Edge answers the "sellout" question...

[jick]

All these commercial ventures are to make money. That's why its called commercial. That's why being in the band is their profession and their day job. That's where they earn money. To U2, music is only a vehicle to earn money to feed their families. To us fans, it is U2's music that gives us satisfaction so their personal lives is a non-issue. As I mentioned many times, the best balance is for U2 to make money and the fans to get musical enjoyment. That is the bottom line of it all.

Cheers,

J

 

[Irvine511]

To U2, music is only a vehicle to earn money to feed their families. To us fans, it is U2's music that gives us satisfaction so their personal lives is a non-issue.

if this were true, then u2 wouldn't have turned down so much money in the past from corporations like Coke or from car companies who wanted to use "streets." the said themselves that "streets" was too special, so this indicates that they view that song as something more than a mere vehicle from which they make money to feed their families.

u2 are certainly not opposed to making money, and there are bottom lines to meet in both their personal lives and the lives of the record company, but their music is a multidimensional thing. money is a component, yes, and they own up to that -- but if they only wanted to make money, they'd be a much different band. they themselves are rationalizing this iPod/Apple partnership 10 ways 'till tuesday ... because they need to.

 

[Flying FuManchu]

i think it's clear that this isn't a "sell out" -- u2 are already unfathomably rich, and they haven't changed their sound dramatically to get on the radio (think about that abomination Sugar Ray ... early albums are sort of thrash metal things, now they write awful pop songs). but this is a calculated, direct move to increase their exposure, and they've done it by aligning themselves with a massive corporation. yes, u2 themselves are a massive corporation, but at least it's organic, and started in a garage. there is something about the purity of u2's music that initially attracted me to them. i've never had any problems with them wanting to sell their own albums or tickets to their concerts; i am happy when their songs are on the radio because i want more people to listen to them. however, whenever i hear "vertigo" i think of the iPod. i see silhouettes and the Apple logo. this is different, i think, than a u2 video or a u2 song on a trailer for a movie because those are likewise creative fabrications, whereas the iPod is an actual product one goes out and purchases. this association has diluted something of the purity of the music for me, and even the purity of their ambition which is to sell lots of albums and tickets and be on the radio. i'm fine with that, it's just the methods they are now employing to do such things that aren't sitting well with me. it's just different, and i'm uncomfortable with it -- i'm not outright condeming, but something feels wrong about it.

of course, if ticket prices are affordable, that will make it an easier pill to swallow.

This is what I'm talking about. However the more critical/ indie snobbish fans of U2 will probably look at it in an even more negative light IMO.

Vertigo in a sense has just become a jingle for an advert. Getting paid or not, it is still promoting a product through a song.

 

[MrBrau1]

Indie snobs don't matter. The further you push them away, the better off you are.

 

[U2FAN4LIFE]

if this were true, then u2 wouldn't have turned down so much money in the past from corporations like Coke or from car companies who wanted to use "streets." the said themselves that "streets" was too special

I disagree... and to play devil's advocate here , why do you think they viewed streets as being "too special"? Could it be that at the time the offer was made they knew the backlash against them would cost them many millions more than they would have made in the endorsement deal? Maybe they didn't want to be associated with the other "artists" (I use that term loosely ) who have endorsed Coke. I think the only way U2 has been able to maintain credibility despite being among the top 3 or 4 all time grossing bands is that they've made very careful choices... lots of bands have made amazing music but never get heard... what makes U2 truly spectacular is their ability to merge art and commerce without sacrificing too much of the art

 

[Flying FuManchu]

Yeah... but indie snobs are everywhere and have infiltrated the media i.e rock critics... I don't think you can push them away or the band can b/c part of their success is having that "critical" respect.

 

[Irvine511]

I disagree... and to play devil's advocate here , why do you think they viewed streets as being "too special"? Could it be that at the time the offer was made they knew the backlash against them would cost them many millions more than they would have made in the endorsement deal? Maybe they didn't want to be associated with the other "artists" (I use that term loosely ) who have endorsed Coke. I think the only way U2 has been able to maintain credibility despite being among the top 3 or 4 all time grossing bands is that they've made very careful choices... lots of bands have made amazing music but never get heard... what makes U2 truly spectacular is their ability to merge art and commerce without sacrificing too much of the art

it wasn't my words, it was theirs. i remember reading the article on atu2.com sometime in 2002-3, and i've done a quick search, but can't find it (and i'm at work, so i can't spend too much time on this).

i think your point about them choosing to retain "credibility" (my quotes, used to distinguish between credibility and "credibility" -- the quotes showing that this is a concept that can be marketed ... like "authenticity") through not choosing to have their music played on a car commerical is a good one. they might loose more fans and do more damage to their reputation than is worth the $10-15 million they would have gained from giving the song away.

i agree that U2 (usually) makes good choices. this one is a sound decision in many ways, and the song is getting enormous exposure, and watching the Red Sox last night in a bar in the middle of DC, it's amazing how many people count along with the spanish when the commercial comes on. so many people know about it (and i've had 2 friends tell me how much they don't like the song and don't understand why 14 comes after 3 ... but that's a different story). i also think the ad is visually striking. it makes lots of sense. i know why they did it.

but, that said, something feels a little creepy about it. i don't mind U2 selling me albums, t-shirts, and concert tickets (lord knows i've spent enough money on that). but i don't want bono telling me to buy an Apple product, which is what they are doing. i can't buy the single yet, so that's the only way i can listen to "vertigo" non-stop and burn it onto the CD i listen to on the treadmill (kickass song to run to, btw).

how would you feel if, instead of those dumb commercials about suburban middle aged men wanting to buy a big TV at Best Buy, there was "vertigo" playing and U2 performing in the middle of a Best Buy and it ended with "Vertigo by U2 available at Best Buy"?

i wouldn't like that.

 

[U2FAN4LIFE]

but, that said, something feels a little creepy about it. i don't mind U2 selling me albums, t-shirts, and concert tickets (lord knows i've spent enough money on that). but i don't want bono telling me to buy an Apple product, which is what they are doing. i can't buy the single yet, so that's the only way i can listen to "vertigo" non-stop and burn it onto the CD i listen to on the treadmill (kickass song to run to, btw).

I agree with what you are saying... but if you take a step back and view what U2 is doing in the context of 2004 (everyone is endorsing everything) then its not so bad IMHO. I still see this Apple thing as more of a partnership vs. an endorsement deal. U2 promotes IPOd... IPOD promotes U2

I truly believe that commercial success has helped U2 create more meaningful art... ZooTV would never have been possible without massive $$$$. If this IPOD thing generates new fans and more $$$ and if it results in U2 carrying on for a few more years then its all good in my book....

as long as they don't do the best buy thing

 

[teebee]

What point do you think U2 was making when they wrote these lyrics below? And how do you think that point of view compares to the present one? (working with Apple) Interested to know your thoughts ...

Zooropa...Vorsprung durch Technik
Zooropa...be all that you can be
Be a winner
Eat to get slimmer


Zooropa...a bluer kind of white
Zooropa...it could be yours tonight
We're mild and green
And squeaky clean


Zooropa...better by design
Zooropa...fly the friendly skies
Through appliance of science
We've got that ring of confidence

 

[U2FAN4LIFE]

What point do you think U2 was making when they wrote these lyrics below? And how do you think that point of view compares to the present one? (working with Apple) Interested to know your thoughts ...

Zooropa...Vorsprung durch Technik
Zooropa...be all that you can be
Be a winner
Eat to get slimmer


Zooropa...a bluer kind of white
Zooropa...it could be yours tonight
We're mild and green
And squeaky clean


Zooropa...better by design
Zooropa...fly the friendly skies
Through appliance of science
We've got that ring of confidence

I love that song!! IMHO its more about materialism than commercialism... ie; using artificial means to generate self esteem, love and other intangible positives that should not come from nowhere but inside... the goal is soul!!

 

[U2FAN4LIFE]

I love that song!! IMHO its more about materialism than commercialism... ie; using artificial means to generate self esteem, love and other intangible positives that should not come from nowhere but inside... the goal is soul!!

my grammar sucks these days!!

 

[Irvine511]

What point do you think U2 was making when they wrote these lyrics below? And how do you think that point of view compares to the present one? (working with Apple) Interested to know your thoughts ...

Zooropa...Vorsprung durch Technik
Zooropa...be all that you can be
Be a winner
Eat to get slimmer


Zooropa...a bluer kind of white
Zooropa...it could be yours tonight
We're mild and green
And squeaky clean


Zooropa...better by design
Zooropa...fly the friendly skies
Through appliance of science
We've got that ring of confidence

just thought i'd say that i think "zooropa" might be U2's strongest album lyrically.

as for this one ... "zooropa" was was placed in a sort of post-apocalyptic soundscape. metaphorically apocalyptic. kind of the end of traditional means of consumerism and into late hyper-capitalism where everything is, literally, the push of a television remote (in 1993 ... today, the click of a mouse) away. this is combined with the end of traditional definitions of European nationalism that began with the reunification of Germany and the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. the cages have been opened, and the animals of the european zoo (who have twice tried to destroy each other in the 20th century) are free to wander. traditional methods of identification were no longer useful, and now one was free to assemble an identity with all the tools (i.e., products) that capitalism provides. it's a kind of existential freedom that can be terrifying -- we want institutions to tell us who we are, it's easier that way ... think identity politics -- but also empowering. identity through assemblage, accessories as personality traits.

"don't worry baby/ it'll be allright/ you've got the right shoes/ to get you through the night/ it's cold outside/ but brightly lit"

it's all very "post" -- post sexual, post gender, post ethnic, etc.

as for iPod? it does fit the ethos expressed in this particular song. U2 are again using the tools available to their advantage. and maybe my notions of "purity" and "authenticity" are outdated and naive, but i'm still not totally comfortable with a U2 iPod.

very good point through. will ruminate further.

must. get. back. to. work.

 

[tkramer]

understand many of you feel off about this. But think on these:

thanks to tech moving forward anyone can now download their whole catalog for 150.00 That's .33 a song. That is NOT selling out. That's making it cheaper than ever before to get the bands tunes.

You don't want 350.00 ipod? Neither do I. Same for a 450.00 signed poster, a 30.00 dollar tour program, or whatever else the band has offered me over the years. It's a U2 ipod, nothing else. Don't stress over it.

U2 and Apple did not trade a penny. They went on record and said it. U2 gets max exposure that they could NEVER afford to do themselves, and Apple gets a cool way to tell the public they have the best online music store in the biz. Yes, A MUSIC store. Not fries, not cars, not paper towels. It's a perfect move by the band. It's the same as "get the new U2 album at your nearest record store!" except no one would bat an eye if they saw that...

I'm seeing a patern with the folks that have a problem with this. They are almost all over 20. (not a bash, I'm 27) They don't see apple as a record store. Trust me, in 5 years all the kids will think apple is a record store the way you and I remember going down to the corner to pick up an album, tape, cd. Time marchs on, and U2 went with it. They might have been able to sell like this some other way, but this way is forward thinking. (ugh, I hate that term) One way they most certainly would NOT have been as successful with is the single sales. Physical single sales are dead. Nearly gone, ka-put in the USA. A physical CD single is hot stuff if it can sell 10,000 in a week. Vertigo sold 37,000 on I-tunes it's first seven days. That's incredible. All this band is doing is switching from the outdated model (which is the physical) to the up and coming one. They were brilliant to be the first mega rock band to do it.

ON and on and on...

 

[teebee]

tkramer, you've pointed out some excellent things about the U2 and Apple collaboration, and if nothing else I credit the band with re-inventing the way music is sold. I am sure we'll see things like this more and more as time goes by.

I guess, for me, the irritation is that MY favorite band has to do this. When I think about where the band has been, what kind of music they've been making recently, how they've been in the public eye (Super Bowls, etc) quite a bit, it all adds up to one thought:

In the attempt to be the best band in the world, they're succeeding in being the biggest band in the world.

Once upon a time, they were both.

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

Let me put it this way; U2 and Apple put out a U2 iPod, I want it so I buy it. It might be pricey for the college student in Iowa, or the high school student in Salem, Or., so I can understand their dilemma with the sellout theory. Usually the people who cry sellout are the younger fans (not all, I'm trying not to generalize here), those who don't have the means to purchase the products hawked by the group, or understand the rational these bands use to "sell" their songs. These fans also still have an ideal of how the world "should" run and therefore at this point in their lives would not "sellout" to the man. I salute and admire that sort of mindset, and I once had it too.

But what we have here is a "failure to communicate"...nah, what we have here are business savy men in their mid-40s, who have seen the world, walked the walk and talked the talk. U2 have seen the present and the future, and U2 have always been about innovation and trying to stay in step or stay one step ahead, so is this really that shocking and that much of a sellout?

It's actually evolution, it's about the "new market", the "new media". It's about reaching all of your fans, no matter where they live. Coming into their homes in a way that could never happen 13 years ago when the multi-media of Achtung Baby and Zoo TV hit. It's about being in touch with today and now. That's what U2 and Apple are all about. Take that or leave it, but I've watched this band for the last 21 years and I can honestly say I don't believe they have sold out. Honestly.

 

[bsp77]

tkramer, you've pointed out some excellent things about the U2 and Apple collaboration, and if nothing else I credit the band with re-inventing the way music is sold. I am sure we'll see things like this more and more as time goes by.

I guess, for me, the irritation is that MY favorite band has to do this. When I think about where the band has been, what kind of music they've been making recently, how they've been in the public eye (Super Bowls, etc) quite a bit, it all adds up to one thought:

In the attempt to be the best band in the world, they're succeeding in being the biggest band in the world.

Once upon a time, they were both.

How are they no longer the best? That is a musical question. Do you think that their music has gone downhill? If so, that is cool. Otherwise, what the hell does an ipod have to with it?

 

[doctorwho]

Just how did they sell out? NO MONEY CHANGED HANDS!!! There is no mythical higher ground they fell off of here. I-tunes is a digital download store and digital is currently the only way to even get the song. So it is even less like selling a sony walkman and a whole lot more like: BUY THE NEW U2 song, in music stores now!!!"

You do know the kids won't see it that way don't you? Only the over 20 set think its odd because we're anchient history now. We were around before the internet. A 16 year old in 2008 will not see the difference between this and a "GET THE NEW U2 album, in stores now" spot.

I agree with this.

It is a fine line... but it's which side of that line that makes a difference. In this case, U2 are on the "right" side of the line.

For years, I've seen ads on TV and newspapers advertising albums for sale. "Get the new song!" "Get the new CD!" I've also heard older albums advertised this way too (especially with the Time Line box sets).

As CD singles no longer are present in the U.S., this commercial is just like iTunes saying, "Get the new song now!" - but at our online download "store". I don't view this commercial as U2 advertising iTunes, but rather, iTunes advertising U2. It would be like Best Buy or Circuit City ads advertising the new album (which they will do).

As for the little U2-themed iPod... gee, is that any different from U2-themed hats, T-shirts, condoms, cubes, snow globes, key chains, etc. All of these are official and sponsored by U2. If U2 "sold out" they did so years ago.

Also, these ads are great. While U2 are still a hit on modern rock and some mainstream rock stations, the Top 40 just doesn't play U2 (amazingly enough) unless they are almost forced to. Clear Channel selects the artists it wants to succeed and that's that (or so it seems). If U2 don't have these unique way of advertising, they don't get heard. This is why Sting and Moby were forced to have their music in car commercials - radio wasn't playing it, which was a shame as those albums were brilliant. If it weren't for the commercials, we would have potentially missed out on some outstanding music as we might not have ever heard about it or realized these artists had an album out.

In other words, sad as it may seem, U2 are almost forced to take advantage of some of these opportunities just to get their music heard. "Pop" is an example of what happens when U2 relies just on their fame alone. The album does well, but not great. There may come a time when "well" is acceptable. But I don't think U2 are at that stage yet.

So if they must appear in ads, I'd rather it be these than car commercials.

Oh, and lest I forget, Larry did Harley ads way back in the 80's. I guess he sold out first.

 

[Irvine511]

U2 and Apple did not trade a penny. They went on record and said it. U2 gets max exposure that they could NEVER afford to do themselves, and Apple gets a cool way to tell the public they have the best online music store in the biz. Yes, A MUSIC store. Not fries, not cars, not paper towels. It's a perfect move by the band. It's the same as "get the new U2 album at your nearest record store!" except no one would bat an eye if they saw that...

I'm seeing a patern with the folks that have a problem with this. They are almost all over 20. (not a bash, I'm 27) They don't see apple as a record store. Trust me, in 5 years all the kids will think apple is a record store the way you and I remember going down to the corner to pick up an album, tape, cd. [/B]

hey -- you make a bunch of great points, and i agree 100% that it is a very savvy move, and i am pleased that $$$ isn't changing hands. one thing i'd like to point out, however, is that it is different than the "get the new u2 album." in that instance, Best Buy (or Tower, or whoever) is advertising a product that they carry: the new U2 album, which 500,000+ people are going to buy at the end of November. fine. that's how it works. the difference here is that U2 are essentially endorsing one particular store (as you say so yourself) over others. it's more analagous to bono saying, "go buy our new album at Tower Records" rather than Tower Records saying, "come buy the new U2 album at our store." there's a critical distinction there.

yes, i am over 20 (am 27 like yourself) and i came of age musically in the early '90s when everyone was obsessed with the "authenticity" of grunge and claimed that they listened to "alternative" music on the radio. my position was that U2 was always more authentic, because there was no bullshit with them -- rather, there was tons of bullshit about the music industry, and they were both mocking it and enjoying it and using it as a means to an end -- the best concert tour in history, bar non (Zoo TV). something Bono talked about in the Flanagan book, the idea of "judo," of using the strength of the enemy against him. here, the enemy was brainwashing via media, and they used media to craete something magnificent, and gaudy, and emotional, and intimate. i think macphisto singing "can't help falling in love" is one of the most moving, sublime moments in all of popular music, because so much is being said in that moment (it's a whole other post). it was very honest: we are bigger than big, and we will use this gargantuan stage to create a moment as intimate as bono singing you to sleep in your bedroom.

my point (and i do have one) is that U2 were always "in it, but not of it." the "it" being the bullshit of the record business, which is mostly money. now, with the close identification with Apple, there's been a "branding" of U2. i'll hold back until i hear the album (which i expect to be magnificent) and see how they promote this album (i'm worried), but the song "vertigo," at least, is in it and of it.

 

[tkramer]

hey -- you make a bunch of great points, and i agree 100% that it is a very savvy move, and i am pleased that $$$ isn't changing hands. one thing i'd like to point out, however, is that it is different than the "get the new u2 album." in that instance, Best Buy (or Tower, or whoever) is advertising a product that they carry: the new U2 album, which 500,000+ people are going to buy at the end of November. fine. that's how it works. the difference here is that U2 are essentially endorsing one particular store (as you say so yourself) over others. it's more analagous to bono saying, "go buy our new album at Tower Records" rather than Tower Records saying, "come buy the new U2 album at our store." there's a critical distinction there.

Anyone heard of the 7 CD? Why not the outcry over that?
Target was the only distributor of that CD, you couldn't get it anywhere else.
At least I-tunes is as close as a computer anywhere in North America. Target is a physical store that wasn't even in all locations.

Digital is in it's infancy. We're still figuring out how to use it and how to advertise it. We are also figuring out how we feel about the advertising. (obviously)

Chill everyone, the band is the same band they were ten, fifteen, etc. years ago. They've ALWAYS DONE STUFF LIKE THIS.

 

[U2FAN4LIFE]

hey -- you make a bunch of great points, and i agree 100% that it is a very savvy move, and i am pleased that $$$ isn't changing hands. one thing i'd like to point out, however, is that it is different than the "get the new u2 album." in that instance, Best Buy (or Tower, or whoever) is advertising a product that they carry: the new U2 album, which 500,000+ people are going to buy at the end of November. fine. that's how it works. the difference here is that U2 are essentially endorsing one particular store (as you say so yourself) over others. it's more analagous to bono saying, "go buy our new album at Tower Records" rather than Tower Records saying, "come buy the new U2 album at our store." there's a critical distinction there.

You make some great points Irving

Regarding your point above, I think you'll feel better about the whole "endorsment deal" if you look at the substance rather than the form. I don't see this as an endorsment deal because to me its very different from MJ hawking Nikes... as you said no $$ changed hands, secondly MJ's endorsement deal (and any other traditional endorsement deal) is not a partnership its Jordan getting $$$$ for saying "Be Like Mike... Buy Nike" in everthing he does. This IPOD deal is a business partnership, U2 has a product to sell, in exchange for a massive amount of free promotion they've put their signatures on the back of an IPOD and have appeared in a press conference. Apple will sell more IPODS, and U2 will get the best free marketing an aging band could get. If U2 was appearing in ads saying... "we're U2 and we're serious about our music (larry scowls) so we get our music from ITUNES, real player is for little bitches" then I might get really concerned

 

[teebee]

How are they no longer the best? That is a musical question. Do you think that their music has gone downhill? If so, that is cool. Otherwise, what the hell does an ipod have to with it?

The iPod has everything to do with it. I love U2, I love my ipod, and I love the song they're promoting with the commercial, but I don't love them *together.*

It's like ... I don't mind being naked in front of my girlfriend, and I don't mind being naked in front of my doctor, but I would be horribly embarrassed to be naked in front of both of them.

That's probably the wrong metaphor. Anyway, I'm just sayin' - in the attempt to always top themselves, what will U2 do in 2008? If whatever THAT is isn't a sellout, plain and simple, I will be very surprised.

 

[jick]

if this were true, then u2 wouldn't have turned down so much money in the past from corporations like Coke or from car companies who wanted to use "streets." the said themselves that "streets" was too special, so this indicates that they view that song as something more than a mere vehicle from which they make money to feed their families.

u2 are certainly not opposed to making money, and there are bottom lines to meet in both their personal lives and the lives of the record company, but their music is a multidimensional thing. money is a component, yes, and they own up to that -- but if they only wanted to make money, they'd be a much different band. they themselves are rationalizing this iPod/Apple partnership 10 ways 'till tuesday ... because they need to.

U2 turned down money offered from corporations and car companies because if these songs were used in their commercials, it would "cheapen" U2's image and make the public perceive them wrongly. A cheapened down U2 in the public eye is a harder sell. So in the end, refusing to use those songs for the commercials made them more money in the end. Just look at the sweetness of the iPOD deal - U2 supposedly doesn't earn money -just royalties or commissions off sales of the iPOD. Now that is shrewd business. Low-risk with the high possibility of great financial gain. I have stressed many times in the past that U2 are shrewd businessmen and they do deserve the credit and accolade for their talent that can seem to better that of a used car salesman.

Cheers,

J

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

At least it's not as bad as when Shakira sold out...

I like how Bono is sitting with his legs together like a little boy towards the end.

 

[bcrt2000]

At least it's not as bad as when Shakira sold out...

I like how Bono is sitting with his legs together like a little boy towards the end.

shakira was always a sell out? look at the way she dresses, dances, etc

 

[jackboy]

Edge and Bono are right. Itunes and Ipods are just another form of media for music to be heard and distributed. And U2 is taking it on and using it to promote the new album and their music.

exactly...i remember people like Madonna (God bless her...) whinging about illegal downloads risking ruining their careers...I remember u2 saying it is a medium that should be embraced, it's the way of the future now that we have the internet...U2 are just being very clever and bagging this now...making the most of this just like any other medium... be it records, tapes, cds, dvds whatever...nobody has sold out here...forget it...you might as well say a band has sold out when it sells its first record!!

 

[jick]

I wonder if a download of the complete U2 would be considered as a sale for each of the abums involved there. It would be great it yes, so that it will add to POP's sales figures.

Cheers,

J

 

[artdirector]

U2: The baddest mofo rock band!!!

Sellout; who give a flying F#*$!

Bring the album out now!

 

[innocent_eyes]

Just think years from now, U2 will be remembered for all their amazing music, Bono's humanitarianism, and they'll be seen as pioneers in didgital music sales.

-most leagally downloaded song on itunes, 1st themed iPod, maybe even sell concerts, etc. via itunes.

This is the way of the future, digital sales, iPods, etc...U2 are one of the few bands to realize, understand, and use it to their advantage...they're always WAY ahead of there time, you may not understand them in the present (ZooTV, for example) but the brilliance etc. is there..and way ahead of its time!

great work U2, lets hear that album!

 

[david]

Selling out is compramising your music and your artistic integrity to make a quick buck. Like, being something you are not. U2 are what U2 have always been: a kick ass rock and roll band. They're making the music they want to make, now they're finding new ways to distribute it by embracing the technology of today. Remember, U2 were self made millionaires YEARS before things like iTunes and iPods existed. How anyone could ever accuse U2 of "selling out" is beyond me. I respect and admire U2 as musicians and as business men. When a lot of bands get manipulated by the music industry and are basically just commodities that end up being wasted because their career is marred by people making money off the band while the band themselves starve, die, or turn into commercial crap, U2 stood above that all and had a tight grip on their careers and never once fell into the trappings of the music industry. Their career and how they did it should be used as a blue print for any band that wants to make honest music all the while not being afraid of being rock stars either.

 

[Flying FuManchu]

They have Paul McGuinness to thank for that....

When, I hear Vertigo, I see an IPOD?!?!