(06-18-2003) Updated (6/24) Solar Poster is False - Interference.com *

[Blue Room]

This poster was not meant for public consumption, the record company sent it out to their subidiaries to get the individual promo departments prepped for what's in the pipeline. Getting together the right promotion for an album can and does take months, appearances and junkets and interviews all need to be scheduled and arranged. Plus, the record company would schedule a release as huge as U2's maybe even a year in advance to give them time to push that date up or back in case another similarly huge album was to drop at the same time. For instance, Universal probably wouldn't want the new U2 album to come out at the same time as the new REM album and possibly lose sales and hype.
Additionally any packaging or imaging that goes into an album and accompanying PR campaign has to be created, tested, debated, altered and everything else many, many times before the general public ever gets to see it. From my point of view all this poster is saying is that Universal offices need to get ready for the impending release.

OK, fair enough. What subsidiaries are you referring to exactly? Also, why did Interference get one? I havent heard or seen any other news about the album cover anywhere but here. Seems very strange.

 

[pub crawler]

I?ve have it on good authority that another version of the poster will be released Friday of next week, with one key change: the font used will be Century Gothic. Be advised that the release of the poster with 48 point Century Gothic will officially hail the coming of a new album and that the actual final release title will be ?Vox Crying in the Wilderness.?

 

[BAW]

I hope everyone remembers that we should be having fun with this - none of us are masters at record label politics, or the ins and outs of "leaks."

So, given that logic, none of us can unequivocally say it is true or false one way or the other, no matter how high we hold our own opinions.

IMO this whole thing is being over-analyzed to death. In the end, all that really matters a new album and tour...is the artwork really that important?

 

[t345]

hi, i think you're all just over excited

 

[sixtoe]

IMO this whole thing is being over-analyzed to death. In the end, all that really matters a new album and tour...is the artwork really that important?

Well, then there wouldn't be a nine-page thread, would there? Interference.com is getting a lot of hits over this, so I doubt they'd want to put an end to the hoopla anytime soon.

 

[zoocarolina]

What a response to this thread, maybe we'll have an article on u2.com soon disputing the whole thing or clearing it all up. Could be a publiciy stunt by the shrewd marketing genuises of the U2 organization to get things geared up for the release which will probably happen early next year.

I wouldn't put it past them, and if it's a hoax or early idea, it's all fun to have some type of information to chew on!!

If it's true, 264 days and counting!!!

 

[Strato Edge]

Bono keeps saying January 2004...So does Edge.

 

[Michael Griffiths]

I've heard a report that Edge recently said "Autumn" of this year. That said, releases are always delayed with U2. Expect a January/February release.

 

[BAW]

Well, then there wouldn't be a nine-page thread, would there? Interference.com is getting a lot of hits over this, so I doubt they'd want to put an end to the hoopla anytime soon.

I never suggested putting an end to the hoopla. I simply stated that in my opinion, there is a ridiculous amount of analyzing and speculation going on over a simple piece of artwork that may or may not be authentic.

Speculate to your hearts content

 

[gvox]

I hate to sound trite, but I'd rather see a few hundred posts on this analyzed and dissected a few hundred different ways than most of the *cough* topics discussed on *ahem* other areas of interland...

Just my 2 cents..

 

[BAW]

Good point Gabriel... there are a few topics of discussion around here that don't deserve one page, let alone 20 or 30.

 

[DrMusk]

agreed

 

[nexus6]

Anyway, this includes good news

 

[Roland of Gilead]

What does this quote mean to you? I do not understand it. >>>"Pull the trigger on a rock n' roll ****** bigger than Jesus on a bumper sticker!" -Bono, Bullet the Blue Sky.

It is from the Elevation DVD version of Bullet. It is about the death of John Lennon. This is the spoken/rap bit that Bono does concerning Mark Chapman (Lennon's killer). It is my understanding that the term "rock n' roll ******" is a compliment to John Lennon and the reference to Jesus is in light of Lennon's famous comments regarding the Beatles as being bigger than Jesus.

 

[DrMusk]

I didn't know that ...interesting

 

[MoFo_monkey]

that's soo cool i can't wait!
from
*Mad buggered brit*

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

lennon had a song called "woman is the n****r of the world." there was also a patti smith song named "rock and roll n****r"
that's where the reference comes from

 

[gvox]

It's unfortunate he felt the reference was necessary...

It was a departure from his more subtle inferences...he did after all say John and Yoko and say other things that made the reference to Lennon quite clear...

coulda just as easily said "singer"

too bad, its a good monologue..

and before anyone gets all defensive, I understand and agree that it wasn't a racial slur...I just think the word would be better mothballed and to me it was just a poor choice, that's all.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

You know, the last thing I would ever want to do is offend anyone with my signature. If anyone here truly feels offended by it, I have no problem finding a new one. Bono certainly meant nothing offensive by this and the media never thought there was an issue with this comment (there was no issue being the point). However, that being said, I don't want people here thinking that I might be a racist because of my signature.

 

[gvox]

Gah! I'm not offended. I fully understood what Bono was trying to say, and that Bono is prolly the last guy you could try the race card on.

I just think it was a poor choice of words on his part, that's all. In the context of the monologue his giving to me it doesn't add much to the whole meaning which was already quite meaningful without using the term.

I will allow tho that it did cause me to sit up straight and relisten and make sure I understood exactly what it was he was trying to say, so maybe in that respect it is an effective vehicle for a message that some Americans would have rather he not touched, that of gun control.




PS...rather off topic so I wont belabor the point..

 

[aerofault]

Why are there no direct-on shots of this? It appears that the photographer had free reign to take pictures, so why are they all on a slant or from the side? Psychologically, if someone is perpetrating a hoax like this, they are going to want to make the product look as amateurish as possible; both the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot photographs/films which were later revealed as hoaxes, are masked by their own rough nature. It is harder to disprove something as erroneous than a "happy accident," therefore, we do not see a perfectly framed shot, nor a source file from a computer.

 

[follower]

This is from U2Star message board:

Today Universal France rejected all the rumours circulating on the net about the title of the new u2 album.
Early this week a couple of u2 sites posted rumours about the next album calling it Solar and publishing also a poster.
Universal France said that the release of the first single is expected for december/january and the album during the spring. Universal confirmed that the album will not be released this year!
The title and the layout are really far to be done.

Source: u2achtung.com

Or in french, from the original source:
http://www.u2achtung.com/01/news/index.php3

Universal d?ment l'information qui circule sur le titre du nouvel album et sur les dates de sorties annonc?es.
Actuellement la seule chose plus que probable pour Universal c'est une ?coute de la nouvelle chanson pour fin d'ann?e avec la sortie de l'album au printemps.
Par ailleurs, Universal a annul? l'album de U2 dans ses pr?visions de sortie jusqu'? fin 2003.

 

[STING2]

follower,

Thanks for clearing all this up. I bet someone had a nice laugh out of all the speculation they fueled. I'm sure there will be some more of these before the album is finally released.

 

[Elvis]

follower and sting2,

speaking from personal experience, I have worked in co-operation with interscope/universal previously... and specifically around the time of ATYCLB and Million Dollar Hotel, as well as with other labels in my previous job.

The labels will ALWAYS deny anything and everything if they are not at the point they want the information released. This usually also holds true with management and artists as well.

I'm not saying that the poster or name or legit, but I'm also not saying they aren't.

Don't be so quick to believe a label or mgmt JUST because they are 'official'.


Reading this thread, and other sites, I've really realized how many people don't really understand the politics, inner-workings, etc of the music industry. I tend to get very frustrated by this, simply because I am a fan, and have also seen the 'other' side as well. I've personally had meetings with executives of multiple labels, including universal/interscope. I'm not bragging, I could careless about this, but I am trying to share my experience.

 

[Elvis]

Why are there no direct-on shots of this? It appears that the photographer had free reign to take pictures, so why are they all on a slant or from the side? Psychologically, if someone is perpetrating a hoax like this, they are going to want to make the product look as amateurish as possible; both the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot photographs/films which were later revealed as hoaxes, are masked by their own rough nature. It is harder to disprove something as erroneous than a "happy accident," therefore, we do not see a perfectly framed shot, nor a source file from a computer.

I've got 300dpi images which are the originals. They are much toooo large to post here for thousands of people to download (and eat up all our bandwidth). I scaled them down to 400 pixels wide - simple as that.

 

[madamc]

I think people are overreacting to this poster "is it legit or not legit" deal.

*yawn*

 

[maude]

My first impression of it was that it is a fake simply because it's so poorly designed, nevermind all the other things that have been pointed out that tend to lead me to believe it's fake, but then who knows. Like many, I do like the title but I think the poster looks completely amateurish.

What perplexes me is why some of the interference staff seems so unduly defensive about the idea that the poster is genuine despite the fact that in the first post it says that this is just a rumor and it could be a fake. If some people don't believe it's real and want to explain their reasons for feeling that way, who cares?

 

[Elvis]

its not that im defensive over the poster... im just shocked (ok.. maybe not so shocked now that i think about it) about how people jump to conclusions and make up conspiracy theories.

some times, some things are best left at face value.
i dont know if the poster is a fake or not, and honestly i dont care.

what i do seem to care about is putting down the further misinformation, which is the only reason i posted the last 2 posts that i have.

 

[Blue Room]

some times, some things are best left at face value.
i dont know if the poster is a fake or not, and honestly i dont care.

what i do seem to care about is putting down the further misinformation, which is the only reason i posted the last 2 posts that i have.

OK, let me get this straight. You dont care if the poster is real or not, yet are concerned with misinformation people are saying about it?? Interesting. So basically if the poster is a fake (very likely) you are spreading misinformation. But you dont care about that. But if someone is wrong about why they think it is fake, you care???

Is this some type of publicity thing to get more hits here or something? Man, I hope not, because that would be pathetic. I dont really believe that. But it is obviously crossing my mind here.

 

[Wowy23]

It is from the Elevation DVD version of Bullet. It is about the death of John Lennon. This is the spoken/rap bit that Bono does concerning Mark Chapman (Lennon's killer). It is my understanding that the term "rock n' roll ******" is a compliment to John Lennon and the reference to Jesus is in light of Lennon's famous comments regarding the Beatles as being bigger than Jesus.

Thanks for the explanation because I did not know where the reference and/or context came from. U2 songs/lyrics mean alot of different things to people and I was wondering what those words meant to you. If that is your favorite line, that is your choice and nobody can argue with that. You should not change your signature just because it's not a mass friendly quote. If you offended somebody it was not intentional; that is obvious.