U2’s Bono – Poisoned
I must begin by explained that no one has tried to kill Bono from U2! He has not been poisoned in the chemical sense – more so – he has been poisoned in the mind.
Bono recently wrote a letter to music magazine NME, dictating his points on the state of the music industry. Bono starts by indicating his respect for Radioheads recent approach to furthering their ‘relationship with their audience’ and elaborated that ’such imagination and courage are in short supply right now’.
He then targets, our forever picked on by the simple, ISP’s by saying:
“We agree that it is disturbing to see Internet service providers and technology companies profit from the so-called ‘disintermediation’ of the music business when so many music lovers are losing their jobs.”
Are these the words of an ‘in touch’, technological artist? Or those of a man possessed by the industry’s vehement hatred of progression?
The music industry reminds me of the car industry. Petrol and Diesel engines work just fine – why change? Well, it turns out that Oil is required to create petrol and diesel, which in-turn is burning a large hole in the ozone layer – never mind escalating in price each day. So we should change to renewable energy sources to power our cars – but why isn’t the process more wide spread?
The easy answer is that changing the design of vehicles and mass producing them is a risk that car manufacturers are not willing to take – but the technology remains available all the same.
The music industry has all the technology that could reduce remove the need to stamp millions of CD’s. They could reduce remove the distribution needs of such large amounts of CDs. They could centralize their distribution model (1 large server farm). This would make their marketing data 1000 times more accurate and up to date. Statistics drawn from the sales data retrieved through sales to different continents and at different times of the day would be a marketers dream. They could place an advert on TV in any country and watch almost immediately for the reaction in online sales.
They would be able to remove the current monopolies such as iTunes and generate much higher revenues in the long run.
For some reason – they don’t think this is a good idea and I am completely baffled as to why.
Bono’s outburst at ISPs is the kind of narrow minded stupidity that has led the music industry into the parallel they are currently in. Has the music industry started to us its public facing employees (the musicians) to start campaigning on its behalf? Have they poisoned Bono into believing that they are right in all this? Or are the musicians to scared to brave it alone?
So many questions and all the wrong people at the table attempting to answer them.
*Note: I completely agree that artists should be duly compensated for their endeavors but every business must move with the times.
It is interesting to see just how far people are stretching Bono’s words. Let’s look at this statement shall we.
“We agree that it is disturbing to see Internet service providers and technology companies profit from the so-called ‘disintermediation’ of the music business when so many music lovers are losing their jobs.”
Fact one: ISP’s and technology companies are profiting from both legal and illegal downloading of music.
Fact two: The downloading of music is putting a bite into traditional forms of music distribution leading to the downsizing of record companies, the outright closures of many, many music outlets and the like which employed many music lovers.
Bono finds the juxtaposition of fact one with fact two disturbing. Nowhere does he state that the ISP’s and technology companies have caused this situation nor does he state support for McGuiness’ proposed solution. But apparently the simple fact that he finds something disturbing is enough to create a mountain out of a mole hill. Bono has been warning the record companies for years that they need to embrace the technologies instead of fighting against them. I don’t know any more than you do of what Bono really thinks but this particular statement absolutely does not support the conclusions being drawn from it.
rihannsu:
Your idea that ISPs are profiting from legal and illegal downloading draws direct comparisons to the cassette tape, and long track. The music companies did not create the medium – but used it to distribute their material with cassette tapes being the frist real wide spread threat to the music industry. So are you saying that cassette tape makers didn’t profit from the purchase of tapes by Joe Public?
Secondly, the medim used to distribute ANYTHING profits by providing a service. Broadband is used in a plethora of other areas than downloading music. Your presence here is testament to that. The million and one other websites you visit also further prove my point. Cassette tape was no different in its day.
The number of businesses that would not exist if the internet never was, dramatically overshadows the amount of people that the music industry had to re-organise its priorities.
Your ‘Fact two’ is indeed a fact. But what you are failing to understand is how REAL businesses must adapt to survive. You also fail to understand the reason that these outlets exist in the first place : To sell music to the public. They are quickly becoming defunct as a result of dwindling sales – as they are failing to fulfill their purpose.
The article above finds Bono’s comments shocking because he, as well as you, are failing to understand that the way people want to gain access to music has changed. Not ‘is changing’ but ‘has changed’.
I didn’t say anything about whether it was right or wrong for ISP’s to profit from downloading, simply stated the fact that they are profiting and nothing at all about whether other technology advances resulted in industry shake ups. All technology advances change the playing field. You can find quotes from Bono way back in the days before downloading got huge warning that the industry should embrace new advances. U2 was visionary enough in the early 90’s to only license the audio distribution rights to their music to the record company and not the video or other media specifically keeping future evaluation of those rights under their control. You actually did not disagree with the fact that they are profiting only pointed out that other media providers profited as well but that does not refute my point.
I didn’t say that businesses shouldn’t have to adapt to changing dynamics but simply that the changing dynamic’s is what is causing many in the music industry to lose their jobs and most of these people are not the fat cats who raked in profits by exploiting anyone they could. Bono has always had a heart for people who suffer from these situations. U2 has friends throughout the music industry and Bono has previously commented on the fact that little attention has been paid to the lower level people in the music industry who work their butts off to promote bands and get little reward for it.
I am not defending either side of this arguement but simply stating that the conclusions being drawn about Bono’s position based on this one little statement are not in fact supported by this one statement. If anyone has other statements by Bono that support those conclusions then that would be different. But very broad generalizations are being made about Bono’s supposed postition that far outstrip anything said in this short little letter to NME. About all you can really conclude about Bono’s position is that he admires Radiohead and is upset that many music lovers are losing their jobs when others are doing well. This to me is simply compassion on Bono’s point with the little guys who are suffering. He is bothered by the fact that some are losing out but there is nothing in this particular statement that assigns any blame, only the fact that both situations occur simultaneously. Some win, some loose, but Bono is the kind of guy who would prefer to see everybody win.
I’m all for logical argument but drawing conclusions out of thin air is not logical. If you are going to ignore everything Bono has ever said in the past about these issues and look only at this particular statement you have to support your conclusion from this statement and I don’t see that happening. Characterising his statement as “an outburst at ISP’s” is carrying things a bit far. If this qualifies as an outburst then someone has apparently redefined the term. A more mild mannered statement I could hardly imagine.
The real truth of the matter is that if the record industry had paid more attention to what Bono (and others) were saying years ago they would have been forward looking enough to change with the times. Bono has been lambasting the music industry for years yet you allow this one statement to erase all of that history and draw an entirely different conclusion about his position which is not supported by the facts of what he said.
Hi rihannsu,
I appreciate your comments and understand what you are saying.
The simple fact of the matter is that Bono is a capilalist. He is a business man that knows how businesses should be run. His investment decisions make this quite clear. His public utterings are sympathetic but essentially meaningless.
Perhaps, as you have mentioned, his early lambasting of the music industry’s management choices should be taken in a different light. Perhaps he was saying that new mediums (the internet) should be embraced as they were new avenues to sell his music. i.e more money for him and the band.
If they had been embraced back then – the move to internet sales would have been much more gradual but certainly not without pain as music stores’ employees would still lose their jobs – just over a longer period of time.
His sympathies for ‘music lovers’ should go hand in hand with his delight at new jobs being created for people to manage the computers that facilitate his music being downloaded. Also the viral marketing that occurs through forums, digg, reddit, stumble upon, news sites etc – This is not done by the public. It is a hired position. A job paid for by the band or their record company.
Thank you. Although I’m not quite sure what you are getting at with the statement “His public utterings are sympathetic but essentially meaningless.” Is there some reason that Bono’s being a good businessman makes his sympathy meaningless? Does being successful disqualify someone from being sypathetic or are you just saying that sympathy is meaningless?
One of the big problems with people in general not just in relation to this situation is the tendency of everyone to point fingers at someone else. One of the things that I admire about Bono is that he rarely, if ever points the finger at anyone other than himself. Which is why I find it frustrating that the meaning of his statement is being stretched practically beyond recognition. The sad thing is that most people don’t even realize that they are twisting or distorting the meanings of someone else’s words. Everyone brings their own frame of reference to the things they read or hear it is easy to jump to conclusions or focus only on what supports what one already believes. Rigorous arguement requires discernment and careful attention to what is actually being presented. Unfortunately those qualities are in far too short a supply these days. I’ve enjoyed this little exchange because it is refreshing to find someone who addresses the actual arguements presented.
Good businessmen understand that efficient businesses reshape as and when necessary. Although Bono has expressed his disappointment that jobs are being/will be lost as a result of this latest reshaping in the music industry – he ultimately understands that the change is the best and only way forward.
That is why his public utterings are meaningless. It gives his perception of being a general good guy a little shine – but anyone can talk.
I still don’t feel that I am distorting Bono’s words
Classifying what was essentially a statement of sympathy as an “outburst at ISP’s” and considering it to be whole hearted agreement with McGuiness that ISP’s are at fault is what seems to be a distortion or at the very least an extreme exaggeration of this particular statement of Bono’s. It seems to require quite a bit of assumption to stretch these words of Bono’s into those conclusions. That was my point. But it also sounds as if you believe that an expression of sympathy serves only to polish someones image. You see no value in the acknowledgement of pain?
This should all be discussed over a few beers – as it is becoming a lot more philosophical as we progress.
Bono’s sympathy is not sympathy in its truest sense – he feels sorry for the situation within which some people are currently finding themselves (the ‘music lovers’) – yes.
But when this sympathy is being willfully passed around – the man is fully intune with the fact that the change must occur. That is what makes his sympathy meaningless. For one to feel truely sympathetic – they should, if it is in their power, try to do something to prevent the injustice – but he doesn’t.
His ‘outburst at ISPs’ is his frustrations at not fully capitalising on the new market available to his business (the bands music). He feels that others are benefiting instead – which is wholly inaccurate and idiotic – and also summizes the music industry’s current way of thinking – simply because they do not have the knowledge to lead their business into the 21st century. I have not misconstrued his words. They seem quite clear.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on what constitutes an “outburst”. Bono’s statement seems rather mild to me not in the “outburst” category. To me an outburst is something much more inflammatory, like some of McGuiness’ statements. As for trying to prevent the injustice he’s been very vocal from the very beginning of the whole internet downloading age about how the industry should embrace the technology instead of suing people over it. U2 didn’t give a shit about fans using Napster, they were loosing more sales through commercially bootlegged CD’s. They have only ever complained about commercial bootleggers who were making money off of the fans, especially those selling inferior quality merchandise. They have at times actively encouraged fans to trade their music. Bono’s himself has pushed for DRM free downloads as can be seen with the upcoming (RED) subscription service which will provide regular mp3 downloads without DRM. But in the end they don’t control the record company so there is only so much they can do.
U2 seems to have navigated the changing markets fairly well even if their record company isn’t necessarily doing as well but I don’t know what else you think Bono can do to “fix” the music industry. Although Larry did say at the Hall of Fame induction that Bono should hurry up with the poverty stuff so he can tackle the music industry. LOL U2 makes a lot of smart moves to navigate the changing landscape, like the iPod partnership with Apple and the Complete U2 set on iTunes as well as making sure all their physical releases have deluxe editions with extras and other interesting content to make it worth paying a bit of extra dough.
They have also always been ahead of the game in their contract negotiations and so have never suffered the kind of ripoffs that many artists are victim to, but that has more to do with being willing to pay attention to the business around their art rather than sticking their head in the clouds and thinking that business is beneath them. One of the reasons that the music industry has gotten away with as much as it has is through perpetuating the fiction that artists can’t be any good at business and still be creative artists. U2 have done more than any other artists that I can think of to dispell that myth.
An outburst is an attack of sorts. When Bono states that it is ‘disturbing’ – he is showing clear, negative emotion on the subject. When one takes the time to write a letter, they usually ensure that they are pushing all the right buttons to make their point.
Whether it is an attempt to get the music industry to double their efforts in implementing a solid and lasting strategy for the internet – is another matter. It is obvious that he is getting at ISPs and techology companies incorrectly though – and that is what I find issue with as it shows a complete lack of understanding on the subject. Which is what I was getting at in the post.
It is beyond the remit of this post to discuss the semantics of U2’s business exploits – but I agree that they have done well in that respect. Maybe more kudos should go to McGuinness in that respect than Bono or the band though.
Well heck, I’m just a dog groomer who doesn’t know much about either the music industry or ISP’s but it has always struck me that neither side really has the high ground and in general the artists themselves usually end up being the ones holding the short end of the stick. Part of that is as I’ve said also their own fault for not educating themselves about business but part of it is that in reality even the general public still doesn’t really assign value to the abstractness of creative works. All discussions of value end up revolving around hard costs such as materials, distribution, etc. People who defend their supposed right to get music for free are essentially at the heart of it saying that their is no value to the creative work involved. This is a part of the arguement that I almost never see addressed. I don’t have a solution to that and there might not be one really. You interpret Bono’s words to be blaming the ISP’s but I don’t see that. He used the word ‘when’ not ‘because’. It’s disturbing to see one thing happening at the same time as the other thing not that the one thing was happening because of the other. That is where the frame of reference thing comes in to play. He isn’t literally making a cause and effect connection but if someone is invested in this arguement it is likely to be seen that way. If you already think you know what side Bono is on you will tend to interpret his words in such a way as to confirm that. It is human nature. We automatically try to categorize data according to our own frame of reference. This tendency is one of the things at the heart of all miscommunication.
As for the business decisions U2 state that all business decisions are made with McGuiness and all creative decisions between the four band members. McGuiness has always stated that they are very much the masters of their own destiny.
If you are interested in continuing the conversation off site, I would assume you have my email, you are welcome to use it.