“…credibility, integrity, humility – these are traits that make me respect an artist (or company)…”
I had a different editorial planned for today, but you can’t take 5 steps without someone mentioning the “U2 Virus” scandal, so here are my two cents…
For those who haven’t heard, U2 and Apple struck a deal whereby the band got paid $100 million [!] to essentially give Apple their new LP, and in turn the latter ‘gifted’ it to 500 million iTunes account holders. Meaning, the LP simply turned up in your iTunes library for free, whether you wanted it or not.
My personal Facebook page has been enjoying a healthy debate on the ethics of this marketing ploy, and it was certainly a hot topic at ye olde pub last night. Why all the fuss?
There’s a camp that views this as genius – not only a way for the band to grab a mountain of cash without spending a cent on marketing, but a way to reconnect with old fans or make potential new ones. An $100k profit is a pretty good incentive for not having to worry about selling your LP.
To some, it’s also perceived as merely a new format for the free giveaway model, likening it to the bonus CD that comes with a magazine, or getting a free “cassette” (Google it, kids) when you purchase a “walkman” (ditto). In this opinion, the delivery mechanism for the digital LP just reflects modern technology.
“U2, shoving their music down your throat since the early ’80s”
Photo: Snopes
(alas, it’s a fabrication, but made me chuckle anyway)
I say, it’s the delivery mechanism, AND the way it was handled, that make it an epic fail. (And I believe this to hold true whether or not the LP eventually soars to #1, although apparently they’re only eligible for those stats after the LP is available everywhere… Anyway.)
Firstly, the delivery. There must be something in the lengthy iTunes ‘terms and conditions’ that allows them to access my account to deliver new material, whether it’s initially just in the Cloud or not. Otherwise, how is this even legal? To my knowledge it hasn’t happened before this, but it doesn’t mean I didn’t give them the ‘right.’ HOWEVER, I think it still feels like a violation of privacy. It makes me uncomfortable and I now distrust the platform. Is that a good result?
As for the ‘free giveaway’ model, I find it’s more akin to someone coming into my house and putting a CD amongst my collection on the shelf without my initial knowledge, permission, or desire, then telling me it’s a “present.” Even if somehow, sometime I’d given them keys, this is still creepy with a capital CREEP.
And it gets worse. I only just discovered that for a short period of time, you couldn’t even get rid of it. As a friend pointed out, it’s like they ‘glued it to the shelf’. It was only after a big enough backlash that Apple set up a special page with instructions of how to remove the LP. You can’t just delete it like any other file. Again, creepy.
But it looks so “innocent”…
Photo: Opt Out
Sure enough Apple and U2 considered these risks, and decided that the cash & publicity (good or bad?) was worth annoying someone like me who wasn’t going to buy the LP anyway. Why would my annoyance matter to a band like U2 or company like Apple? The phrase ‘crying all the way to the bank’ comes to mind. But credibility, integrity, humility – these are traits that make me respect an artist (or company). I can’t truly like an act, or their music, if I don’t respect at least something about them.
Maybe it’s much ado about nothing. Maybe I’m part of the ‘misguided overreaction‘. What’s the big deal? I you don’t want it you can (now) get rid of it. BUT – what if this opens more doors? Think of the 10 bands you loathe the most, then consider how you’d feel if their new material kept arriving unsolicited and cluttering up your music library, just because they received a big payout from Apple. The horror. These are some scary floodgates.
Speaking of which, we haven’t even touched on the ‘message’ this sends to people about music being given away free. If the world’s richest band (I’m assuming) starts gifting their work, what about those who can’t afford to do so? That’s a whole other blog…
A friend used 2 words that resonated with me, and I reckon do a fine job of summing up the whole fiasco: “arrogance”, and “disgust”. If they’d simply sent an email saying you could download the new LP for free if you wanted to, that wouldn’t have upset me (notwithstanding the point above). MAYBE I would have checked it out. As for the music? I have no idea if it’s good or not. I deleted it.
[Note: Recommended reading for a particularly erudite take on the matter (thanks Darby!) : Wired >>]
Music SA Digital Marketing Manager
music sa 
One thought on “Editorial: The U2 ‘Virus’ – Marketing Genius or Jerk Move?”