Author Topic: Message from U2.COM  (Read 15705 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ian ryan

  • Global Moderator
  • Child of Grace
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,699
  • Don't worry, baby, it'll be alright
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #75 on: March 07, 2011, 12:41:20 PM »
To the folks who are saying that changes take time and these things aren't going to be immediate, I'd respond that they've been charging for membership since 2004, when Atomic Bomb came out. That's seven years, which is plenty of time in my book to get their stuff together.

Offline soapit

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,527
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #76 on: March 07, 2011, 01:24:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To the folks who are saying that changes take time and these things aren't going to be immediate, I'd respond that they've been charging for membership since 2004, when Atomic Bomb came out. That's seven years, which is plenty of time in my book to get their stuff together.

i'd say it takes time like 1 or 2 months. so we should be starting to hear about changes after a month for mine

Offline savoyard

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #77 on: March 07, 2011, 02:21:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't really know what people were expecting just now. If they are gonna make changes, then of course they're going to take time.




"We spent 18 seconds putting together duals. You know it and U2 knows it. We had to come up with something, even a CD as lame as 'Duals'. Studies show more people subscribe when there's a gift, even if its worthless. Oh, and sorry about the ticket presales, but sponsors and those who give live nation the most money will always have the first selection at tickets. The second tickets go on sale, the best ones are already gone. We have to please Blackberry employees, the promoters, and the friends and family of the promoter and sponsors first. I know that's not what you want to hear, but it's how the world turns, so get over it."

Although harsh, I appreciate truth.



Ha, This is so true. Maybe it took more like 5 minutes to put together duals :D
For me the site functions ok and is designed well. The problem is that the content is crap. Duals just pushed everyone over the limit. When they first announced duals I was thinking we'd finally hear some tracks that were never released.
What ever happened to the U2 RZA collaboration? We all know they have REAL unreleased Duals in their vault. 

Offline briscoetheque

  • Traffic Cop (Rue du Marais)
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,731
  • R-E-S-T-E-C-P
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #78 on: March 07, 2011, 03:55:27 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For me the site functions ok and is designed well.

Not being funny, but how?

Offline JasontheJedi

  • Running to Stand Still
  • **
  • Posts: 1,103
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #79 on: March 07, 2011, 08:26:13 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For me the site functions ok and is designed well.

Not being funny, but how?

Well there are words and it's in color.

Offline briscoetheque

  • Traffic Cop (Rue du Marais)
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,731
  • R-E-S-T-E-C-P
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #80 on: March 07, 2011, 09:28:46 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
For me the site functions ok and is designed well.

Not being funny, but how?

Well there are words and it's in color.

True. It does adhere to all HTML v1.0 coding standards.

Offline savoyard

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #81 on: March 08, 2011, 08:53:25 AM »
"For me the site functions ok and is designed well."
I was just trying to emphasize that the content is what's bad and ultimately that's what everyone cares about. Personally the site gives me a headache.

I think it's possible that u2.com isn't allowed much freedom on the site and they are being micromanaged by principle management.
I'm not defending livenation/u2.com, but I think it would be hard to do a U2 Fan Site if the actual band doesn't participate or give you material.
I think they put everything up on the site that they receive from the band.  There's just a huge disconnect between the band and the site, which is puzzling considering how much the band cares about their fans.





Offline Monicalea

  • Drowning Man/Woman
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,954
  • I don't care, I'm claiming it!
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #82 on: March 08, 2011, 09:07:44 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not defending livenation/u2.com, but I think it would be hard to do a U2 Fan Site if the actual band doesn't participate or give you material.

They don't participate here or on any of the other hundreds of sites that routinely scoop the official site.

Offline jw

  • Intellectual Tortoise
  • *
  • Posts: 422
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #83 on: March 08, 2011, 01:49:46 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not defending livenation/u2.com, but I think it would be hard to do a U2 Fan Site if the actual band doesn't participate or give you material.

They don't participate here or on any of the other hundreds of sites that routinely scoop the official site.

I'm not sure you can compare the news that come from U2.com to news for other sources.  U2.com isn't a news site.  It's an announcement/promotional site.  Most of the kind of stuff you find elsewhere, like on @U2, wouldn't really belong on U2.com.  As far as announcements are concerned, unless U2 chooses to release info through U2.com instead of the press, U2.com will always be "scooped" because U2.com will be updated AFTER the actual announcement is made but not before news hounds get the story out.  

I don't know... I've just never seen U2.com as a intended source for daily U2 news like @U2.   I do however see it as a source of official confirmation of rumors - like the release of Wide Awake In Europe or tour dates, etc.

I'm not defending the $50 price tag.  I'm just saying I would never see "news" as the purpose of U2.com.  U2.com should be more about original stories or exclusive videos, announcements and things like that.


Offline JamietheEdgefan

  • Child of Grace
  • **
  • Posts: 1,588
  • Infinity's a great place to start!
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #84 on: March 08, 2011, 02:43:32 PM »
It's true, it would be difficult to u2.com to report on as much stuff as say, @u2, because a lot of remarks reported in the news around the internet aren't necessarily announcements, so u2.com can't really publish those rumours (e.g. Bono's offhand remarks) without turning them into facts, which could be problematic when said remarks weren't intended to be official declarations.

But there is a way around this - why doesn't the band - instead of talking to random new outlets around the world at random times, talking only to those who can reach them personally - leave blog entries on or speak directly to those running u2.com? Instead of telling a random european journalist about the danger mouse news, Bono could have left a post on u2.com saying:
"Hey guys, we're working with danger mouse. Got quite a few songs with him, so it seems promising. Working with RedOne on some club tracks too. We don't know where it's headed at the moment, but just thought you might like to know!"

Doing something like that would be a great way for the band to be in direct contact with the fans. Considering these remarks about uncertain album work aren't official announcements or official marketing, why doesn't the band tell them to the fans, instead of to random journalists, which is not only a bit alienating to fans (not keeping them in touch directly), but can be misconstrued as fact. Talking to a journalist, the band has to be a lot more fantastical ("we'll definitely have an album by the end of the year!), even if they're not being honest, because it will get them in the headlines. If the band talked to fans, they wouldn't have to exaggerate, they wouldn't be trying to make headlines, so they could emphasise to us that there is no set release date, that there is no guarantee of release - it would be a lot less irritating, and a lot kinder than Paul McGuiness constantly setting firm deadlines twice a year that never come to be.

Offline gnmmet

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 755
  • Your love is like a secret it gets passed around
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #85 on: March 08, 2011, 03:46:07 PM »
Yeah going through the press is particularly annoying.  But even if U2 refuses to talk to the website it would be so easy to link to the news stories that come out, a la @U2.

Offline Terrasidius

  • Party Girl/Boy
  • **
  • Posts: 568
  • Bass suit, bug shades, moon boogie motorcade
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #86 on: March 15, 2011, 07:37:42 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's true, it would be difficult to u2.com to report on as much stuff as say, @u2, because a lot of remarks reported in the news around the internet aren't necessarily announcements, so u2.com can't really publish those rumours (e.g. Bono's offhand remarks) without turning them into facts, which could be problematic when said remarks weren't intended to be official declarations.

But there is a way around this - why doesn't the band - instead of talking to random new outlets around the world at random times, talking only to those who can reach them personally - leave blog entries on or speak directly to those running u2.com? Instead of telling a random european journalist about the danger mouse news, Bono could have left a post on u2.com saying:
"Hey guys, we're working with danger mouse. Got quite a few songs with him, so it seems promising. Working with RedOne on some club tracks too. We don't know where it's headed at the moment, but just thought you might like to know!"

Doing something like that would be a great way for the band to be in direct contact with the fans. Considering these remarks about uncertain album work aren't official announcements or official marketing, why doesn't the band tell them to the fans, instead of to random journalists, which is not only a bit alienating to fans (not keeping them in touch directly), but can be misconstrued as fact. Talking to a journalist, the band has to be a lot more fantastical ("we'll definitely have an album by the end of the year!), even if they're not being honest, because it will get them in the headlines. If the band talked to fans, they wouldn't have to exaggerate, they wouldn't be trying to make headlines, so they could emphasise to us that there is no set release date, that there is no guarantee of release - it would be a lot less irritating, and a lot kinder than Paul McGuiness constantly setting firm deadlines twice a year that never come to be.

Totally agree, with this, this is what Propaganda used to be like. I would LOVE it if U2.com was one of the sites that I spend alot of time on when on the Net but it just isn't because of its crap layout / design, uninteresting news / articles, and the problems others have mentioned. Radioheads website is very very good, as they actively participate in it. I think a mix of Radioheads site and the music siet Last.fm would be a good start; with truly exclusive music, interviews, videos and lots of other interesting stuff to keep you occupied when you visit it.

I think almost everyone has a favourite site or two that they like visiting. As U2 fans, shouldn't their official one be one of those? Sadly for me it is far from it. One of the main reasons I think this is the case is because LiveNation now control it as an extension of their deal with U2 and with them being a massive, global company the proper running of U2's website might seem a trifle and something to be left to any old computer literate monkey but what U2 (because I know they really care about us) should do is take that aspect of the whole deal back into their hands and seek out some really good website designers / managers to really make it amazing. And even get the journalists who worked on Propaganda to work on it. I have a bunch of old issues of Propaganda and the big Best of Propaganda book and that really was getting your money's worth.

You would think that in this day in age, with the internet (a much more powerful communication media / tool) and their massive experience and resources that U2 could have, not just a good site but, one of the best websites on the Net.

Offline p8ru2

  • Precious Stone
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,941
Re: Message from U2.COM
« Reply #87 on: March 19, 2011, 09:50:51 AM »
I signed the petition & I am with those who feel the site is a terrible "fanclub" w/ poor value & sub par customer service, that reflects poorly on the band.  U2.com membership appears to have become nothing more than a $50 surcharge on tickets ( that are available by other means) & a as Live Nation portal to their shop.  I renewed early this year despite Duals and in hoping for some live streams but I won't likely renew next year, if they don't take fan concerns seriously.