[kj] OT: Hypocrisy

[Alexander Smith]

Peter, I'm not consciously ignoring you, I'm just a bit on the busier 
side these days (trying to secure another job), so I don't have time to 
go over each Gathering post with a fine-tooth comb. I see my name pop 
up here and there, but usually when it's in a post of yours, its simply 
a wind-up...and those don't usually warrant immediate reply. Unless 
it's a really good one, of course.

Anyway, still here.

Alex in NYC



On Tuesday, November 23, 2004, at 06:38 AM, peter.west410 wrote:

> "I wont pay for Murdoch empire. Full stop. I can watch it in a pub"
>
> Unless you watch it in a pub and don't but anything then you are
> contributing,The pubs pay a higher amount too screen the games and that
> money comes from the profits through higher sales.
>       Anyway why are you against "helping the murdoch empire",It works 
> like
> this.
> We pay our money to Sky.
> Sky gives it to the |Clubs.
> The clubs buy world class players,Or build better stadiums
>
> If there was nt Sky TV there would be no premiership as we know it.We 
> still
> be stuck with "The Big Match" on Sunday dinnertime.
>
> ALEX: Are you ignoring me?  recently ,When I do A post ,You do one a 
> few
> minutes later on a completely different subject,If you do it after 
> this post
> then my suspicions will be confirmed.
>
>                       PW
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Patrick Davies" <Patrick.Davies at subsea7.com>
> To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)"
> <gathering at misera.net>
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 2:35 PM
> Subject: RE: [kj] OT: Hypocrisy
>
>
> <For what reason do "many"people refuse too be associated with Sky.And
> if
> you are against it ,Then I hope you don't watch any of the programmes.>
>
> ah, now you ask why people refuse and then stipulate a method of
> behaviour before you understand why!
>
> I wont pay for Murdoch empire. Full stop. I can watch it in a pub if im
> so inclined but ultimately life is full of riches that go far beyond
> that cathode ray tube. After being Thatchers icon of ruthlessness he is
> happy to jump ship to court anything that gives him money and without
> regard for people or their culture
>
>
> <The only difference between U2 and the KJ advertising campaigns is the
> scale and amount of money involved.U2 song was used in a commercial so
> was
> KJs ,U2s faces were used KJs were nt.>
>
> As I say I can see a difference. You can disagree. Im not commenting on
> whether KJ were right.
>
> <The more money the advertisers pay the more the band do.KJ were nt 
> paid
> much.I suppose U2 use ipods,So why should
> nt they advertise it,If I remember correctly the KJ song was used to
> advertise a Sky programme(snow-boarding I think)>
>
> these are, I take it, assumptions. You don't really know do you? I
> already defined the difference to my understanding. Im happy to change
> that when I see good arguments that encourage deliberation. Im not
> judging KJ peter, I was simply defining the difference.
>
> From: Graham Brown : I'm wondering whether the bands have much say in
> the matter or whether the label or publisher can do what they like with
> a piece of music.  I could be wrong...
>
> Coldplay (I think) refused their song to be used recently. Cant give 
> you
> anymore details. The embarrassment of the clash being on that Bond film
> in order to tekll the viewer that the scene is now in London should be 
> a
> warning to all artists. I believe the clash s complete control is at 
> the
> start of a film right now, although I don't know which film it is.
>
> ePat
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gathering mailing list
> Gathering at misera.net
> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gathering mailing list
> Gathering at misera.net
> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
>