? Huh…

bono-louis-vuitton__opt.jpg


I totally understand that they are well in the can to LV’s parent company, after they bailed out Edun, so there’s probably not much they could do about them wanting this kind of presence as a trade off. And I know that the fine print pushes Edun, and Ali is decked out in Edun, not LV, and I know it’s fashion/Edun, not poverty/ONE, and I get it’s meant to be about her, not him, and that the point of Edun is to try and push high end fashion over into something else. But, still… to any non-fine print reading person casually flicking through a magazine (surely a good 90% of the people who will see this), what does this look like?

In a snapshot, this plays right into the hands of absolutely everything thrown at Bono. If you want to come across as genuine, and you want to avoid being classed as just an ego-centric, loaded rock star, flying private jet from one of several luxurious homes around the globe, to spend a few minutes yelling at people about how they should do something about poverty, before returning to count your tax dodged dollars – I would think that wanting to avoid a tacky romanticising of it all via an Annie Leibovitz shoot (in all it’s airbrushed glory) would be a start, and that perhaps not having that romanticised version of yourself and your work used to push one of the most iconic examples of idiotic excess, would just be a given.

I understand how this likely came into being, but I really can’t see it in any way helping his cause, doing anything positive for his image, or in the end, even really giving Edun any kind of publicity or push. All you see is Bono, in Africa, Louis Vuitton bag, LV logo. Here he is to save Africa (soft focus sunset Africa), in all his luxurious glory. Really. Somewhere there's someone working in media relations for either U2 or ONE who is continually fielding stupid questions or challenges about Bono, and I can just imagine that person hearing he was off to Africa to shoot a Louis Vuitton advertisement with Annie Leibovitz and just going :doh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrsSpringsteen
Bono Wants One Campaign To Be NRA For The World's Poor
Replies
2
Views
605
lazarus
lazarus
DaveC
Pious plonker or just misunderstood: why we should all lay off Bono
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
dazzledbylight
dazzledbylight
A
The little stranger chapter 18
Replies
0
Views
492
annj
A
A
The Little stranger chapter 16
Replies
0
Views
986
annj
A
A
The little Stranger chapter 11
Replies
0
Views
744
annj
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom