I’m sure it was presented to the band like this “hey will you do a private show for a dump truck of money?” Of course the answer is yes. As if he has any way of knowing what’s going on inside a company, who’s specifically on the invite list - come on…. He’s a rock star - he plays shows for money, bitches, and blow. That’s all there is to it - he ain’t the villain here.
I guess my point is, in what way is Foo Fighters playing for Amazon divisive?
Amazon was going to pay someone to perform at that show & that performer, regardless of whether it was FF, was not going to convince Amazon to give that money to employees that deserved it.
So what exactly did the Foo Fighters do to earn this level ire? You’d rather Amazon gave that money to another performer?
If everyone really feels that strongly about FF taking this gig, then start a campaign telling FF how you think the money should be spent.
I’d certainly consider that a better use of everyone’s anger.
Look, congratulations on being able to turn down a paycheck from Amazon. I myself would absolutely take that paycheck from Amazon.
But I digress… So, back to the topic at hand.
In what way is any of this FF’s fault? What have FF done to divide anyone? Perform?
Amazon wanted a concert. Amazon got a concert. Amazon was going to get a concert, regardless of who performed.
Your argument is that FF are fault because… because why? They should’ve turned it down?
Who should have performed for Amazon then?
If that argument is so weak, you go right on ahead and tell me who the ethical choice would be for an Amazon concert? Dua Lipa? Green Day? Chris Brown?
You know what? Your right. Every single established musical act should have displayed the mental fortitude & character to turn down Amazon’s money.
The key word there is SHOULD, but should isn’t always realistic.
Be mad at Amazon. I’m with you on that. But blaming a band because you don’t like person who signs their check is pretty self defeating in my opinion.
The Foo Fighters don’t owe any of us shit & our opinions on their income streams are irrelevant.
Thank you. I really do turn down money for what I believe in and I’m not rich, I just think there is more to life than money. As a software developer I could earn a lot more by working for say a gambling company, but I wouldn’t do that as I find the industry particularly morally bankrupt.
You’re conflating what they have done wrong with what I finding morally acceptable. FF can do whatever the fuck they want and be fine, but they can’t do whatever the fuck they want and still receive my money or attention.
It’s not that deep. FF don’t even know I exist, and they’ll continue to be rich and successful. Just without me compromising my beliefs.
I don’t know if the devil performs these days but I think he would be quite fitting. Perhaps if Hitler was alive he could paint them some pictures.
I’m not trying to dictate who performs for the Amazon execs, just that whoever it is isn’t getting my money.
You know who does get my money, based on their moral fortitude and beliefs. Someone like Macklemore. I will support people whose beliefs align with mine.
I really don’t know how I can be any clearer than that and I find it staggering that I have to defend myself in here, but you are fine with FF performing for execs from one of the most parasitic companies in the planet. If FF and Amazon can do what they want without recourse then so can I no?
Let me ask you this. Do you just not care if you contribute to the worst aspects of society? Would you ever not give a company your money if it’s something you want?
I forgo a lot of purchases as I can only find them on Amazon. I’ll pay more to buy things elsewhere. I don’t support McD, I try to avoid nestle as much as humanly possible. I left Facebook over a decade ago when they did nothing about rampant misinformation. I don’t support Weatherspoons in the UK over how they treated staff during Covid. I wouldn’t bank with Barclays as they invest in Israel etc.
The right boycotted bud light because they were being transphobic. We are simply calling attention to the fact that Dave Grohl does not need the money and doing a show for Amazon execs is a decision he didn’t have to make. I’m not boycotting him, I don’t suddenly hate him and want him to die or something. So please do not compare me to the bigots who decided that a few beer cans showing someone who is trans was basically the end of the world.
Many of us are critiquing his decision and some of you are really upset by it for some reason. We have that right and it’s a valid thing to point out. Would you not judge him for playing a trump rally?
Right, but you have no clue how FF will use that money & you’re willfully ignoring that Amazon has already infected the music industry.
Your moral outrage at FF completely ignores that the band lost a drummer & cancelled a tour on the heels of a global pandemic. You have no idea what their debt to cash ratio is and whether they intend to use that cash to keep costs down for fans or maybe even help Taylor’s family with it.
This thread has seen half of a story, chosen their villain, and are now willing to jump on anyone who might show a modicum of patience and empathy.
So go ahead, call out the Foo Fighters for taking dirty Amazon money… but you still only have a story.
I have a feeling Foo Fighters/Dave Grohl must mean a lot to you and this must be a very difficult discussion for you to have. I’m not really sure I deserve the snipes you are taking at me so I’ll just leave it there. Hopefully you’ll understand the response to it isn’t as binary as your making it out to be, and that you don’t need to be so angry/hostile for people questioning the decision of a successful musician. It’s just a discussion about what we perceive as social responsibility.
I’m not a fan of the Foo Fighters I think they’ve already sold out & while I don’t dislike them, I’m not a fan.
What’s difficult about this conversation is that everyone else has made it black & white, over whether Amazon’s money is tainted.
That’s everyone’s only argument, Amazon money is bad & the Foo Fighters shouldn’t have taken it.
But… that argument ignores the nuance I’m trying to point out.
That money was going to be given to a band or musician for concert full of gross Amazon execs. Full stop. That is all it was ever going to be used for by Amazon & neither you or I can stop it.
So if the Foo Fighters shouldn’t have taken that money, than who should have received it? What band would you prefer to have played for Amazon?
That concert was going down with it without the Foo Fighters. So if not them, then who?
You’re saying everybody else has made a black-and-white, but I am here trying to talk to you about it in a nuanced way, which you responded to by attacking me personally and pushing it back into a more black-and-white discussion. I’m not really sure what you want out of this so I think it’s best we just let it go. You seem quite heightened for somebody who is not emotionally invested in it.
Keep in mind the prevailing sentiments of any post are heavily influenced by who shows up first. In this case, a number of people showed up with opinions antagonistic to your beliefs. It’s not necessarily representative of the community, just the majority of the people in the comment section at that time. Those with beliefs that run contrary to the prevailing theme in the comment section may decide just not to comment instead of being involved in conflict, further reinforcing the bias.
I have no skin in this game dude, I don’t hate Dave Grohl suddenly. I just think this performance was incredibly tacky. You’re way too defensive about this.
He’s a performer. Who he performs for does matter to some degree. If he played Trump’s inauguration, for instance, people would rightfully judge the decision.
It’s not like he needs the money at this point. He can be a little more discerning.
Fucking-A, Dave. At least Kurt never sold out.
Die a hero or live long enough to become a villain. Kurt punched his card before it could happen to him too.
deleted by creator
Agree 100%
I’m sure it was presented to the band like this “hey will you do a private show for a dump truck of money?” Of course the answer is yes. As if he has any way of knowing what’s going on inside a company, who’s specifically on the invite list - come on…. He’s a rock star - he plays shows for money, bitches, and blow. That’s all there is to it - he ain’t the villain here.
Rock probably died that day
It died a long time before that.
Seriously. This is as shitty as the Right boycotting Budlight.
Go ahead & burn your FF tunes. Hell make a social media post about it. It’ll do good, we promise.
Why don’t you wait & see what Dave does with money? Anybody know what his charitable interests are?
Y’all just want to burn some one & you’ll burn your heroes as easily as your villains. Buncha fuckin’ assholes.
To be fair the right boycott things for being inclusive. I like to boycott things for being divisive or shitting on the little guy.
Does it matter? To the companies and people I boycott, probably not. But I know I’m not giving my money to people I don’t agree with.
I guess my point is, in what way is Foo Fighters playing for Amazon divisive?
Amazon was going to pay someone to perform at that show & that performer, regardless of whether it was FF, was not going to convince Amazon to give that money to employees that deserved it.
So what exactly did the Foo Fighters do to earn this level ire? You’d rather Amazon gave that money to another performer?
If everyone really feels that strongly about FF taking this gig, then start a campaign telling FF how you think the money should be spent.
I’d certainly consider that a better use of everyone’s anger.
Divisive. Just look at these comments.
The argument if it’s not them it’ll be someone else is pretty weak.
I may as well rob my neighbours house, if it isn’t me it might be someone else aye?
Yeah I’d rather they give it someone else if it goes against FF morals. I certainly would have turned it down if I were them.
Look, congratulations on being able to turn down a paycheck from Amazon. I myself would absolutely take that paycheck from Amazon.
But I digress… So, back to the topic at hand.
In what way is any of this FF’s fault? What have FF done to divide anyone? Perform?
Amazon wanted a concert. Amazon got a concert. Amazon was going to get a concert, regardless of who performed.
Your argument is that FF are fault because… because why? They should’ve turned it down?
Who should have performed for Amazon then?
If that argument is so weak, you go right on ahead and tell me who the ethical choice would be for an Amazon concert? Dua Lipa? Green Day? Chris Brown?
You know what? Your right. Every single established musical act should have displayed the mental fortitude & character to turn down Amazon’s money.
The key word there is SHOULD, but should isn’t always realistic.
Be mad at Amazon. I’m with you on that. But blaming a band because you don’t like person who signs their check is pretty self defeating in my opinion.
The Foo Fighters don’t owe any of us shit & our opinions on their income streams are irrelevant.
Thank you. I really do turn down money for what I believe in and I’m not rich, I just think there is more to life than money. As a software developer I could earn a lot more by working for say a gambling company, but I wouldn’t do that as I find the industry particularly morally bankrupt.
You’re conflating what they have done wrong with what I finding morally acceptable. FF can do whatever the fuck they want and be fine, but they can’t do whatever the fuck they want and still receive my money or attention.
It’s not that deep. FF don’t even know I exist, and they’ll continue to be rich and successful. Just without me compromising my beliefs.
I don’t know if the devil performs these days but I think he would be quite fitting. Perhaps if Hitler was alive he could paint them some pictures.
I’m not trying to dictate who performs for the Amazon execs, just that whoever it is isn’t getting my money.
You know who does get my money, based on their moral fortitude and beliefs. Someone like Macklemore. I will support people whose beliefs align with mine.
I really don’t know how I can be any clearer than that and I find it staggering that I have to defend myself in here, but you are fine with FF performing for execs from one of the most parasitic companies in the planet. If FF and Amazon can do what they want without recourse then so can I no?
Let me ask you this. Do you just not care if you contribute to the worst aspects of society? Would you ever not give a company your money if it’s something you want?
I forgo a lot of purchases as I can only find them on Amazon. I’ll pay more to buy things elsewhere. I don’t support McD, I try to avoid nestle as much as humanly possible. I left Facebook over a decade ago when they did nothing about rampant misinformation. I don’t support Weatherspoons in the UK over how they treated staff during Covid. I wouldn’t bank with Barclays as they invest in Israel etc.
The right boycotted bud light because they were being transphobic. We are simply calling attention to the fact that Dave Grohl does not need the money and doing a show for Amazon execs is a decision he didn’t have to make. I’m not boycotting him, I don’t suddenly hate him and want him to die or something. So please do not compare me to the bigots who decided that a few beer cans showing someone who is trans was basically the end of the world.
Many of us are critiquing his decision and some of you are really upset by it for some reason. We have that right and it’s a valid thing to point out. Would you not judge him for playing a trump rally?
Right, but you have no clue how FF will use that money & you’re willfully ignoring that Amazon has already infected the music industry.
Your moral outrage at FF completely ignores that the band lost a drummer & cancelled a tour on the heels of a global pandemic. You have no idea what their debt to cash ratio is and whether they intend to use that cash to keep costs down for fans or maybe even help Taylor’s family with it.
This thread has seen half of a story, chosen their villain, and are now willing to jump on anyone who might show a modicum of patience and empathy.
So go ahead, call out the Foo Fighters for taking dirty Amazon money… but you still only have a story.
I have a feeling Foo Fighters/Dave Grohl must mean a lot to you and this must be a very difficult discussion for you to have. I’m not really sure I deserve the snipes you are taking at me so I’ll just leave it there. Hopefully you’ll understand the response to it isn’t as binary as your making it out to be, and that you don’t need to be so angry/hostile for people questioning the decision of a successful musician. It’s just a discussion about what we perceive as social responsibility.
I’m not a fan of the Foo Fighters I think they’ve already sold out & while I don’t dislike them, I’m not a fan.
What’s difficult about this conversation is that everyone else has made it black & white, over whether Amazon’s money is tainted.
That’s everyone’s only argument, Amazon money is bad & the Foo Fighters shouldn’t have taken it.
But… that argument ignores the nuance I’m trying to point out.
That money was going to be given to a band or musician for concert full of gross Amazon execs. Full stop. That is all it was ever going to be used for by Amazon & neither you or I can stop it.
So if the Foo Fighters shouldn’t have taken that money, than who should have received it? What band would you prefer to have played for Amazon?
That concert was going down with it without the Foo Fighters. So if not them, then who?
You’re saying everybody else has made a black-and-white, but I am here trying to talk to you about it in a nuanced way, which you responded to by attacking me personally and pushing it back into a more black-and-white discussion. I’m not really sure what you want out of this so I think it’s best we just let it go. You seem quite heightened for somebody who is not emotionally invested in it.
deleted by creator
Keep in mind the prevailing sentiments of any post are heavily influenced by who shows up first. In this case, a number of people showed up with opinions antagonistic to your beliefs. It’s not necessarily representative of the community, just the majority of the people in the comment section at that time. Those with beliefs that run contrary to the prevailing theme in the comment section may decide just not to comment instead of being involved in conflict, further reinforcing the bias.
Didn’t he and the band literally promote AIDs conspiracy theories at concerts?
deleted by creator
Yeah NBD at all! Lol
Imagine stanning for such a mid band
Well for starters, he played a private show for Amazon execs.
deleted by creator
I have no skin in this game dude, I don’t hate Dave Grohl suddenly. I just think this performance was incredibly tacky. You’re way too defensive about this.
He’s a performer. Who he performs for does matter to some degree. If he played Trump’s inauguration, for instance, people would rightfully judge the decision.
It’s not like he needs the money at this point. He can be a little more discerning.
deleted by creator
I dunno. Man’s getting paid to play music. If he takes that money and does something better with it. That’s still a positive. Don’t be a hipster lol
Imagine if they gave some or all of it to an Amazon union drive. A prank of historical proportions
Kurt wasn’t offered millions for a private show.