U2's Bono Apologizes for Automatic 'Songs of Innocence' Album Download

[7enderbender]

Congratulations, America. You've forced an apology from someone who gave you something for FREE.

See, that's the thing. In Boner's mind and maybe in yours there are such things as "free things". In real life there is no such thing. U2's silly little "free" album is paid for by us consumers of Apple products. And then there is opportunity cost in having to remove their ***** from several devices potentially (just like the iOS8 upgrade file that was foced onto my kids' iPads before I could block my router). Worse: some people may have actually paid real factual dollars by exceeding download quotas and such. Not to speak of the man-hours invested in IT departments trying to prevent this kind of nonsense anytime the Holy Apple decides to bequeath us with the latest flashy hipster idiocy.

 

[casperes1996]

No

If you have the setting to show songs in iCloud on your phone, and used shuffle, it would still play songs from that album. The only way to guarantee you didn't hear that garbage was to turn off music in the cloud, and then lose access to your other music.

Not correct. You can hide songs in the cloud on a per song basis. Hiding them also disables shuffle.

I have a **** song associated with my iCloud that I bought for my mom, and after hiding it, it never plays on shuffle, and I can't even force it to play without unhiding it.

 

[7enderbender]

People are making a huge ass deal over something that was supposed to be a nice gesture honestly. Even if I didn't like U2, hell, if it was Hootie and the BLowfish (who I detest), I would have just said, ew, deleted it, and moved on with my life. I certainly wouldn't be having a hissy fit over how much jerks Hootie were (I wouldn't even consider them jerks for it at all, I just don't want their music on my machine).

And another problem. Please don't believe a word anytime someone like the guys in U2 (or the left in general) give you a speech on how nice "free" things are and how they are for the "common man" and "common good". It's not true. For Bono this is his way to make a living and by extension enable him on his delusional power trip.

I respect those guys a lot in fact - as business people, not musicians. They have their fingers in a lot of stuff (recently they got added to the board of directors at the Fender Music Co for instance). And they manage to market themselves as these selfless heroes - usually leaving out the part what they get in return for their good deeds. I'm fine with that. I don't mind it if rich people make even more money with what they do - unless they give other people attitude about doing the same thing.

Their strategy in getting a big wad of cash for an album that otherwise would have gone more or less unnoticed and certainly wouldn't sell much (their clientele is not exactly into buying albums anymore I would think) is genius in a somewhat Faustian kinda way.

 

[Chiloé]

See, that's the thing. In Boner's mind and maybe in yours there are such things as "free things". In real life there is no such thing. U2's silly little "free" album is paid for by us consumers of Apple products. And then there is opportunity cost in having to remove their ***** from several devices potentially (just like the iOS8 upgrade file that was foced onto my kids' iPads before I could block my router). Worse: some people may have actually paid real factual dollars by exceeding download quotas and such. Not to speak of the man-hours invested in IT departments trying to prevent this kind of nonsense anytime the Holy Apple decides to bequeath us with the latest flashy hipster idiocy.

I hope that $.00000000000000000000000000001 U2 tax of which you speak doesn't prove too much for your wallet to bear when you next make an Apple purchase.

It was free. To get this riled up about something that has no impact on one's life is mind-boggling...

 

[Kr15]

I'm quite lost...
Where is the problem? That content been downloaded to your device?
Is it a space issue? Music taste issue? Quite lost...

What about simple "Thank you..."?
1. "Thank you for giving me a new album for free" (possibly saving couple of quid if you were tended to buy it)
2. Or "Thank you, No..." whatever the reason is...

Why can't we just appreciate people effort?!
Anyway...

 

[milo]

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but this wasn't "auto-downloaded". It was simply made available in our libraries as if we had bought it.

You're wrong, it was auto downloaded for many users. Seems like since it didn't download automatically for some people, they just assume it didn't for anyone, which isn't the case.

This didn't happen. You were given the opportunity to download the album.

False, for many users it wasn't an "opportunity", it downloaded on its own. Now if they had just made it available for free instead of automatic download, you wouldn't have seen the complaints or the apologies.

 

[UpperQuadrant]

artists have to be paid, how is giving away music free benefiting the art?

besides, timmy cookie gave out the album free because the shiny crispy red fruity company purchased all those digital albums to give out as promotional material, he may have also asked bonono to give a discount for "exposure" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!! hey you wanna reach 10 billion folks on eyetoons? want more "exposure"? HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!

exposure kills

if you want all the free music you can get - great, just pick from the top 40's and the one hit wonder's pile. don't expect incredible independent artists to give their art free. you are not expected to pay, you should just pay for art period

love you all!

Apple is paying U2 for the album. I don't know how much they are paying, but U2 isn't giving the album for free, Apple was and the issue for me was that this was a horrid sounding album and the songwriting and performance was just not that enjoyable. Plus, I hate it when these overrated acts get so much exposure.

For me, if Apple wants to promote ITunes by giving away free songs, I would much rather they just give us so many song download credits so everyone can pick what they want and Apple pays the labels for the free download, that way we get to choose what we want and there would be nothing but smiles from the customers and no artist would get this much attention. Bono is really using Apple as a means to promote himself, U2 and his RED non-profit a little too much and it's getting really annoying. That's just my opinion. I personally like to have a choice when it comes to music. I gave U2 a listen but was disappointed by the quality of The album and ended up deleting it. So there really was no upside for me. If a lessor known jazz artist tried to do this, it wouldn't have gotten so much attention because they aren't as commercial about what they do. Wynton Marsalis performed at an iTunes/iPod event several years ago and they released some free music and videos of the actual live performance from the event and that was cool. Great music, great recording, free, and there was no major issues with it and it was from the actual event, they weren't trying to win some silly download of an album download record of the most downloaded album. U2 is really too self centered of a band.

 

[Jungo]

No ... this not just a free download and I'm ungrateful - There is free stuff all over iTunes -

This is spam - plain and simple - apple knows it , Bono knows it. U2 was greedy and I believe talked apple into this - AND got big cash for it as well - Fact is in todays market they would have lucky to sell a million units ... and clearly THEY know that.

But on the eve of the album starting to count as sales - bono sez 'opps, sorry about that' - What an Idiot.

Apple has never done this before - and I doubt they'll do it again. U2 wins this one.

 

[DeadSeaMac]

He finally admits in a round about way what a narcissist he is. It should read:

Oops. Um. I'm sorry about that. I had this beautiful idea and I got carried away with myself.

I am prone to that kind of thing. Drop of megalomania, touch of generosity, dash of self-promotion, and deep fear that these songs that I poured my life into over the last few years might not be purchased, relevant or be heard.

I am totally paranoid of becoming a washed up rock star and wanted to appear to be this benevolent soul giving free music away while Tim Cook was really giving me hundreds of millions of dollars for Apples right to give it away. After all its really all about the money isn't it?

And I thought Bono still hasn't found what he's looking for...

 

[swajames]

That we are even having this discussion is just staggering and proof, as if it were needed, that no good deed goes unpunished....

With that said, the U2/Apple combination created a perfect storm for the idiots who choose to complain and find fault rather than appreciate the gesture for what it was. As much as there is an obvious hard core who will choose to see the negative in pretty anything Apple does, Bono (more than any other band member) makes great music but can be a polarizing individual.

Switch out Apple for say Samsung or Google and switch out U2 for an innocuous artist - let me suggest Taylor Swift as an example - and you can bet your bottom dollar that the reaction to the same set of circumstances would have been different...

For me, this was a great way to get a good album for free. Kudos to Apple and U2 for making it happen. That both have had to back peddle and even apologize for giving us something for free leaves me perplexed.

And some of the overreactions in this thread - particularly the guy who claims to have sold off all his U2 music and merchandise in protest - genuinely leave you scratching your head in bewilderment. Are people really that stupid?

 

[anova]

See, that's the thing. In Boner's mind and maybe in yours there are such things as "free things". In real life there is no such thing. U2's silly little "free" album is paid for by us consumers of Apple products. And then there is opportunity cost in having to remove their ***** from several devices potentially (just like the iOS8 upgrade file that was foced onto my kids' iPads before I could block my router). Worse: some people may have actually paid real factual dollars by exceeding download quotas and such. Not to speak of the man-hours invested in IT departments trying to prevent this kind of nonsense anytime the Holy Apple decides to bequeath us with the latest flashy hipster idiocy.

I highly doubt Apple would have lowered prices on merchandise had they not paid an artist for something like this. So if not free, it is out of the consumers hands anyway...so why whine about!? They're getting into your wallet if you want their gear, one way or another. Just enjoy the free tunes

 

[numlock]

That we are even having this discussion is just staggering and proof, as if it were needed, that no good deed goes unpunished....

With that said, the U2/Apple combination created a perfect storm for the idiots who choose to complain and find fault rather than appreciate the gesture for what it was. As much as there is an obvious hard core who will choose to see the negative in pretty anything Apple does, Bono (more than any other band member) makes great music but can be a polarizing individual.

Switch out Apple for say Samsung or Google and switch out U2 for an innocuous artist - let me suggest Taylor Swift as an example - and you can bet your bottom dollar that the reaction to the same set of circumstances would have been different...

For me, this was a great way to get a good album for free. Kudos to Apple and U2 for making it happen. That both have had to back peddle and even apologize for giving us something for free leaves me perplexed.

And some of the overreactions in this thread - particularly the guy who claims to have sold off all his U2 music and merchandise in protest - genuinely leave you scratching your head in bewilderment. Are people really that stupid?

why should u2 get credit? didnt they get their check?

u2 didnt do this for free and i assume the same applies to apple but if you want to give this kind of "gift" then it dosent have to be this invasive. people were stating right away that it should be an option. anything else is just spam as jungo says.

 

[calzon65]

Oops. Um. I'm sorry about that. I had this beautiful idea and we got carried away with ourselves.

Artists are prone to that kind of thing. Drop of megalomania, touch of generosity, dash of self-promotion, and deep fear that these songs that we poured our life into over the last few years might not be heard.

There's a lot of noise out there. I guess we got a little noisy ourselves to get through it.

Sounds like a typical celebrity half hearted, self serving "apology" or at best "excuse" for pushing something, free or not, on others without their permission.

 

[bawbac]

Apple is paying U2 for the album.

How about you back up your statement to substantiate your claims.

 

[MaloCS]

They should apologize how terrible their music is.

Boom goes the dynamite!!!!

----------

That we are even having this discussion is just staggering and proof, as if it were needed, that no good deed goes unpunished....

With that said, the U2/Apple combination created a perfect storm for the idiots who choose to complain and find fault rather than appreciate the gesture for what it was. As much as there is an obvious hard core who will choose to see the negative in pretty anything Apple does, Bono (more than any other band member) makes great music but can be a polarizing individual.

Switch out Apple for say Samsung or Google and switch out U2 for an innocuous artist - let me suggest Taylor Swift as an example - and you can bet your bottom dollar that the reaction to the same set of circumstances would have been different...

For me, this was a great way to get a good album for free. Kudos to Apple and U2 for making it happen. That both have had to back peddle and even apologize for giving us something for free leaves me perplexed.

And some of the overreactions in this thread - particularly the guy who claims to have sold off all his U2 music and merchandise in protest - genuinely leave you scratching your head in bewilderment. Are people really that stupid?

Gesture? I could care less about an invasive gesture from a band that hasn't made a good song since the mid 90s. This was not done out of good will, this was done to make sure the money Apple spent was justified by meaningless numbers padded by auto downloads.

If Apple wants to send me a good will gesture how about a free case for my new iPhone 6. Or what about a free $25 iTunes gift card. Now those are good will gestures that I could get behind. Instead my privacy gets invaded and a product that I didn't ask for or want was forced upon me.

 

[UpperQuadrant]

Message to Bono

Get off your ego maniacal trip. Your music isn't that great and the last album SUCKED. Look at the Beatles, they wrote better tunes in a shorter period of time, they didn't have to resort to heavy signal processing to cover up bad playing and they sang better than you'll ever sing. They sell because they created classic songs with classic recordings that have lasted the test of time.

Grow up.

 

[brucewayne]

If you have auto downloads setup, its because you want what you purchased to end up on all of your devices, not what Apple purchased for you. Same thing goes with your music library.

It doesn't matter if it is a good album or not. If you go to a nice restaurant and instead of taking your order, the waiter sits a plate of Osso Buco in front of your vegan PETA loving girlfriend, you would get pissed right?

It sets a precedence. If Dr. Dre ever finishes Detox do you want it to end up on your 6 year olds iPod? Do you want the next candy crush to show up on your home screen one day? And before you say turn off automatic downloads, remember that up to the U2 album release, auto downloads was gated by the fact that someone had to buy/download it first (purchases could be turned off on the 6 year olds iPhone). Even if it didn't auto download, its still in the cloud library, meaning it can pop up during shuffle play or get sync'd back to your iTunes library

To have to launch a U2 removal tool is just embarrassing to both Apple and U2. A free album release would have accomplished giving the album to people that wanted it, or wanted to try it, without the backlash from people that didn't.

 

[Steve121178]

How bad, sad and empty is your life to actually spend time complaining about this? The way some crybabies bang on you'd think they were forced into making a mandatory financial transaction to acquire the album.

Anyone who is actually upset about this is an idiot. I can only hope Apple make more of these marketing deals just to piss these morons off time and time again.

 

[dampfnudel]

We just need Apple to apologise for iOS 8 and it'll be a great day all round.

I suggest you get comfortable because it's going to be a long wait.

Apple could have done things differently, like providing these free songs on the iTunes store instead of making them "available" right in your library. I hope Apple learned their lesson. A lot of people don't want things to be automatically "pushed on them" even if those things are "free". As for U2 and Bono, this album doesn't come close to their best, but they've given us enough good stuff over the years so...

 

[KellydenAdel]

IM SO HAPPY I got their CRAHP music SLAMMED onto my Iphone.






Pretentious D-bag in the dictionary has BONOs picture under it.



Thanks Apple for ASKING me to slam that garbage music on my phone

 

[yojitani]

Still not sure what the big deal is about this. Seems like a bunch of people who don't like U2 decided that they hate U2 and that, as a result, the automatic download is just an infraction too far. In other words, a bunch of mad people on the internet.

I don't like U2 - can't stand Bono's self-righteous sanctimoniousness - but I thought I'd give it a listen since a) they named the album after a book by William Blake and b) it was there anyway. Were it not for pop music's history of egregious abuse of the works of literary masters such as William Blake, I may have been outraged that U2 could have done such a thing. However, I decided that there have been much greater offenses and watched the episode of Monkey Dust in which Ivan Dobsky, AKA The Meatsafe Murderer, encounters Bono at a charity concert celebrating Dobsky's release.

 

[IbisDoc]

See, that's the thing. In Boner's mind and maybe in yours there are such things as "free things". In real life there is no such thing. U2's silly little "free" album is paid for by us consumers of Apple products. And then there is opportunity cost in having to remove their ***** from several devices potentially (just like the iOS8 upgrade file that was foced onto my kids' iPads before I could block my router). Worse: some people may have actually paid real factual dollars by exceeding download quotas and such. Not to speak of the man-hours invested in IT departments trying to prevent this kind of nonsense anytime the Holy Apple decides to bequeath us with the latest flashy hipster idiocy.

Not to mention the opportunity cost in reading the above twisted logic.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

except if you are one of the folks who opt to stream their music rather than store it on the device, and don't want to fart around with playlists, then it wasn't just added to your plate.

It was unceremoniously dumped right in amongst what you paid for without so much as a fork to pick it back out

Point taken.

Can we compromise with oats on the bread crust then? I mean, if you had 6 albums, then it's like un-asked for mayo (18% of your sandwich), but if you have 150 albums (.66% of your playlist), then it's more like oats on the crust.

----------

Not to mention the opportunity cost in reading the above twisted logic.

I'm sure that dogs and cats living together was next on the list up there.

 

[phillytim]

The apology was unnecessary, albeit good intentions. I guess it was worth it to silence the haters.

 

[snorkelman]

Can we compromise with oats on the bread crust then? I mean, if you had 6 albums, then it's like un-asked for mayo (18% of your sandwich), but if you have 150 albums (.66% of your playlist), then it's more like oats on the crust.

Lol, sure but its more about flavour; if you've got 1800 tracks that all taste like icecream you don't want twelve that taste like pickled gherkins mixed in