GEN
Active topics
  1. Kris - to answer your question the intention was to automatically put the U2 album in the library of every person with an iTunes account. Not sure why it didn't happen that way for you, but how it happened to me and to others (to their joy, confusion, anger, whatever) was that suddenly the U2 album appeared in your library as if you had purchased it.

    Worth noting that it doesn't take up any space on your device unless you click the cloud icon - it just streams. However, since effectively Apple purchased the album for you, it's very hard to get rid of it you don't want it.

    And to dylbagz post about their plan working, there are countless counter examples of people posting a very, very negative response to this which I could just as much argue that their plan didn't work.

    Some people were excited to get it, some weren't...for some people this is the first time they've heard of U2 and they may end up becoming lifetime fans...for others this is the first time they've heard of U2 and because of it they will dislike them the rest of their lives. I'm sure there will be examples of all of this.

    But to me, it's my opinion this was an annoyance to many, and something U2 or Apple shouldn't have done, and I certainly am ashamed to be a U2 fan right now with this awful PR-intrusion stunt they pulled not in public, but on everyone's private device.

    Not expecting lots of people to agree with me, though am surprised there aren't more people shaking their heads over this PR stunt.

    If it was "our new album is now on iTunes for you to download for FREE!" instead of "it's now placed in the music library of every single iTunes account" it would have made all the difference to me.
  2. As they say, any publicity is good publicity, and right now, U2 have shitloads of it
  4. If that saying were true, then Ray Rice would be having the best week of his life. I wager to say he isn't.

    As a person whom a lot of friends associate with U2, I've heard a lot of complaints and "what do you think about what they did"s? One friend who always liked U2 somewhat was put off by this so much they now decidedly hate the band.

    Made me think about it enough to have a strong opinion (obviously) that what they did was intrusive, and extremely egotistical. And as far as publicity, people aren't talking about the content of the album...the MUSIC...they are talking about a stunt they pulled. And in the case of getting publicity, I don't think the ends justify the means.

  5. That's a good one, or it could be called something like "From Innocence To Experience Tour" All in one evening....you come to the show innocent and leave Experienced...haha
  6. I do get the hate about pushing it to everyone too...

    About the tour : probably the Volcano-tour. Or the Apple-tour.
  7. This is Bono's response to the haters.

  8. Originally posted by robotsandmonkeys:If that saying were true, then Ray Rice would be having the best week of his life. I wager to say he isn't.

    As a person whom a lot of friends associate with U2, I've heard a lot of complaints and "what do you think about what they did"s? One friend who always liked U2 somewhat was put off by this so much they now decidedly hate the band.

    Made me think about it enough to have a strong opinion (obviously) that what they did was intrusive, and extremely egotistical. And as far as publicity, people aren't talking about the content of the album...the MUSIC...they are talking about a stunt they pulled. And in the case of getting publicity, I don't think the ends justify the means.

    I think you're pointing your finger at the wrong person. U2 probably saw it this way "our album will be free for tons of people and we'll probably reach more people than we would have with a standard release. Why not go for it? It's edgy". Apple are the ones who pushed it onto THEIR devices, not U2, they don't control Apple. The album isn't on my Samsung Galaxy or PC, I had to go onto my itunes and download it. The point is, it was Apple's risk, U2 are only taking the blame for it because a ton of people don't like them and they're the ginny pigs. Point is it's the smartest business move any artist could make, especially at their age. All of the fuss about this will die down by the end of the month.

    On top of that, if you want examples, go look at the reviews. People are pissed at Apple, but don't mind the music. Right now it's publicity first and music second for them. Don't think it worked? Explain all of their classic albums climbing the charts and Songs of Innocence being manually downloaded supposedly two million times.

    And as long as we're using friends as a means to argue, I have a friend who isn't a huge U2 fan by any stretch, but he checked out the album just to see if the experiment actually worked. It did, and now he's sending me reviews for each song! California is his favourite.
  9. Another thing to keep in mind is that most news outlets are all about the clicks, especially when it comes to entertainment. An article titled "itunes users pissed off by free music showing up in their library" will get more clicks than "itunes users pleased by U2's free album." If you look at twitter, there's a lot of angry tweets, but there are even more tweets that applaud the move. As I said before, there are many people who haven't thought much of U2 who are now curious, even grateful, for the new album. There is also a large population of college-age people who almost universally have the mindset that free things are good things. Right now they may see U2 as the band that gave them a free album and think differently about some pop-star nobody charging $20 for a CD.
  10. Originally posted by ahn1991:Another thing to keep in mind is that most news outlets are all about the clicks, especially when it comes to entertainment. An article titled "itunes users pissed off by free music showing up in their library" will get more clicks than "itunes users pleased by U2's free album." If you look at twitter, there's a lot of angry tweets, but there are even more tweets that applaud the move. As I said before, there are many people who haven't thought much of U2 who are now curious, even grateful, for the new album. There is also a large population of college-age people who almost universally have the mindset that free things are good things. Right now they may see U2 as the band that gave them a free album and think differently about some pop-star nobody charging $20 for a CD.

    So true.
  11. Just had a random thought..

    So California is about U2's first time being in..California, right? And this album is by and large the story-telling of the band before the band. The original lyrics to Invisible were about Bono's first trip to London when he went with Ali to speak to the TV or radio producer (the name is escaping me). I wonder if either that song was cut (and the lyrics changed) because they found California to be a better song about also going to a location (maybe they didn't want 2 songs about the same thing (albeit different place) on the album)? OR maybe they were both originally on there but once they decided on the alternate lyrics they thought it no longer fit on SoI and decided to release it as a single instead?

    Either way, something tells me we haven't heard the last of Invisible - the one we got WAS called the (RED) Edit - perhaps we'll see a different mix/version of it on the supposed Songs of Experience.
  12. Most albums including best of's all appearing in the itunes album charts speaks volumes to me... Because it's not us fans who have been downloading them... Even Paris 87 is in there and Blood Red Sky.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.