From a recent National Review article entitled "Tenth Avenue Sell-Out?"

"But even those beginning to become jaded were unprepared for what came next: today’s release of a greatest-hits compilation available exclusively at Wal-Mart—corporate enemy No. 1 for the Left. Among die-hard lefty Springsteen fans, there was an outcry similar to the far Left’s outrage at Obama for inviting Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration. Springsteen, they felt, had betrayed them by consorting with Wal-Mart. He was accused on the Huffington Post of selling out children, small businesses, unions, and LGBTs (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and the transgendered) for the almighty dollar. And here you just wanted an inexpensive CD and maybe some tube socks.

At the discussion board at Backstreets.com, an authoritative resource for all things Springsteen, the anger was palpable. In a posting under the heading “How to ensure Bruce hears your voice re: Wal-Mart,” one fan called for anti-Wal-Mart signs at concerts to “force Springsteen to address the issue from the stage,” while another suggested boycotting Springsteen’s new album and upcoming tour. “It makes me so upset. This goes against EVERYTHING he is about. How could Bruce do this?!?!!?!?” posted a third disheartened fan. In a separate discussion of the controversy, a fan accused Springsteen of “fornicating with Wal-Mart.”

For Bruce Springsteen, the realization that he can’t please some of the people all of the time is not necessarily negative. Sales of the Springsteen catalog at Wal-Mart and other retailers will spike, exploding after the Super Bowl and pushing ticket sales. That’s what musicians do: They sell records and concert tickets."

-----

My comment--I am not a fan of "modern" Bruce Springsteen. Have not cared for anything since "Darkness" on '78.

BUT as for this group--I know there are some big "Boss" fans here--whaddya think? Is this recent move, which I might add is going almost unreported, a turn for the hypocritical? Why would he do this, save for it being a complete cash grab (which is totally his business). Does it tick you off? Do mind that he made this deal?

(one other headlines- Boston Herald: "Non-union label: Bruce Springsteen silent on his Wal-Mart exclusive" seems he won't even offer a quote on this)



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-31 17:57 by hbwriter.

It's hard... and not idea... but acts have to go somewhere to maximize profits... and it walmart is the big bidder, how can they say no?

aero--that's fine--but while he sings in d.c. this week to many people that may have lost jobs due to walmart, well, let's hear him address that in one of his famous speeches, you know? all's fair, but i'd love to see him get asked about this.

Before the Springsteen slaggers start to pile on, read THIS article: [online.wsj.com]

hbwriter, if you don't like Springsteen's music, you can simply say so.

Bass--I read it -- this stuck out:

A month before Mr. Springsteen's Wal-Mart deal was announced, Seattle record store owner Matt Vaughan participated in a music-industry panel that included a discussion of exclusives. "I said what would be the death knell to indie retail is if a guy like Bruce Springsteen started playing with the big boxes," recalls Mr. Vaughan, whose Easy Street Records has two locations in Seattle. "Because if the Boss can do it, Tom Petty can do it, Neil Young can do it, Pearl Jam can do it." Mr. Vaughan adds: "These are some of the most principled artists in American songwriting. I wouldn't expect guys like this to even consider this notion."

"The Wal-Mart Greatest Hits package is a limited edition item only rather than a permanent addition to catalog," Columbia Records said in a statement.

------

I don't think it offers any thing even close to anything that might defray some legitimate complaints from longtime followers of his--in fact, I think it substantiates it and actually exposes the "blue collar saviour" for what he is--just another big brand act that will take the best deal possible -- nothing more, nothing less. What, there's no reason for his fans to pile on? If not now, when?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-18 08:03 by hbwriter.

Bass--I did say I don't like his post-Darkness music. The point of this post is not what I think of his music--I merely included that to frame my argument. The point is to call attention to the Walmart deal and to solicit opinions of his real fans. So if you're a fan, do tell.

I'll add--i think there's a first here: Springsteen totally bs-ing his fans: from that WSJ article: "In Mr. Springsteen's case, the impetus for the new, 12-song greatest-hits collection was even more specific, according to people involved. First, priced at just $10 and sold only at Wal-Mart, it was designed as an inexpensive proposition that would appeal to some of the 125 million people expected to tune in to at least part of the Super Bowl."

So he's doing this to help his financially strapped fans?? Sounds like when John Edwards went to work at a Hedge fund so he could, in his words, "learn about the poor." I mean, how stupid do they think people are?

Posted by hbwriter: "I don't think it offers any thing even close to anything that might defray some legitimate complaints from longtime followers of his--in fact, I think it substantiates it and actually exposes the 'blue collar saviour' for what he is--just another big brand act that will take the best deal possible -- nothing more, nothing less. What, there's no reason for his fans to pile on? If not now, when?"

And the Stones are exempt from this? What's your point? Do you honestly think that any musical artist takes a vow of poverty? They are artists AND businessmen. Do you have a problem with that?

Something else must be bothering you. You may as well spell it out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-18 08:15 by bassplayer617.

It's VERY VERY SIMPLE! LISTEN:

WAL*MART DOES NOT KEEP IN STOCK AN ENTIRE ARTISTS CATALOG. NOTICE THIER CD DEPT IS SHRINKING? IF YOU ARE A MAJOR ARTIST AND YOU WANT TO BE STOCKED IN WAL*MART, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A "BEST OF" OR YOU GET NO SHELF SPACE EXCEPT FOR YOUR LAST RELEASE OR TWO.

SPRINGSTEEN FANS SHOULD NOT CARE, THEY OWN ALL THE SONGS ON THE CD. THERE IS NOTHING SPECIAL ABOUT THEM, NO LIVE TRACKS, ETC.

THERE ARE MORAL ISSUES WITH WAL*MART, BUT IF YOU WERE HIS RECORD LABEL, WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF WAL*MART TOLD YOU THAT IT WILL ONLY STOCK YOUR ARTIST IF THERE IS A LOW PRICED "BEST OF" OR THEY WILL NOT STOCK ANY OF THAT ARTISTS PRODUCT EXCEPT FOR A NEW RELEASE?

IF WAL*MART WAS THE EXCLUSIVE SELLER OF A NEW SPRINGSTEEN STUDIO RELEASE (LIKE AC/DC), THEN I COULD SEE HOW FANS WOULD BE TICKED OFF.

OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S NO BIG DEAL...

And the Stones are exempt from this? What's your point? Do you honestly think that any musical artist takes a vow of poverty? They are artists AND businessmen. Do you have a problem with that?

---

NOT AT ALL--I guess you're not understanding my post--I'm wondering if Springsteen's fans are troubled by this seemingly hypocritical decision to get in bed (exclusively!) with a company that seems to go against every single public political stance this guy takes as it applies to the American worker. Last I checked, the Stones don't make it their "act" to get in front of people to piss and moan about politics (even though the pissers and moaners don't have a freaking clue about how to fix anything-except maybe their own record deals)

So tell us--do you find Springsteen hypocritical in this new light?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-18 08:19 by hbwriter.

Quote
hbwriter
Bass--I did say I don't like his post-Darkness music. The point of this post is not what I think of his music--I merely included that to frame my argument. The point is to call attention to the Walmart deal and to solicit opinions of his real fans. So if you're a fan, do tell.

I'll add--i think there's a first here: Springsteen totally bs-ing his fans: from that WSJ article: "In Mr. Springsteen's case, the impetus for the new, 12-song greatest-hits collection was even more specific, according to people involved. First, priced at just $10 and sold only at Wal-Mart, it was designed as an inexpensive proposition that would appeal to some of the 125 million people expected to tune in to at least part of the Super Bowl."

So he's doing this to help his financially strapped fans?? Sounds like when John Edwards went to work at a Hedge fund so he could, in his words, "learn about the poor." I mean, how stupid do they think people are?

So, your argument is based on your political beliefs? Sorry, my friend, this will only get the thread locked or deleted.

Fan Support should be the last thing on his mind. The industry is licking its lips waiting to see if Gene Simmons tries to sues Bruce. For those of you not familiar, it's just like the Joe Satriani vs. Coldplay case. Amazing that not one person in the studio, band or label said anything to Bruce during the recording session.

So, your argument is based on your political beliefs? Sorry, my friend, this will only get the thread locked or deleted.

---

Excuse me? Where are the political beliefs in here? Merely pointing out that in my opinion, a hypocrite is a hypocrite, be they a politico or a musician--and also that if the Springsteen people want to make the case that The Boss is looking out for the little guy, then it's as baldface ridiculous as anything a guy like Edwards did (I'm wary of multi gazillionaires who tell me they're looking out for the poor--sorry, i'm a cynic that way and trust me, it's not a political thing)

Not sure what your chip is all about--I asked a simple question of Springsteen fans here, period--my political beliefs were never presented (they're none of your business) and it's offensive (and a bit bizarre) for you to suggest they were--

Now...will you finally answer the question of this thread and stop deflecting?

DO YOU FIND IT HYPOCRITICAL FOR SPRINGSTEEN TO SIGN WITH WALMART?

train--was not aware of a controversy--he caged a KISS song?

memo to Bass--

one thing we do agree on-Bobby Darin was a genius

The song is "Outlaw Pete" the opening song on Bruce's new release. There are too many simularities to "I Was Made for Loving You" from Kiss. There are some clips on youtube discusing this.

t-just checked a couple out--interesting--though i think they both borrowed a bit from "standing in the shadows of love"

though suing might create a whole lot of PR, hype and needless attention-- is that the sort of thing Gene Simmons would want to be part of?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-18 08:45 by hbwriter.

The Big Question is What will Bono say about Bruce and Wal-Mart?

i heard one today that i always thought you could make a case over--Joe Jackson's "Breaking Us In Two" - seems very similar to Badfinger's "Day After Day"

On Bruce's defense, there is what looks like an official Bruce Springsteen channel on youtube and you can watch high quality videos, appearances and the new videos from the yet to be released CD.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Is "hbwriter" in HB? And if so, are they going to this >

[hollywoodstones.com]

Quote
stonesrule
The Big Question is What will Bono say about Bruce and Wal-Mart?

"Bruce, how many hundreds of thousands of CD's did Wal*Mart pre-order?"

T--that's all good, and if voicing my dislike of his modern stuff as a set up here to my point was out of bounds to folks here who like him--my bad. I was just venting a bit because I do find it odd that he of all people would strike this deal--given his public stances. And I am genuinely curious if this is off putting to serious fans--

also, i hate to say it but i have become a bit numb to the Stones corporate overtures over the years--and i do think a lot of it has become ridiculous--but Springsteen, who even though I feel has become pretentious, I admit, I always did sort of like his anti corporate pose--for instance, he played the first STAPLES Center show--supposedly hates the class-division feel of the place and so next time he returned to the gloriously run down Sorts Arena (where I saw him kick butt around 1980 or so) So that said, I was sort of put off by the deal and the fact that they tried to slip it by with a lame disclaimer.

nothing here that offends this longtime bruce fan. not even an issue imho.
the self-styled 'progressives' and 'left,' are infamous for turning on their own and hindering real progress when it presents itself imo.

they are Obama's biggest danger, and an impediment to real change in many ways. meet the media boss, same as the old media boss. in fact they ARE the same ol' media boss if we look at what's funding huffpo for example.

springsteen remains one of the most important rockers to ever hit the stage or studio. hb likes the classic bruce back in the day but i found many projects of his, solo and with the E STreeters very worthwhile my time. hb, you even eschew born in the u.s.a. and everything after? really? and NOTHING from the classic "river" album? (right after 'darkness' if i remember correctly)
aw, say it ain't so joe. jeeze, nor that live double album? gosh call me surprised.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-18 11:15 by Beelyboy.

While dissing Springsteen, do not forget about Rolling Stones and Michael "it's all about the money" Cohl.

Hello,

This is a difficult one for me to get my head around,to put it mildly.In a strange way I also wonder whether I really have a valid opinion on this as I'm not a U.S. citizen,have shopped at WalMart just once (in Joliet,IL since you ask) and don't know Bruce personally.But I am fan of his music and live shows so perhaps that is good enough.

Having said that,something definitely doesn't sit right with this decision.You just know when something ain't right.I am assuming that Bruce had the final say in allowing a tie-up with WalMart.@#$%&,for all I know maybe it was his idea in the first place because The Eagles had already dealt with WM in a very,very profitable manner and Don Henley is a friend of Bruce.
I'm not defending BS here,merely thinking through my own feelings out loud.Is he still the same bloke who has given at least as much and very probably more than most away to various good causes?And by 'as much' I mean both in terms of income donated but also in terms of giving up his own time to play benefits when he could be with his own family enjoying a slice of the $200-odd million that he and The E-Streeters grossed in 2007/2008.

These are causes such as Armed Forces Veterans,local food banks in every town he plays,Asbury Park,Democratic candidates,standing up for the rights of 'Illegals':there may well be others that I don't know of.This is in addition to the many anecdotal accounts of his unannounced help.Things ranging from paying for the hospital bills of random strangers who had the good fortune to be his waitress or replacing the uniforms of a Marching Band,paying for a new ambulance and more.
More than this,he is a guy who will continue to support these causes and turn-up year-on-year which sets him apart from the vast majority of performers.

I suppose it's because he is that kind of Decent Man that I feel...disappointed.Even as I type that I know that everyone has feet of clay and that Bruce is as capable of being as useless as any of us-have we expected too much out of him?
He must be aware of WM's appalling track record on their own workers' rights though,so what on earth is he thinking of?Well,I read one interview with Don Henley where he said that WM's new wanna-be-green-credentials and their newly-changed attitude to their workers were enough to seal the deal.That and the absolute shed-load of cash that came his way,but to be fair he did admit to that too.It isn't called The Music Business for no good reason.

However,I have read the following posts about all this from BS fans:

"That's really what this Walmart deal, and NFL deal is about. Bruce has become disconnected from his "working class" fanbase, by and large. He's trying to re-establish that relationship with these endeavours, right or wrong."

...and this one...

"So why not criticize him for even selling his CD's through WM in the first place? Why is that OK, but the idea of "exclusive" crosses the line?
If that is WM's reputation, then even supporting them in the first place should be cause for equal criticism.The only thing the exclusiviity does is raise it to another level, but the sin remains the same."


...also...

"As a father of 4 kids on a teacher's salary, I can tell you that my family is thankful for Wal-Mart! I got no problem shopping there, white trash that I am."

As of today there is no mention of the WM best-of album on Bruce's official site.There are plenty of reminders for me of the stupendously good live shows that he and The E-Streeters gave over the last two years.This is a performer who will bust his guts to give his fans the best show that he can,time and again.

I will give the man the benefit of my doubt and disappointment in the meantime.

To end this post on an 'up' I include the following,as lfted from Backstreets.com:

"Sunday, February 1: Bruce and the E Street Band play Super Bowl XLIII Halftime.Visit NFL.com to watch the Halftime commercial, and to have a look at and discuss seven "tentative playlists" just posted today. For another take on how halftime might go, don't miss The Sports Guy's column -- this is Bill Simmons at ESPN.com:

As a lifelong Bruce Springsteen fan, the Super Bowl ads for his performance next month never stop flooring me. Don't they know how the man is wired? He can't bang out three songs without sprinkling one autobiographical story in there, and he certainly can't just go away without returning for an encore, right? (Note to the NFL: After Bruce finishes his set, hog-tie him to one of the uprights or else he's coming back out for three more songs. Just trust me. You don't want Bruce wandering back onto the field with his guitar like Shooter in "Hoosiers" and getting bowled over by a safety.) Look, Bruce might be telling the NFL, "Don't worry, I won't tell a story. I'll just sing my three songs and get out of there." But he won't be able to do it. You watch. We're gonna get a moment like this after the second song.

"Tampa Baaaaaaaay! (Crowd cheers.) Is anyone alive tonight??? (Crowd goes crazy.) Super Bowl Forty-Threeeeeee!!! (Crowd goes crazy as Bruce turns somber.) You know, when I was growing up, the only thing my dad hated more than me was my guitar. (Crowd hushes.) He was always saying, 'Bruce, I wish you never got that danged guitar.' So one day I was playing it in my room, my dad was watching Super Bowl Three between the Jets and … uh … uh … I think it was the Colts. Big man, was it the Colts? (Clarence says, 'Yeah, boss. The Colts.') Well, turns out my dad had a ton of money on the Colts … and they lost. But I didn't care. I was just up in my room strummin' my guitar. Then Dad came upstairs, and I remember asking, "Hey, Pop, who won the game? And Dad got mad and broke my guitar over my head. He busted me up pretty bad, I needed 589 stitches to close the wound. From then on, I knew I needed to start watching football. And so I did. (Dramatic pause.) This is 'Darlington County.'"


Nice work!

Cheers,

Si.

It's easy to complain about Springsteen doing what I'd say 90% of people would do. It's nothing more than doing whatever he can to make his money. It's the music BUSINESS. As much as we like to think it's all about the art, it's just not true. He's getting his music out there. Radio and MTV are not viable outlets for him anymore. It's sad but it's true. I can't blame him for using Wal Mart. And that is exactly what is happening. Wal Mart needs Bruce a lot more than Bruce needs Wal Mart. And is Wal Mart really that evil? Although I live in Los Angeles, my family lives in rural areas that have Wal Mart and they have been able to help them save money. To me, the stores are dirty and cluttered but they do serve a purpose and do help the common man that can't afford higher prices. Who cares where Bruce sells his music?

The Eagles opened the door for Bruce.

And...Walmart does not need Bruce more than Bruce needs Walmart.

I don't have a problem with Bruce & I don't have a problem with Walmart...
...but I just wish all these sanctimonious "ARTISTS" would admit that
they are in it for the money & fame and not pretend that they are
so virtuous...doing it for other reasons. They are businessmen. Capitalists.

Bruce has millions of $. He could afford to be a principled "artist" now.
He can afford to let his music stand on its own.,,without worrying
about paying the bills. He is still pushing the pseudo blue-collar image. Obviously the Walmart deal is only about money. Just admit it Bruce.


IORR............but I like it!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-01-18 14:38 by sweet neo con.

The music business has always been more about business than music.

I personally love Bruce's music and dislike everything else about him - the holier-than-thou speeches from the stage, the "Hollywood" Bruce (won a Golden Globe recently), the "I really care about you poor saps" bullshit, etc.

That said, the songs and concerts are magical. I'll probably buy it if there's anything I don't have on it.

Quote
hbwriter

DO YOU FIND IT HYPOCRITICAL FOR SPRINGSTEEN TO SIGN WITH WALMART?

No.