I've been away for a while submerged in work and travel...but I had to post this for the brother/sisterhood at IORR. This is from a writer that I respect, Dave Marsh. I'm sure you all have read his work through the years. What he has to say is scathing. And fascinating. I just read it and I thought immediately that it would be interesting to the always lively members of IORR.

Not One Red Cent
Bono's Bullshit
By DAVE MARSH

I read with growing dismay each successive paragraph of David Carr's fawning New York Times business section piece on Bono, the Red Campaign and Vanity Fair yesterday morning. Later, I read the more interesting piece from Advertising Age that shows that all the sturm and drang from Red has generated $18 million for African relief-I wonder if that'll even be enough to replace the condoms Bono's "effective" friend the Shrub refuses to allow U.S. government-supported agencies to deliver. You can be dead certain that it is hardly a match for the combined profits that the corporations for which Red fronts expect to pull out of all those products.

What maddens me most is that articles like this are built upon a cascading series of false premises, so I thought I'd catalogue the ones in the Times column.

· Bono is a "rare" rock star. Almost every rock star has some kind of charitable endeavor.

· Only the opinions of celebrities (the Pope, Bill Gates) are of any consequence in getting the job done.

· Wealth and charity are somehow a "contradiction." Unless there is wealth, there can be no charity in the sense that Bono and Carr use the term (which is quite a bit different than, say, St. Paul's definition).

· Bono is not part of the "Sally Struthers" thing. But of course, his entire project depends on sustaining the image of Africans as unable to fight for themselves, which is one reason one encounters no Africans-certainly no poor ones--writing for these Bono guest edits. It also depends quite a good bit on their continuing to be humiliated by their poverty (presuming they are, other than in the minds Bono loves most).

· "The crucial role that commerce will play" as a new thing. That has been the barking sales pitch of imperialism and its missionaries from the first day that Europeans landed in Africa. (If Bono didn't think that history began when Jeffrey Sachs conned his first Russian, he'd know this.) Bono doesn't really contend that corporations have a "crucial role," anyway. He premises this statement on his insistent, addled idea that they are the only vehicle by which the problems of African poverty and disease can be solved, despite the fact that everywhere on Earth that these corporations exist, there is a great deal of poverty and disease.

· The bizarre assertion that, in this case (but there is always something equivalent to this), China wants to invest in Africa as somehow a boon to the poor. It is either the opposite (the Chinese invest in Africa because they can exploit African workers even more than Chinese ones) or irrelevant (since the profits will go to China, not whatever part of Africa the Chinese are invested in.) By the way, Bono knows that there are a couple dozen nations that comprise Africa and that Chinese and other corporations invest in one or more of those, not the continent as a whole, right? I read the whole Independent issue and never heard a peep about this reality.

· "Africa is sexy." How many hundred years of racism does that tightly packed cliché contain?

· "People need to know it." If, after all these years of grandstanding, even the kind of person who reads Vanity Fair doesn't know it, what does that say about the Red approach?

· Changing the subject as soon as the topic of extreme wealth comes up-changing it to AIDS, the only time (it would appear) that AIDS comes up in the interview. Talking from both sides of his mouth as usual: If 5000 people a day are dying, as they are, for what, exactly, do Bush and Blair and Bono's other powerful cronies earn their high marks?

· Refusing to discuss his ownership of Forbes, ostensibly because it's off the topic. It couldn't be more on topic given that Capitalist Tool Bono is about to edit a slick magazine, claims he lives in the world of media, claims that such commerce-friendly publications have a "crucial" role to play.

· Bono sees the world through rose-tinted glasses. The Red campaign is based on an entirely cynical view of what motivates humans.

· Bono would have been a journalist. In fact, he did freelance a few pieces, universally undistinguished ones; his more obvious career choices would have been either a priest or a pimp.

· "Striking fear in the hearts of writers." As if this piece weren't an example of how he carefully selects easily intimidated stenographers to do his bidding. (Would a real journalist have stopped at "I don't want to talk about" Forbes or let him get away with changing the subject to AIDS when the topic of his own arrogance comes up? Or that if he did quote Bono in those cases that he shouldn't have written a little detail about the contradictions Bono is avoiding, as I have managed to do in about a sentence each here?)

How long before people will call a con a con? How many more people have to die in Africa before we acknowledge that this process is a fraud and a failure and that the evidentiary trail is not short but quite long (it's been 22 years since LiveAid)?

Dave Marsh (along with Lee Ballinger) edits Rock & Rap Confidential, one of CounterPunch's favorite newsletters, now available for free by emailing: : rockrap@aol.com Marsh's definitive and monumental biography of Bruce Springsteen has just been reissued, with 12,000 new words, under the title Two Hearts.

Marsh regularly hammers out rantings like this one for Holler If Ya Hear Me, the new collective blog about the music industry.

Diamond rings, Vaseline, you gave me disease, well, I lost a lot of love over you.

Interesting. My reply is:

So Bono has money, an ego and a complex. So What. He raises awareness. U2 raises awareness, whether it be Amnesty Int'l, AIDS, or music education in Louisiana post-Katrina. Bono and the Edge use their celebrity power to raise awareness. They make loads of money off their music, then raise awareness on issues relating to the less fortunate. Aren't there other (far worse) people to gripe about?

Wait... I'm not done. About the Bush thing... Bono talks to Bush, tries to work with him. Isn't that commendable? He could just stand on the sidelines and complain about Bush, like the rest of us, but he has power and $$, enough to get him into the oval office for a chat. Good for F%$#ing him! I wouldn't mind having a chat with our presidential shrubbery myself.

So what's your point Turd? U2 sucks and the Stones rule? Explain your mind set to me cause I see U2 being much more innovative then Micky J. and band mates these days (but i don't have a Dave Marsh article to prove my point so I'm at a BIG disadvantage.....)

HelterSkelter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what's your point Turd? U2 sucks and the Stones
> rule? Explain your mind set to me cause I see U2
> being much more innovative then Micky J. and band
> mates these days (but i don't have a Dave Marsh
> article to prove my point so I'm at a BIG
> disadvantage.....)

That wasn't Turd's point at all. He merely copied and pasted an article by a well-respected journalist. (Ok, Marsh's Springsteen books were embarassingly sycophantic, but Bruce is a close friend)

It's an interesting polemic, the piece, painting the Bono-fronted Red campaign as a failure, both commercially and spiritually.

As for this bollocks about Bono "raising awareness". Awareness about what, exactly? That Africa's mostly a poor, beleaguered continent awash with AIDS and famine? It's on the news every other night, all over the internet, and in the papers. Everyone's aware of that. Few care enough to donate to Oxfam (which Bono should have fronted), Medecins Sans Frontiers (which Bono should have fronted) or the Red Cross.

One of Africa's main problems is that its individual countries are run by corrupt dictators (see Mugabe) who let their people starve while stealing most of the foreign aid that comes their way.

They're also tackling the continent the wrong way. They should be doing it country by country. Anyone up for voluntary work in Somalia? Maybe we should send Bono there.

Oh God, if there's anyone I hate more in rock journalism it's Dave Marsh.

Dave Marsh may be a respected rock critic, but he really is a bit mixed up on many points by all this. I'll address a few of his statements.

"all the sturm and drang from Red has generated $18 million for African relief" - He tries to make it seem that it should be much more than this after all the effort that has been put into the Red campaign. The reality is this campaign was only put into place roughly 6-8 months ago. After 1 year, this total may very well be double that amount and the idea behind the campaign is that it will be ongoing in the years to come. You can debate whther $18,000,000 is a lot or not very much in the scheme of things, but it's certainly better than $0 had this campaign not existed.

Personally I feel it has been very successful in the short run and will continue to be in the long run, because it is not asking for anyone to donate money. It's all about having people buy the type of product they would already buy and having profits from those items go to relief. Here in Los Angeles, I would say that every week I see at least 1 person on the street wearing a Red tshirt and I expect that to increase.

"Bono sees the world through rose-tinted glasses. The Red campaign is based on an entirely cynical view of what motivates humans." - If by not asking people to donate money to a cause and instead getting them to buy useful products is a cynical way of looking at people, so be it. It's a far more realistic way of generating money for a cause than expecting people to give money with nothing in return other than a good conscience.

"Bono is not part of the "Sally Struthers" thing. But of course, his entire project depends on sustaining the image of Africans as unable to fight for themselves, which is one reason one encounters no Africans-certainly no poor ones--writing for these Bono guest edits. It also depends quite a good bit on their continuing to be humiliated by their poverty (presuming they are, other than in the minds Bono loves most). " - Marsh clearly has not listened to what Bono has said. Bono consistently says that Africans don't want charity and that they are a proud people. Instead he has said they want to be able to be productive and to this end, his group and others have been creating jobs for people in Africa. Bono has a clothing company known as Edun and all the clothing is made in Africa. The idea is let the people be and feel productive and bring in money in that way, rather than entirely form aid from the West.

The reason that Bono approach is winning over common people and both left anf right wing politicians is that it is NOT based on people continually donating money to help Africans. His first step is to have nations of the world give debt relief to many impoverished African nations. With his One campaign, it is not about having people donate money, rather than to give of their time in pressuring politicians. His next step is in trying to aid in creating a greater infrastructure in which Africans can work to earn money instead of relying on Western relief. He is just trying to encourage people in the West to buy these products either manufactured by Africans or where corporations are signed on to donate a large percentage of their profits. In any case, he is not asking for the common people to give away their hard earned money to charity, which makes his campaign a lot different than most and in my opinion, it's a lot more realistic way to create change in the long run.

Dave Marsh clearly idolizes and is prctically part of the family with Bruce Springsteen, who is a very good friend of Bono's. Maybe Dave should have asked Bruce's opinion on all of this prior to writing his ill-informed rant.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-17 00:55 by Halup.

Gee, I've been saying all these things on this board for years. Nice to see vindication in print. Just stand up, sing (or whatever that curiously noxious sound is you make), and shut up. Don't give me no more brother, brother. I say potato, you say potato famine.

HEILOOBAAS Wrote:
Just stand up, sing (or whatever that
> curiously noxious sound is you make), and shut up.
> Don't give me no more brother, brother. I say
> potato, you say potato famine.


Ive heard this before and I dont agree with a flat out staatment like this. How can you really appreciate an artist, or anyone if you dont care at all about what they think?

Ive heard this before and I dont agree with a flat out staatment like this. How can you really appreciate an artist, or anyone if you dont care at all about what they think?

Listen to their lyrics, read their books, view their art. THAT's how.

Again, I just don't understand the gigantic ENJOYMENT in knocking Bono that some members on this board seem to enjoy doing AOAP (as often as possible). The guy tries in his own way. Some things work some don't. All I can say is by just TRYING he's doing much more than the TOTALLY self absorbed Micky J. and company contribute. But to be fair they do support one cause very strongly - their own. Charlie's got his horses to support, Mick's got his ex Wive's and Girlfriend's, Ronnie has twice - yearly relapses into rehab, and Keith has his "accident record" that needs to stay on track. The boys are doing alot for society, I must say. What's that saying? Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house? No wonder Turd's never come back to discuss his post, must be fixing his "Glass House".....

Helter, I'm sure that the Stones donate to charities, just not publicly. They apparently don't want to make a big deal over it but I have heard it mentioned multiple times (here and other places) that they do donate to charities. People have different styles of dealing with this stuff.

I hope you're right Cali, I read that thread about what cheapsh*t tippers they were to limo drivers that was on here a while back that it turned my stomach.... I don't know, like I said, I hope you're right.....

HelterSkelter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I hope you're right Cali, I read that thread about
> what cheapsh*t tippers they were to limo drivers
> that was on here a while back that it turned my
> stomach.... I don't know, like I said, I hope
> you're right.....


I've been lurking a while but don't recall the story about the limo drivers. What happened? I remember hearing that L'Wren wasn't nice to one (at least), but was there another story about one or more of the Stones?

Actually, someone on here was a driver for Jagger in London and on 24 hr call for days. One or 2 others that have driven for the Stones (or have friends that have) put in their comments. The way it usually goes is the drivers would sign a contract that agreed to a total amount (including built in tip). They did their job (in fact one guy was a giant Stones fan but didn't want to bother Jagger with any questions to remain professional). At the end they thank the drivers and leave (not slipping them an extra $100 or anything.) Now, when you are worth half a BILLION (or more) dollars (or 500 MILLION) $100 is a penny to us. Then if you read the recent Ron Wood Mojo interview that ROCKMAN put up and in it he says he wrote one of the Stones songs completely on his own (can't recall which one, HEY NIGRITA? I'm not sure) and recieved no credit as song writer (I'm SURE that was one of Mick Taylors big beefs. You can't tell me his name shouldn't be on TIME WAITS or CYHMK) it just starts to look like very controling, obsessive behavior. It has nothing to do with how rich one really is, it's a sickness of feeling you NEVER have enough. I mean 2 weeks ago Bill Gates was in front of Congress asking to take the limit off H1B Visa's so he can bring in more non Americans to work at Microsoft at half of what an American gets paid. This is the richest man in the world for the last 13 years trying to cut corners and save himself and his company some cash while outsourcing jobs that cut out US workers (thank God I'm 100% Mac/Apple) - like I said, it's a sickness......

Turd On The Run Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've been away for a while submerged in work and
> travel...but I had to post this for the
> brother/sisterhood at IORR. This is from a writer
> that I respect, Dave Marsh. I'm sure you all have
> read his work through the years. What he has to
> say is scathing. And fascinating. I just read it
> and I thought immediately that it would be
> interesting to the always lively members of IORR.

cool piece totr! thanx for posting. got me into researching some of his earlier stuff for creem mag. (founding editor!) and also his blog; and also 'rock and roll confidential' pieces...now 'rock and Rap confidential'...it certainly provokes me to buy one of his springsteen books...what's the best of them btw? i too found the piece fascinating, tho i'm no geo-political expert on these matters...still, a lot of it rings real true for me...and also, dare i say, a passonate, intelligent and responsible piece of criticism.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-20 11:40 by Beelyboy.

Helter Skelter writes: “So what's your point Turd? U2 sucks and the Stones rule? Explain your mind set to me cause I see U2 being much more innovative then Micky J. and band mates these days (but i don't have a Dave Marsh article to prove my point so I'm at a BIG disadvantage.....)”, then, “No wonder Turd's never come back to discuss his post, must be fixing his "Glass House".....”

No. Just running a business that unfortunately doesn't leave me much time of late…IORR is a privilege for me…not an inalienable daily right. But your pugnacious attitude makes me sit down and reply…hey Mr. Skelter…got a chip on your shoulder? Why so tense?

First of all, how you could interpret that I’m implying that ‘U2 sucks and the Stones rule’ by reading the article I posted is beyond me. I read an article and I thought some people might be interested in this point of view. I’m not endorsing it. I’m not refuting it. I’m merely sharing it and opening up a discussion. A THOUGHTFUL discussion…not the spitting match that you seem to be interested in.

Bono is a good man. Yes… he has a Jesus complex. And he is almost comical in his Megaphone Sanctimony…but here is a man that is TRYING to do something – misguided or not – about humanity’s problems…and for that he has my respect. He is investing HIS time and HIS reputation in relieving suffering and poverty. How many of us do that? Whether his methods are ultimately productive or ill-conceived, or his intentions self-serving or altruistic will only be judged with the clarity of hindsight and the practical results on the ground [so far not that encouraging, unfortunately]. What is irrefutable is that he is devoting his considerable energy to a good cause. Also irrefutable is the fact that Bono is an expert businessman and self-promoter…a Capitalist Tool, to borrow the Legend from from Forbes [a magazine Bono owns a part of!]. The article simply was interesting to me because it breaks with the orthodoxy of Saint Bono and present another angle.

And for your information, U2 has put all their earnings in the hands of the people who have protected the Stones from the tax-man [Dutch foundations/fund managers] for the last 35 years. So U2 and the Stones are paying virtually no tax [1.6% rate]. So much for U2 as Saints and the Stones as Sinners.

Your ignorance of the Stones’ charitable activities, on the other hand, is poorly conceived. In the last few years the Stones have quietly given/raised millions in local charities. A small sample follows:

· SARS Concert Toronto-organized in about a month, upon the suggestion of the Stones who wanted to help revive Toronto's economy after the SARS outbreaks in 2003.
· Thousands of dollars to the New England Chapter of Gift of Life, dedicated to saving children with heart disease throughout the world.
· The same to Jump Start, a program in which college students mentor preschoolers.
· Hurricane Katrina – over $1.5 million given by the Stones to the Katrina Fund while they toured in the wake of the disaster.
· Tickets-For-Charity: donations include the sum of the ticket price going to a Charity of your choosing

This is a small sample...there was also an offer in the Rolling Stones.com fan club for concert tickets that would give a large percent of the face value to the local United Way, and one could choose from an assortment of charities. This may seem like pennies on the dollar to you, but I don’t see many other bands out there quietly donating as much as the Stones do. Perhaps the Stones don’t get on the soapbox that Mr. Hewson seems to carry around with him at all times, but their acts of kindness are not lost on me. What a shame that they are lost on you.

As far as U2 being much more innovative than the Stones ‘these days’…when you’re right, you’re right. Can’t argue that…regrettably.

To answer Beely’s question, I really can’t recommend ANY Marsh book on Springsteen because his books on the Boss are NOT exactly objective [i.e. more like quasi-hagiographies – while he rips Saint Bono, he lionizes Saint Bruce]. A passionate music connoisseur like you would find them very lacking. Marsh’s wife works for Springsteen…therefore…caveat emptor! Better stick to his ‘Rock and Roll Confidential’ if you want to read him.

Gotta go back to cleaning windows.

Diamond rings, Vaseline, you gave me disease, well, I lost a lot of love over you.

Turd, first of all I just skimmed your article/post cause i have better things to do than worry about if Bono has a "Jesus complex". All I can tell you is living in LA I know people that have worked with or bumped into both Jagger and Bono. I'm not EVEN gonna get into it here but one is known to be super cool and down to earth and another is pretty much known for being a tight ass prick. You figure out who is who - you have a 50% chance of being correct. As far as Marsh he's just another writer that thinks everything he says is true and covered with gold (we have a guy like that on IORR). He's just ANOTHER opinion, and you know what they say about opinions, "they're like a**holes, everybody's got one". Just the point that you posted this shows you want a "spy vs. spy" thing starting up (or in the least do a bit of Bono bashing - what's the title of your thread? "Bono's Bullsh*t"?)so why should I read it, why should I waste my time, and if you can unglue Marsh's lips from Springsteens ass he might tell you that Helter has a point. Get a discussion going for what? Just put on the CD's (or DVD's), grab a cold beer, and dig the music, who gives a flying f*ck about the rest...........BTW, $1.5 million for New Orleans? Excuss me while I laugh.... Come on Turd, do the math (now get back to your VIP job, I'm sure it's more important than most. Holy Shit, men and their silly competition streaks - mines bigger than yours/I'm right and you're wrong/my teams better than your team - what's it all prove? Little insecure boys that can't grow up and be their OWN men). No chip on my shoulder mate, just find the silliness SO silly (see my above comment about "men and competition" Silly, stupid stuff)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-21 00:10 by HelterSkelter.

Yawn

Marsh trashed SOME GIRLS in "Rolling Stone" when it came out. I've had no respect for him since.

Shows you what good taste he has. One of the VERY Few Stones albums that's had every track played live at some point (others being: STICKY FINGERS, LET IT BLEED, BLACK AND BLUE, and BEGGAR'S BANQUET...almost). But what do I know, some on here claim he's a brilliant wizard so I'll just follow blindly like everyone else does I guess..... As Bono says, "You miss too much these days when you stop and think".....

What dose this have to do with the Rolling Stones?

czr, it's called OFF TOPIC (OT) I think Turd forgot to include that in his glee...

Do yourself a favor, Helter, don't comment on posts that you just 'skim'...you'll sound a lot less foolish.

You write, "Just the point that you posted this shows you want a "spy vs. spy" thing starting up..." What !!????

Your wisdom continues "...(or in the least do a bit of Bono bashing - what's the title of your thread? "Bono's Bullsh*t"?)so why should I read it, why should I waste my time?"

Good question. Why? [why don't you just stay off the post then?] Because it would help to read and UNDERSTAND before you shoot your mouth off. Why comment on something you haven't really read? Why spit on me when you haven't a clue what I meant with my post? Did you read my reply? You condemn something because you 'skimmed' it and it pisses you off? Impressive.

I don't give a fcuk how many "friends" of yours think Bono is "super cool" and Jagger is a "tight ass prick" - by the way I have met Jagger and he was a gentleman. If you'd bothered to read my comments you'd have a better basis for a response. Why do you insist on turning this into a Stones vs. U2 pissing contest? Who the hell intended THAT!? Very intelligent.

And your denigration of the Stones help to charities...no comment...you indict yourself.

The title of the thread [by the way apologies for omitting the O.T. - I didn't know that was protocol] was such because that was the title of the Marsh article. [hint...read next time] Not my take on things.

Marsh is just another writer. He has his opinions. Some I agree with. Many I do not. So be it.

The only person turning this into a 'competitive thing' here is you.

And keep your insipid comments about my job - which you know nothing about - off this board. No one is interested.

Diamond rings, Vaseline, you gave me disease, well, I lost a lot of love over you.

Dave Marsh also suggested in an article that the Rock and Roll of fame should be renamed Rock of fame. His argument was that the term "Rock and roll" wasn't representing the music anymore. I believe that is a stupid idea. Rock and Roll is the best thing America has invented! Don't touch it.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

Dearest Turd, Yes Sir, Yes Sir, Yes Sir, and Yes Sir. Listen Turbster, please just chill.... Dude, it's JUST the internet, this ain't the Revolutionary War (or Iraq). I'm not all pissed off in the least, it's just there's a group of Stones fans on here that always has SOMETHING to say about Bono (no one ever seems to go after Springsteen for example, pick on him). I happen to really like U2 and he seems like a very interesting, talented guy that's trying to do things in a different way.I didn't read your entire post cause it's SO fricken long and I'm just not interested in what a flake/zero like Dave Marsh has to say (maybe if it was Maureen Dowd I'd read the whole thing) Spit on you !?!?! Come on Drama Queen, R.E.L.A.X. ONCE AGAIN, it's JUST the internet. If I send you a Vermont Teddy Bear dressed as Jagger from the '69 tour will you relax and forgive/forget? Gimme a P.O. Box, City, and Zip and I'll order one......is it Turd or Mr Turd, just call me the Foolish Fool- lol...as they say in Ha - wai - i....Hang Loose.....Peace out....

I'm not a huge fan of Bono/U2 but he does seem to be a "human pinata" on this board sometimes.

To me its not a question of weather or not musicians should be political. What It comes down to is that IF a musician and or artist has a political message,its important that it be doen with style and balanced with art. otherwise it comes off the wrong way.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-22 07:43 by ryanpow.

the stones gave a mill to the clinton foundation also...amidst other gifts...
dunno why people post here if they really hate mick and keith...not talking about musical or style critiques and/or related feelings & obersvations o' course...but same constant personal slams against mick and keith for imagined personal insults seems quite weird here.

sick.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-22 15:10 by Beelyboy.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-22 15:02 by Beelyboy.