February 12, 201015 yr NOTE - Even 'The Sun', (which has more or less taken most credit for the Single), admits that only £1 from each CD sold will go to Haiti. They have said, (all Week - each issue) - that there are 'inevitable costs', with making, & marketing a CD, & that's why £1, from each CD will go to Haiti. They have hinted that more cash than £1 COULD be 'squeezed' from the Single - but, they have been very careful not to guarantee that... Basically - if people just gave £3 or £4 directly to Haiti Charities, (as I did), then every penny counts for those Charities. If you buy the awful Single, only £1 is guaranteed towards Haiti. It has misled a lot of people! I do wish people would stop thinking that a terrible Single can do much to solve Haiti's problems. To hear some of the Acts on it talk, Haiti could not do without the Single! In fact, far, far less cash will come from it, than would have been made had those who bought it, simply donated directly to the Charities that are helping Haiti. I'm fed up of the hype around it too:, 1) A Heart Radio DJ appeared on TV, and saying he'd never seen a reaction, (to a Single), like it. That people had been 'phoning in, & saying they got so moved by it, that when they heard it in their cars, they had to pull over - because it made them cry. (The Single makes me cry too - because it is so awful!). 2) Gennaro Castaldo, (HMV 'Chart Expert'), telling 'The Sun', that:, 'Singles don't get to number one on their own'. He then urged people to buy one - or more - copies. He added:, 'We need to keep it at No.1 for a long time'. (Why are so many people going on as if this Single is the be all & end all of aid for Haiti, when it's not - and never will be?). He also said that it is on course to be the Best Selling Single, (in the UK), for 10 Years. This would mean that it needs to sell over 1 Million this Week - because that's what the 1st Will Young Single did in 2002. And the 1st Gareth Gates Single sold over 800,000 in its first Week - also in 2002. THEN, (a few days later), Gennaro declared that the Haiti Single is on course to be the UK's Best Seller of the CENTURY! As we are only in the 11th Year of the Century, he must be very clever - being able to see that it will outsell every Single for the next 89 Years, as well, as those from the past 11 Years! Far too much silly hype, over a Single that is artistically awful, & that only a percentage of the cash from goes to the actual Charities, that it was made for. (2 Charities).
February 12, 201015 yr NOTE - Even 'The Sun', (which has more or less taken most credit for the Single), admits that only £1 from each CD sold will go to Haiti. They have said, (all Week - each issue) - that there are 'inevitable costs', with making, & marketing a CD, & that's why £1, from each CD will go to Haiti. They have hinted that more cash than £1 COULD be 'squeezed' from the Single - but, they have been very careful not to guarantee that... Basically - if people just gave £3 or £4 directly to Haiti Charities, (as I did), then every penny counts for those Charities. If you buy the awful Single, only £1 is guaranteed towards Haiti. It has misled a lot of people! The point that you, and others like you, fail to grasp is that, yes, in an ideal world if people gave £3 or £4 to Haiti that would raise more but the truth is that people won't. They need a single/t-shirt/cookbook/any other merchandise to galvanise them into parting with their cash. Therefore despite your own feelings towards the single you should applaud it for raising money that would not be raised if it didn't exist
February 12, 201015 yr NOTE - Even 'The Sun', (which has more or less taken most credit for the Single), admits that only £1 from each CD sold will go to Haiti. They have said, (all Week - each issue) - that there are 'inevitable costs', with making, & marketing a CD, & that's why £1, from each CD will go to Haiti. They have hinted that more cash than £1 COULD be 'squeezed' from the Single - but, they have been very careful not to guarantee that... Basically - if people just gave £3 or £4 directly to Haiti Charities, (as I did), then every penny counts for those Charities. If you buy the awful Single, only £1 is guaranteed towards Haiti. It has misled a lot of people! I do wish people would stop thinking that a terrible Single can do much to solve Haiti's problems. To hear some of the Acts on it talk, Haiti could not do without the Single! In fact, far, far less cash will come from it, than would have been made had those who bought it, simply donated directly to the Charities that are helping Haiti. I'm fed up of the hype around it too:, 1) A Heart Radio DJ appeared on TV, and saying he'd never seen a reaction, (to a Single), like it. That people had been 'phoning in, & saying they got so moved by it, that when they heard it in their cars, they had to pull over - because it made them cry. (The Single makes me cry too - because it is so awful!). 2) Gennaro Castaldo, (HMV 'Chart Expert'), telling 'The Sun', that:, 'Singles don't get to number one on their own'. He then urged people to buy one - or more - copies. He added:, 'We need to keep it at No.1 for a long time'. (Why are so many people going on as if this Single is the be all & end all of aid for Haiti, when it's not - and never will be?). He also said that it is on course to be the Best Selling Single, (in the UK), for 10 Years. This would mean that it needs to sell over 1 Million this Week - because that's what the 1st Will Young Single did in 2002. And the 1st Gareth Gates Single sold over 800,000 in its first Week - also in 2002. THEN, (a few days later), Gennaro declared that the Haiti Single is on course to be the UK's Best Seller of the CENTURY! As we are only in the 11th Year of the Century, he must be very clever - being able to see that it will outsell every Single for the next 89 Years, as well, as those from the past 11 Years! Far too much silly hype, over a Single that is artistically awful, & that only a percentage of the cash from goes to the actual Charities, that it was made for. (2 Charities). look, I agree with you about giving the money- I would rather donate direct than buy the single, but you have to understand people will buy this as they are willing to do something to help Haiti and just buying a song (however little the amount), they are helping also, it says AT LEAST £1- that could mean at least 60% of the sales plus, I find the song, whilst melodramatic and cheesy, good for its kind
February 12, 201015 yr NOTE - Even 'The Sun', (which has more or less taken most credit for the Single), admits that only £1 from each CD sold will go to Haiti. They have said, (all Week - each issue) - that there are 'inevitable costs', with making, & marketing a CD, & that's why £1, from each CD will go to Haiti. They have hinted that more cash than £1 COULD be 'squeezed' from the Single - but, they have been very careful not to guarantee that... Basically - if people just gave £3 or £4 directly to Haiti Charities, (as I did), then every penny counts for those Charities. If you buy the awful Single, only £1 is guaranteed towards Haiti. It has misled a lot of people! I do wish people would stop thinking that a terrible Single can do much to solve Haiti's problems. To hear some of the Acts on it talk, Haiti could not do without the Single! In fact, far, far less cash will come from it, than would have been made had those who bought it, simply donated directly to the Charities that are helping Haiti. I'm fed up of the hype around it too:, 1) A Heart Radio DJ appeared on TV, and saying he'd never seen a reaction, (to a Single), like it. That people had been 'phoning in, & saying they got so moved by it, that when they heard it in their cars, they had to pull over - because it made them cry. (The Single makes me cry too - because it is so awful!). 2) Gennaro Castaldo, (HMV 'Chart Expert'), telling 'The Sun', that:, 'Singles don't get to number one on their own'. He then urged people to buy one - or more - copies. He added:, 'We need to keep it at No.1 for a long time'. (Why are so many people going on as if this Single is the be all & end all of aid for Haiti, when it's not - and never will be?). He also said that it is on course to be the Best Selling Single, (in the UK), for 10 Years. This would mean that it needs to sell over 1 Million this Week - because that's what the 1st Will Young Single did in 2002. And the 1st Gareth Gates Single sold over 800,000 in its first Week - also in 2002. THEN, (a few days later), Gennaro declared that the Haiti Single is on course to be the UK's Best Seller of the CENTURY! As we are only in the 11th Year of the Century, he must be very clever - being able to see that it will outsell every Single for the next 89 Years, as well, as those from the past 11 Years! Far too much silly hype, over a Single that is artistically awful, & that only a percentage of the cash from goes to the actual Charities, that it was made for. (2 Charities). Totally true!
February 12, 201015 yr THEN, (a few days later), Gennaro declared that the Haiti Single is on course to be the UK's Best Seller of the CENTURY! As we are only in the 11th Year of the Century, he must be very clever - being able to see that it will outsell every Single for the next 89 Years, as well, as those from the past 11 Years! Well, he meant best seller of the century to date of course. That's a rather usual use, especially since the noughties are over, the "century" is now the more minimalistic way to talk about the 2000-2010 era (he could have said the "of the millinium" and that would have been worse :lol: ). It's like the "year to date" charts, the year is far from being over, but those charts still reflect a reality to date.
February 12, 201015 yr I just find it amusing that on every Forum where I've seen the Single criticised, you get people - who like it - saying things like, 'How much have you donated?'. And, 'You are selfish!', & so on. Yet - time & time again - other people who support the Single, say that it was made to get people who would otherwise not have donated, to hand over some cash for Haiti. In other words - those people who will only help someone in need if they get something in return! I call THAT 100% selfish. And - the Single is still garbage. It always will be. That is the majority view. I saw 3 idiots on Channel 5, going on about how, 'Powerful', & 'Moving' it is. It isn't. It's just a load of voices - that don't even work properly together. Singing this or that line, from a Song, that sounds to me like a song about Suicide, rather than a compassionate, suitable, Haiti Song..... And seeing as it was shown on every TV News Programme going, the other day, it really is not selling as well as the hype suggested it would. The 1st Band Aid Single sold 750,000 in a Week. The truth is that the Single would not exist, if every person singing on it had given just 5% of their wealth to Haiti. And Simon Cowell had done the same. And Rupert Murdoch had done the same - instead of 'The Sun', (which he owns), boasting day in day out, how the Single is its idea/project/whatever. Far, far more cash would have been raised, from the Egos jumping on the band wagon, than will ever be made from those members of the UK & Irish Public, who will buy the Single. The fact that the Single exists shows 2 things - the Acts, Cowell, & Murdoch, never handed even 1% of their cash over, & they simply had to have a No.1, to show how 'caring' they are. Even 'The Times' is fed up of this Charity Single. (The Comments, beneath the Article, are illuminating, too). http://smurl.name/8fg4 Edited February 12, 201015 yr by zeus555
February 12, 201015 yr People should not forget the whole point of charity single is not only to make money, but as well (and sometimes more importantly) to raise awareness about a problem or a disaster. Haïti won't be rebuild in one week, so it is also important to raise awareness for a longer time, and music is a way to do so. Everyone remembers the Band Aid efforts, even years after it happened. The video being hyped massively on TV and the song played on radio IS important. That's why Comic Relief or Children In Need release singles too, sometimes the money they get out of it is not that huge, but it's a way to get more awareness. For example the media coverage of Haïti would be less important this week without the release of the single. If you don't understand that, you completely miss the point of charity singles. As it happens for every disaster, Haïti will slowly but surely disappear from the news and general awareness, so every attemp made to keep the memory of the disaster going is very important for the people in Haïti. That's why slagging off a charity single or the hype surrounding it is really not necessary. Edited February 12, 201015 yr by Bert for Lashes
February 12, 201015 yr Even 'The Times' is fed up of this Charity Single. (The Comments, beneath the Article, are illuminating, too). http://smurl.name/8fg4 That article is horrid and ridiculous - especially Peter Fones comment! :o Hes only had a few weeks to do this- Hes not exactly going to waste time trying to write a classic when theres people that need our help! Sometimes, its not the quality, its what its doing that matters- I dont like the song much and I would never listen to it on a whim- but that doesnt matter, no matter how much money actually actually goes to charity, its helping out that counts! So- like BFL said- it is not necessary to bash it, and the fact that that writer expects a classic to be wrote is laughable
February 12, 201015 yr People should not forget the whole point of charity single is not only to make money, but as well (and sometimes more importantly) to raise awareness about a problem or a disaster. Haïti won't be rebuild in one week, so it is also important to raise awareness for a longer time, and music is a way to do so. Everyone remembers the Band Aid efforts, even years after it happened. The video being hyped massively on TV and the song played on radio IS important. That's why Comic Relief or Children In Need release singles too, sometimes the money they get out of it is not that huge, but it's a way to get more awareness. For example the media coverage of Haïti would be less important this week without the release of the single. If you don't understand that, you completely miss the point of charity singles. As it happens for every disaster, Haïti will slowly but surely disappear from the news and general awareness, so every attemp made to keep the memory of the disaster going is very important for the people in Haïti. That's why slagging off a charity single or the hype surrounding it is really not necessary. I'm sorry, but that is rubbish. The Sun newspaper never even once had the Haiti disaster on their front page because the affairs of Katie Price, etc are obviously much more important than the deaths of 220,000 people in some place most people could not find on a map, before announcing their charity single. Or as the gag on Mock of The Week went "Haiti .... isn't that what Cheryl Cole said to that coloured student toilet attendent before attacking her?" The Sun newspaper did next to zero to promote the excellent job the Americans did with their TV brilliant telethon and corresponding album (which I've bought) held a week after the disaster raising $91 million. Surely a similar telethon in the UK by Syco on ITV would have been a much better idea, raising a bigger profile and generating more donations. In addition the following celebrities donated the following: Jennifer Aniston US$500,000 Sandra Bullock US$1,000,000 Gisele Bündchen US$1,500,000 Samuel Dalembert US$100,000 Leonardo DiCaprio US$1,000,000 Lady Gaga announced that all proceeds from her New York concert will go to Haiti relief, which is later revealed to have raised well in excess of US$500,000 Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt US$1,000,000 Madonna US$250,000 Denis O'Brien, the Irish founder of telecom company, Digicel, with operations in Haiti pledged €3.5 million Tiger Woods US$3,000,000 Yet multi-millionaire Simon Cowell donated a "generous" £5,000 of his own money to Charlie Simpson a seven year old schoolboy from Fulham, south London. Charlie's fundraising effort gained national and then international coverage, and by the end of the day of his sponsored bicycle ride his JustGiving webpage had amassed donations of over £60,000 ($96,700) from donors all over the world. Two days later (as of 26 January 2010) the total stands at over £150,000 ($240,000). As for The Sun Newspaper (as I posted earlier in this thread) this is the same newspaper than over 20 years ago actively told their readers NOT to buy the charity single "Ferry Across The Mersey" for the 96 Liverpool supporters who died at the Hillsborough stadium tragedy. Still only 5 Hours until a decent charity record remade and done properly is properly revealed..... g13hbUI24-k
February 12, 201015 yr A lot of celebrities do donate without wishing to advertise it though. It isn't fair to produce a list of who has donated what when for every one on that list there are probably another dozen or so doing the same anonymously. And to start comparing one charity single (for the same cause) with another is a bit petty. How come all of a sudden the US one is 'more sincere'. For a fact ... there were plans afoot for months to re-do the We Are The World as it is coming up to its 25th anniversary ... so no wonder it looks more polished. By an 'act of god' (as Quincy Jones has reportedly said) it just so happened that Haiti obliged by having an earthquake at the same time. And I'm not even a fan of the 'Everybody Hurts' song ... but I'm beginning to be. Norma Edited February 12, 201015 yr by Norma_Snockers
February 12, 201015 yr A lot of celebrities do donate without wishing to advertise it though. It isn't fair to produce a list of who has donated what when for every one on that list there are probably another dozen or so doing the same anonymously. And to start comparing one charity single (for the same cause) with another is a bit petty. How come all of a sudden the US one is 'more sincere'. For a fact ... there were plans afoot for months to re-do the We Are The World as it is coming up to its 25th anniversary ... so no wonder it looks more polished. By an 'act of god' (as Quincy Jones has reportedly said) it just so happened that Haiti obliged by having an earthquake at the same time. And I'm not even a fan of the 'Everybody Hurts' song ... but I'm beginning to be. Norma I agree with you on that Norman. TIP your opinion is so blinded by your hatred for Simon. How do you know Simon hasn't donated lots of its own fortune to Haïti? If he says he did, you're going to say he did for likeability, he doesn't say he did, you're saying he didn't donate at all. Please try to forget about Simon for a while, it's not all about Simon, it's about people actually DYING. Plus you totally missed my point about raising awareness and stuff. The people in Haïti doesn't need people in Europe to diss this single and to say it should have never happened. This single will sell lots and ABOVE ALL will help people not to forget about Haïti. End of. Edited February 12, 201015 yr by Bert for Lashes
February 13, 201015 yr I so much prefer when celebrities DON'T publish how much or if they give money to charities. If they do, i have always to think that they "buy" their publicity and "good image". It is not our problem what someone makes with HIS money.
February 13, 201015 yr A lot of celebrities do donate without wishing to advertise it though. It isn't fair to produce a list of who has donated what when for every one on that list there are probably another dozen or so doing the same anonymously. And to start comparing one charity single (for the same cause) with another is a bit petty. How come all of a sudden the US one is 'more sincere'. For a fact ... there were plans afoot for months to re-do the We Are The World as it is coming up to its 25th anniversary ... so no wonder it looks more polished. By an 'act of god' (as Quincy Jones has reportedly said) it just so happened that Haiti obliged by having an earthquake at the same time. And I'm not even a fan of the 'Everybody Hurts' song ... but I'm beginning to be. Norma The USA one is far more sincere because it was organised by music legend Quincy Jones and winner of 27 production & arrangement Grammys (who has previously produced/worked with music legends Michael Jackson, Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald, Ray Charles, Aretha Franklin, Miles Davis, Sarah Vaughan, Dinah Washington, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, Gene Krupa, Dizzy Gillespie, Sammy Davis Jr, Peggy Lee, Celine Dion, Donna Summer, George Benson, Chaka Khan, Barry White & James Ingram). Also it looks more polished because Quincy got the hottest producer around today RedOne to produce the record, so of course sonically it sounds vastly superior. But the real reason why it is better morally & ethically than the awful Syco record is that Quincy through an all inclusive open invitation for artists to turn up to the recording of WATW25 and not just limit it to Syco acts & a few cronies (the Sugababes, Mcfly, the Saturdays & Pixie Lott all offered their services but were turned down); and then get one of the BGT judges to lambast one act (Florence & The Machine) on the Alan Titchmarsh show for then pulling out of the recording. Just compare Everybody Hurts with the line up to Band Aid 20 and it is woeful. Little wonder that despite an advert on US iTunes EH is only at #200; and has been far less successful than the Canadian charity effort. But hey I guess you regard Simon Cowell the man who gave the world such music legends as Robson & Jerome, Zig & Zag, the World Wrestling Entertainment, 5ive, Michelle McManus, JedWard, Westlife, the Teletubbies, etc as superior to the most successful black producer in the history of music. Still I'll stick to the 2007 NME interview with Quincy Joines where he lambasted Simon Cowell as a "charlatan".
February 13, 201015 yr I agree with you on that Norman. TIP your opinion is so blinded by your hatred for Simon. How do you know Simon hasn't donated lots of its own fortune to Haïti? If he says he did, you're going to say he did for likeability, he doesn't say he did, you're saying he didn't donate at all. Please try to forget about Simon for a while, it's not all about Simon, it's about people actually DYING. Plus you totally missed my point about raising awareness and stuff. The people in Haïti doesn't need people in Europe to diss this single and to say it should have never happened. This single will sell lots and ABOVE ALL will help people not to forget about Haïti. End of. Rubbish, my hatred is because it is a blatant advert for Syco acts and a few other cronies, and I'm highly offended by your comments regarding why I should buy this $h!t excuse for a single, when I've already bought the Help For Haiti US album, and the Radiohead live album for Haiti from their website, and will buy the We Are The World 25 single because all of them are good. Oh, I also bought Susan Boyle's debut album, so if I hate Simon Cowell so much why did I buy it? Answer: because it is good. Unfortunately Simon Cowell has been responsible for so much bland, $h!t & novelty records over the past 20 years with next to zero artistic merit to them, and I hate the way that young people are buying this excuse for music and think that it is good when they are being conned. I feel sorry for a lot of Syco acts, especially Leona Lewis who has an outstanding voice, yet she has to sing such bland generic material. Only last week I read how Damon Albarn asked if Leona could sing on a Gorillaz track for their forthcoming album, but Syco (Simon Cowell) refused this request.
February 13, 201015 yr Well now that WATW has been released I think it is pretty safe to say THAT is how a charity record is done. Now everyone please stop downloading the TRIPE that is Everybody Hurts and download a song in which the people of Haiti are represented.
February 13, 201015 yr But hey I guess you regard Simon Cowell the man who gave the world such music legends as Robson & Jerome, Zig & Zag, the World Wrestling Entertainment, 5ive, Michelle McManus, JedWard, Westlife, the Teletubbies, etc as superior to the most successful black producer in the history of music. Still I'll stick to the 2007 NME interview with Quincy Joines where he lambasted Simon Cowell as a "charlatan". How dare you presume that because I mentioned that this particular song may have been done with the best of intentions ... you make me out to be Simon Cowell's number 1 fan? Quincy Jones has my utmost respect as a music producer and of course artistically ... Cowell isn't even pondlife compared to him. What I was trying to put across and I make no apologies for it is that you brandish about someone's charity donations as evidence of support ... and yet even you must know that anonymous donations by celebrities are made all the time. Secondly ... this WATW ... is nothing more than a musical equivalent of a pre-written obituary. I've also found Jones's comments, which I've previously referred to, as particularly crass on this occasion. And you know what ... I won't buy the EH song for one reason ... it isn't very good ... but neither is WATW ... which you seem to think is a bloody masterpiece. The original was bad enough. Sometimes Rich ... you seem to take it upon yourself to be the one and only musical judge here on BJ ... you look on yourself sometimes like Simon Cowell looks upon himself. Norma But unlike you Rich ... hand on heart ... I can honestly say I've never given a penny of my money to Cowell by buying anything associated ... even the truly mediocre Susan Boyle album. Edited February 13, 201015 yr by Norma_Snockers
February 13, 201015 yr I think the story tells it all. WATW is probably filled with artists that people are not fans of but everyone will buy it due to Haiti. Everybody Hurts is filled with artists that I cannot stand but I still would not buy it even for Haiti, I would rather donate my money directly. Michael Jackson or Joe McElderry on a song. REALLY TOUGH CHOICE.
Create an account or sign in to comment