Pearl Jam Cancels 4/20 Raleigh, NC Concert in Opposition to HB2; Official Band Statement
Comments
-
Resistance to discriminatory laws is the essence of the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement is ongoing. It encompasses efforts to resist laws like the North Carolina law. The civil rights movement is not only about race.jfayiii said:Because an unjust state law passed behind closed doors and soon to be repealed after being in effect for a couple months is the same as the Civil Rights movement. Over dramatize much?
I gather speed from you fucking with me.0 -
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now. All it takes to make the money back is the band to say "let's play three shows at MSG this year instead of two" or "let's play add another festival". It isn't the same as working 12 more months to build the vacation budget back up.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
Post edited by bootlegger10 on0 -
Also, they're multi-millionaires with generational wealth. The $500 I lost hurt me a lot more.This show, another show, a show here and a show there.0
-
There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
I gather speed from you fucking with me.0 -
Incidentally, you also say that they didn't sacrifice their time. I am quite sure that these artists and their management spent time considering what to do and executing their decisions. There are also costs associated with last-minute changes to a carefully laid-out itinerary for an operation that involves dozens of people moving from city to city.I gather speed from you fucking with me.0
-
If people are stuck in NC for awhile you can drive 2 hours south and see Scott Stapp at Hooligans on 5/4. He didn't disappoint his fans and cancel. :-)Springfield 4/6/94, Boston 4/6/94, Hartford 10/2/96, New York 9/11/98, Hartford 9/13/98, Mansfield 8/30/00, Boston 9/28/04, Reading 10/1/04, Quebec City 9/20/05, Boston 5/24/06, Hartford 5/13/06, New York 6/25/08, Hartford 6/27/08 Philadelphia 10/31/09, Hartford 10/15/10,
Boston 10/17/10, East Troy 9/3/11, East Troy 9/4/11, Missoula 9/30/12, Worcester 10/15/13, Hartford 10/25/13, Charlottesville 10/29/13,
St. Paul 10/19/14, New York 9/26/15, Quebec City 5/5/16, Boston 8/5/16, Boston 9/2/18, Boston 9/4/18, Quebec City 9/1/22, Camden 9/14/22, Oklahoma City 9/20/220 -
What the band sacrificed is little in comparison to the impact to the 15,000 fans the band used as pawns. Not even close. Playing a concert is their job for crying out loud. Who of us wouldn't love to not go to work in protest of something and know we can just work another shift in a year or two to make up for it?BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
At the end of the day PJ got some more street cred out of this and more food to feed the ego.Post edited by bootlegger10 on0 -
This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.bootlegger10 said:
What the band sacrificed is little in comparison to the impact to the 15,000 fans the band used as pawns. Not even close. Playing a concert is their job for crying out loud. Who of us wouldn't love to not go to work in protest of something and know we can just work another shift in a year or two to make up for it?BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
At the end of the day PJ got some more street cred out of this and more food to feed the ego.I gather speed from you fucking with me.0 -
0
-
I think they made the decision because Bruce did. It has no effect on the law. The courts will repeal it and anyone that follows this stuff knows that.This show, another show, a show here and a show there.0
-
They are NOT operating it as a business. I can't think of any business that blatantly screws over and uses its paying customers for political purposes. And if there are examples, I'm sure all of you on this board already hate those businesses.BF25394 said:This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.bootlegger10 said:
What the band sacrificed is little in comparison to the impact to the 15,000 fans the band used as pawns. Not even close. Playing a concert is their job for crying out loud. Who of us wouldn't love to not go to work in protest of something and know we can just work another shift in a year or two to make up for it?BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
At the end of the day PJ got some more street cred out of this and more food to feed the ego.
I am posting this much because I think the band screwed up and need to know it. I'm not going to stop being a fan but this time they went to far in using their position of wealth and power.0 -
Sure but want to have chance to be effective boycott way to go.bootlegger10 said:
Right, there is more than just boycotting to get rid of a stupid law.Merkin Baller said:
That's the real kicker here..... This law was doomed from the get-go.MayDay10 said:^^^ yup.
Feds circuit court just ruled against a Virginia school board trying to do this in a case yesterday
PJ didn't have to cancel to force action, the wheels were already in motion. That's why some people think this is a little bit of grandstanding / posturing on behalf of the band.10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG0 -
BF25394 said:
This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.
Well said.bootlegger10 said:BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
I know I was born and I know that I'll die. The in between is mine.0 -
I own a business. I've fired clients for unethical or stupid behavior.bootlegger10 said:
They are NOT operating it as a business. I can't think of any business that blatantly screws over and uses its paying customers for political purposes. And if there are examples, I'm sure all of you on this board already hate those businesses.BF25394 said:This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.bootlegger10 said:
What the band sacrificed is little in comparison to the impact to the 15,000 fans the band used as pawns. Not even close. Playing a concert is their job for crying out loud. Who of us wouldn't love to not go to work in protest of something and know we can just work another shift in a year or two to make up for it?BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
At the end of the day PJ got some more street cred out of this and more food to feed the ego.
I am posting this much because I think the band screwed up and need to know it. I'm not going to stop being a fan but this time they went to far in using their position of wealth and power.I know I was born and I know that I'll die. The in between is mine.0 -
KV4053 said:
Well saidBF25394 said:This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.
Well said.bootlegger10 said:BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
I know I was born and I know that I'll die. The in between is mine.0 -
They most assuredly are a business. They are incorporated as such. The band are owners, not employees. Businesses make decisions like this all the time. Sports leagues have moved events out of states to protest laws that they see as discriminatory.
Offering a full refund is not "blatantly screw[ing]" over your paying customers.bootlegger10 said:They are NOT operating it as a business. I can't think of any business that blatantly screws over and uses its paying customers for political purposes. And if there are examples, I'm sure all of you on this board already hate those businesses.
I am posting this much because I think the band screwed up and need to know it. I'm not going to stop being a fan but this time they went to far in using their position of wealth and power.I gather speed from you fucking with me.0 -
I didn't realize politicians were going to the shows.KV4053 said:
I own a business. I've fired clients for unethical or stupid behavior.bootlegger10 said:
They are NOT operating it as a business. I can't think of any business that blatantly screws over and uses its paying customers for political purposes. And if there are examples, I'm sure all of you on this board already hate those businesses.BF25394 said:This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.bootlegger10 said:
What the band sacrificed is little in comparison to the impact to the 15,000 fans the band used as pawns. Not even close. Playing a concert is their job for crying out loud. Who of us wouldn't love to not go to work in protest of something and know we can just work another shift in a year or two to make up for it?BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
At the end of the day PJ got some more street cred out of this and more food to feed the ego.
I am posting this much because I think the band screwed up and need to know it. I'm not going to stop being a fan but this time they went to far in using their position of wealth and power.0 -
Well some corporations threatened to pack up and leave the state, and others threatened the same in Georgia, and it worked. So I guess some businesses do indeed do that, risking their employees jobs, etc....bootlegger10 said:
They are NOT operating it as a business. I can't think of any business that blatantly screws over and uses its paying customers for political purposes. And if there are examples, I'm sure all of you on this board already hate those businesses.BF25394 said:This is not a good analogy. This is not their job. This is their business. They are the owners of the business. They almost certainly will be required by contract to pay their employees (e.g., their road crew) what they would have earned despite the fact that this show did not take place.
In a corrupt world, cynicism is often justified. But is it justified here? What has this band done to make you cynical about their motives here? Do you really believe that the band made this difficult decision, which actually does take money out of their pockets, out of anything other than a sincere belief that their actions would help in the effort to undo an unjust and discriminatory law? Do you really think they made this difficult decision for "street cred." If so, why are you a fan of this band? You don't have to agree with all of their choices-- I don't-- but I don't think they have done anything that justifies questioning their motives. Do you disagree? I'm interested to know.bootlegger10 said:
What the band sacrificed is little in comparison to the impact to the 15,000 fans the band used as pawns. Not even close. Playing a concert is their job for crying out loud. Who of us wouldn't love to not go to work in protest of something and know we can just work another shift in a year or two to make up for it?BF25394 said:There's no guarantee of that. It may be a small sacrifice in your eyes, but they are sacrificing something. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it is silly to say that the artists are "sacrificing nothing" by cancelling shows from which they make a profit.
bootlegger10 said:
They'll play another show. They'll get the money back. Ed even said at PJ20 how easy it is to be in Pearl Jam now.BF25394 said:
They didn't sacrifice anything? They make money off of these shows.bootlegger10 said:Bruce and Eddie did not sacrifice anything. They didn't even sacrifice their time.
At the end of the day PJ got some more street cred out of this and more food to feed the ego.
I am posting this much because I think the band screwed up and need to know it. I'm not going to stop being a fan but this time they went to far in using their position of wealth and power.With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help