Quote
Rockman
Cashmere Goats Hair Soup .....

Quote
The Greek

Quote
Gazza

Quote
camper88

Quote
Gazza

In addition, if you 'banned' people for posting a 'rumour' that turned out to be incorrect, you'd quickly have no one left on any board. Even the people who run it. People do get info wrong despite acting in good faith. It happens.

For example, I heard this rumour that Gazza may have an aunt who may have balls. I can neither confirm nor deny this story.

That would be my dad's long lost sister - good old Aunt Fred.

Strange ol' bird.

Gazza, just a little reminder,there is no such thing as freedom of the press ,freedom of the net and so on .on BV board does he not edit and remove posts at his discretion?.to me this issue was like going in a sold out theatre and yelling fire ,with the ensuing choas .i am talking from the land of liberty and freedom for all ,and if you believe that well .you get where i am coming from.oh by the way i never bought into that aussie report .

I never really bought it either and whilst it's bv's site and his choice to remove posts as he sees fit, I don't believe I've ever seen him remove a post quoting a news story. It speaks volumes that this thread is now linked to the main news section page on IORR, so he obviously feels its a valid enough talking point.

IMO, spreading a rumour that you know to be untrue just to upset people is one thing (I've booted people from my own board for doing just that myself, so I've no qualms about it) - posting a story 'as is' that appeared on a news site which is in the public domain is another thing entirely. All it took was to do a google news search for 'Rolling Stones' or 'Charlie Watts' and it was there and if Deathgod (who I know is a stand up guy and not a bullshit artist) hadnt done that, someone else would have done a few minutes later. I personally check search engines for Stones stories every day and I'm sure lots of other people do too.

Its not his or anyone else's fault that a journalist posted the original story - and the story's existence to begin with was deemed significant enough for the band's press office to wake up after several months in a coma to actually take the trouble of dismissing it.

Its a message board, and its in the nature of any message board to have its members quote or copy and paste news stories, whether they're good news stories or not. If its already in the public domain, its absolutely pointless to pretend it doesn't exist. The person posting the story is NOT the person who is spreading the rumour.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-04 18:58 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
The Greek

Quote
Gazza

Quote
camper88

Quote
Gazza

In addition, if you 'banned' people for posting a 'rumour' that turned out to be incorrect, you'd quickly have no one left on any board. Even the people who run it. People do get info wrong despite acting in good faith. It happens.

For example, I heard this rumour that Gazza may have an aunt who may have balls. I can neither confirm nor deny this story.

That would be my dad's long lost sister - good old Aunt Fred.

Strange ol' bird.

Gazza, just a little reminder,there is no such thing as freedom of the press ,freedom of the net and so on .on BV board does he not edit and remove posts at his discretion?.to me this issue was like going in a sold out theatre and yelling fire ,with the ensuing choas .i am talking from the land of liberty and freedom for all ,and if you believe that well .you get where i am coming from.oh by the way i never bought into that aussie report .

I never really bought it either and whilst it's bv's site and his choice to remove posts as he sees fit, I don't believe I've ever seen him remove a post quoting a news story.

IMO, spreading a rumour that you know to be untrue just to upset people is one thing (I've booted people from my own board for doing just that myself, so I've no qualms about it) - posting a story 'as is' that appeared on a news site which is in the public domain is another thing entirely. All it took was to do a google news search for 'Rolling Stones' or 'Charlie Watts' and it was there and if Deathgod (who I know is a stand up guy and not a bullshit artist) hadnt done that, someone else would have done a few minutes later. I personally check search engines for Stones stories every day and I'm sure lots of other people do too.

Its not his or anyone else's fault that a journalist posted the original story - and the story's existence to begin with was deemed significant enough for the band's press office to wake up after several months in a coma to actually take the trouble of dismissing it.

Its a message board, and its in the nature of any message board to have its members quote or copy and paste news stories, whether they're good news stories or not. If its already in the public domain, its absolutely pointless to pretend it doesn't exist. The person posting the story is NOT the person who is spreading the rumour.

fair enough,and i agree and was surprised that the stones p.r.dept shot the report down.

Me too - but in a good way!

Quote
CindyC
I think he looks like that Susan Boyle in a wig.

alright... this one's easy..

Too close for comfort!

Quote

Undercover is sticking by the absolute truth of the story until Charlie Watts himself denies it.

This is ridiculous: then you can create any story about any person an continue doing so just stating it is true until the related person denies it.

Then I can say: Undercover has been paid to publish this history by some mean people who want to undermine Stones. Or Undercover is an anti Stones homepage.

This is true until Undercover can prove the opposite

What if this story was intentionally put out as a trial balloon, or a test?
The PR department figured that a strategically placed "rumour" would draw reaction from the die-hard fans only. Little did they realize that the Worldwide Stones Community would be informed almost immediately, setting off a chain reaction that they couldn't imagine, let alone comprehend. This obviously set off a reaction that warranted an "official" statement, within hours of the initial "leak."

If you buy into my theory, then I ask this question...
What type of reaction do you think that they expected?
Or, what type of reaction do you think they desire?...

Talk amongst yourselves...

Quote
mtaylor

Quote

Undercover is sticking by the absolute truth of the story until Charlie Watts himself denies it.

This is ridiculous: then you can create any story about any person an continue doing so just stating it is true until the related person denies it.

Then I can say: Undercover has been paid to publish this history by some mean people who want to undermine Stones. Or Undercover is an anti Stones homepage.

This is true until Undercover can prove the opposite

Cashmere is actually a llama. This is true until he can prove the opposite.

You got the Sun, You got the Moon,
and you've got
The Rolling Stones

Quote
Kurt
What if this story was intentionally put out as a trial balloon, or a test?
The PR department figured that a strategically placed "rumour" would draw reaction from the die-hard fans only. Little did they realize that the Worldwide Stones Community would be informed almost immediately, setting off a chain reaction that they couldn't imagine, let alone comprehend. This obviously set off a reaction that warranted an "official" statement, within hours of the initial "leak."

If you buy into my theory, then I ask this question...
What type of reaction do you think that they expected?
Or, what type of reaction do you think they desire?...

Talk amongst yourselves...

Not an entirely impossible scenario. If so,I think they probably did get the reaction they wanted and expected.

"It's just some friends of mine and they're busting down the door"

conspiracy theorists are at every turn....

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
Kurt
What if this story was intentionally put out as a trial balloon, or a test?
The PR department figured that a strategically placed "rumour" would draw reaction from the die-hard fans only. Little did they realize that the Worldwide Stones Community would be informed almost immediately, setting off a chain reaction that they couldn't imagine, let alone comprehend. This obviously set off a reaction that warranted an "official" statement, within hours of the initial "leak."

If you buy into my theory, then I ask this question...
What type of reaction do you think that they expected?
Or, what type of reaction do you think they desire?...

Talk amongst yourselves...

Not an entirely impossible scenario. If so,I think they probably did get the reaction they wanted and expected.

Hell, if they had to resort to these sorts of antics to "test the waters" ... they don't know either themselves, or us - the fans - as well as they should !!

>> What if this story was intentionally put out as a trial balloon, or a test? <<

... a "test" of what?
disinformation to check who it is in the "semi-inner circles" that goes leaking stuff to cashmere llamas?
yeah maybe

I don't believe this news either. No Charlie Watts I NO STONES!!!

drummer_dude

Hope this is just rumor...or not even true at all.

Not true at 3:03 - 3:04 and onwards
There is a time marker in my own post under the clip if ya double-clic it.







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-05 02:35 by Baboon Bro.

tickets left? how?why?

..because it wasnt well publicised, the band is unknown and most people have no interest in boogie woogie

Quote
with sssoul
>> What if this story was intentionally put out as a trial balloon, or a test? <<

... a "test" of what?
disinformation to check who it is in the "semi-inner circles" that goes leaking stuff to cashmere llamas?
yeah maybe

Thank you with sssoul. That is what I was thinking too. A test for what?

Nice little clip. Charlie never ceases to be fantastic.
To paraphrase Long John Baldry, it's great to lay some boogie woogie on the king of rock n' roll drumming.

With sssoul,

I wouldn't want to or hope to feed the conspiracy fires, but bands in the past have been known to announce that a band member's gone missing or has quit in order to see how much interest the story stirs up--not so much a test as a poor marketing ploy. The Clash did that, according to Joe Strummer in The Future's unwritten, when he (Joe) "went missing" to Paris before a tour. Again, I'm not saying that's what's happening here, but it's happened in the past . . . may be happening with that desert Oasis band right now.

popcorn's on me tonight.

"Not true at 3:03 - 3:04 and onwards"

Then that is clear, Charile is not leaving, and we can delete this stupid thread.

latest from undercover :

[undercover.com.au] ill_With_The_Stones

Charlie Watts Confirms He Is Still With The Stones

by Paul Cashmere - September 5 2009
photo by Ros O'Gorman

The good news for Rolling Stones fans is that Charlie Watts has announced on a UK radio interview that he has not left the band.

Undercover inadvertently sent shockwaves through the Stones community this week when we published a story saying that Charlie had left the band after being advised by a source close to a member of the band.

Within a matter of hours, a publicist for the Stones was shooting down the story although sceptics still insisted that where there is smoke there is fire.

Val King of Spinearth did the most thorough research into the story, connecting with Stones rep Bernard Doherty who says he confronted Charlie about it. “We literally laughed our arses off for two good minutes,” he told King.

Doherty also said Mick Jagger rang him from the Bahamas and jokingly asked why no-one had told him Charlie had left the band.

Charlie, always a man of few words, had just two words to say when he was asked about it on the BBC today. “Not true,” was his reply.

The Undercover story could have quickly been dismissed if it was a fabrication but there seemed to be enough legs in our story to make the Stones themselves jump into action.

So when will we hear new music from the Stones or see them on tour again? That may be for a very long time according to Doherty’s comments to Val King. “I can tell you that Charlie isn't going anywhere. They have the 50th anniversary coming up, are working on the next CD, and planning tours," he said.

The Stones 50th anniversary with Charlie in the band will be in January 2013. That is a lot of planning for an anniversary still more than 3 years away.

In 2013, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards will both turn 70. Charlie will be 72. In fact Bill Wyman might even get out of bed for that anniversary. He will be 77 by then.

For the record, Wyman resigned the Rolling Stones in January 1991. He fulfilled the recording of just one more song, ‘Sex Drive’ for the Flashpoint album. Bill’s departure was continually denied until December 1992 when the Stones reactivated.

[www.spinearth.tv] ory

Paul Cashmere, CEO of Undercover Media - Australia, and author of yesterdays controversial article quoting a "Rolling Stones insider" that insists Charlie Watts has left the band, is standing by his story and source. The article sent an immediate slew of Facebookers, Myspacers and Twits rushing to their laptops and Blackberrys to devour scaps of the news.

An official rebuttal was issued a few hours after the story hit the internet by Stones' PR spokeswoman, Fran Curtis, which stated, "Contrary to a fabricated story that ran this morning on a small music web site in Australia, drummer Charlie Watts has not left The Rolling Stones."

Cashmere posted the following on the main page of undercover.com:
"Yesterday’s story has gone right to the centre of the Stones empire with an announcement from Stones spokesperson Fran Curtis calling it a ‘”fabricated story”. Not quite. The story did not come from an anonymous email or from someone unconnectetd to the band. It was a reliable source. Right now, we will take on board at face value the statement from Fran Curtis saying “drummer Charlie Watts has not left The Rolling Stones” and look forward to hearing about what the Stones will do next. Not every official announcement about an artist always turns out to be true. Not every reliable source always turns out to be right either. Undercover does not make up stories. We write about what we hear and what we've heard is Charlie has left the band. Undercover is sticking by the absolute truth of the story until Charlie Watts himself denies it."

Perhaps some of the people/publications out there slinging insults and making assumptions about Undercover should have taken the time to "Google" Paul Cashmere. His professional resume is impressive and spans a career going back to his early radio days in the 70's and 80's. He is considered by many to be a media pioneer and veteran who's roots run deep in the music industry. Undercover Media was founded in 1994 and launched one of the first online music sites and magazine on CD-ROM in the world, which claims to reach more than 2 million readers worldwide with daily music and news interviews. Other media have referenced undercover.com as "usually very reliable."

I emailed Mr. Cashmere to ask him if he was prepared to stand behind or reveal the source that caused the world to brace for a Rolling Stones breakup in light of the article he wrote and how he felt about the claims that his story was false. In an email received a short while ago, Paul Cashmere wrote:

"I am not about to reveal the source but by all means do your digging. I spoke with my source again today after the fallout from the story and he still insists it it 100% accurate.

Right now, when they will do something again, all shall be revealed.

I can't imagine Charlie missing out on the 50th in 2013, whatever that may be, but I can't see him agree to another world tour. Time will tell.

Anyone who knows us knows we are not tabloid, gossip or sensational. We report the news as we hear it and we don't report it unless we are convinced it is accurate." Paul Cashmere, CEO

So, the saga continues...for now. We have been reporting all sides of this story for the last 24 hours. At this juncture, Mr. Cashmere has a 50/50 shot of coming out of this smelling like a rose if his source turns out to be true. I personally hope that his source was wrong or misinformed.

[spinearth.tv]

This is the story that just won't go away. An article on Undercover.com hit the wires on Tuesday with claims that a Rolling Stones insider leaked the news that Charlie Watts, Stones drummer for over 37 years, had quit the band.Fans around the world were shocked and were bracing for a possible break up of the band altogether.

Despite an official statement by Fran Curtis, the head of Rolling Stones' North American public relations, that Charlie had not left the band, speculation and rumors are still flying all over cyberspace. But instead of maintaining the suspense, we're trying to figure things out just as much as anyone.

First of all, this fire has been fueled by a number of factors, starting with the author of the original article and CEO of Undercover Media, Paul Cashmere, who insists his source is "100% correct" and "time will show that my story was accurate." Bloggers and Twitters are speculating as well, wondering why Charlie Watts hasn't dispelled the rumor himself.

I spoke with "The Man", Bernard Doherty, in London yesterday afternoon to try to get to the bottom of it all. Doherty is the O.G. of PR in Europe and has been the main press liaison for the Stones for over 23 years. His company, LD Communications, boasts an A+ List roster of "whos who" in music; as well as handling PR for just about every major show in the last three decades (Live Aid, Concert for Dianna - you name it - he was behind it).

Doherty was adamant that Charlie Watts is not leaving the band. When I told him that Paul Cashmere was backing his source, he replied laughingly, "Well, of course he is! This is the best publicity he could have ask for, both for his website and himself. Sounds like something drummed up in a pub in Australia. 'Yeah, let's say Charlie Watts is quitting the Stones!'... It's absolutely NOT true and was a fabricated story to elicit just this kind of response. And it worked. Here we are talking about this for ten minutes. Like SPIN or I have nothing better to do. Ridiculous waste of time for both of us."

I pointed out that many fans and other media were wondering why Charlie had not issued a personal statement and the fact that no one from the band had spoken out on the subject either. Doherty said,
"Look, as soon as the story hit, I waited until a respectable 9 a.m. to walk the short distance from LD Comm. to Charlie's flat (although he is an early riser). I rang the bell and he answered. I won't tell you his exact words, because they contain some expletives, but we literally laughed our arses off for a good two minutes. So, obviously he is finding humor in the notion that he would quit the band. We discussed issuing an official statement, and that truly should have been the end of it. Short of marching him up on a stage in front of cameras, which we will not do, the official statement should suffice."

Doherty went on to say, "Perhaps the world hasn't heard from the band, but Mick (Jagger) called me yesterday from the West Indies and very jokingly asked why no one told him Charlie had quit. Again, we just had a great laugh over it! How preposterous that this rumor; started by someone for publicity and does not know what he's talking about (Cashmere) has been blown so out of proportion."

I asked him if there were any plans to have Charlie Watts issue a personal statement, to which Doherty replied, "Not at this time, I don't believe. A statement was issued by Fran Curtis (PR firm of Rogers & Cowan - NYC). Everyone knows who Fran is, and that should truly suffice to set everyone's mind at ease. She would be the one to decide if that were to happen, but I can tell you that Charlie isn't going anywhere. They have the 50th anniversary coming up, are working on the next CD, and planning tours."

Fran Curtis is out of the office for Labor Day Weekend and could not be reached for comment. But we think the case is closed here. Finally!

Funny little detail caused all this hassle: It looks like that the 50th Anniversary is nowadays considered to be January 2013... No Stones without Charlie! Perhaps Charlie actually IS The Rolling Stones!

The status of Charlie goes as a winner from all this...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-09-05 11:57 by Doxa.

I can't be bothered reading the above post!

They have the 50th anniversary coming up, are working on the next CD, and planning tours.

Hmm

well at least this 'story' has got the Stones officials talking to the media again.

So new DVDs, remasters, working on new CD, 'contemplating' a tour ... all in good spirits ...

me is happy.

by Paul Cashmere - September 5 2009

...Undercover inadvertently sent shockwaves through the Stones community this week when we published a story saying that Charlie had left the band after being advised by a source close to a member of the band.



"inadvertently"? What did he think was going to happen. We would read it and go, hmmmmm, interesting, pass me the sugar.

well we all know they are not waiting until 2013 to tour so the 50th will be at least two tours from now, they are going out next year for sure

Not believing a word of this... If it comes out official word then we'll just have to believe it then, but if it doesn't come from Mr. Watts' mouth it is just rubbish like they say.

drummer_dude