By Nick Deiuliis
Free speech and rock music are two of my lifelong passions. Interestingly, that duo has a long history of colliding, with one impacting the other and vice versa; sometimes positively and sometimes negatively.
In today’s world of rock, you would be hard-pressed to think of bigger names than Bruce Springsteen, Bono, and Ed Vedder. At their peaks, all three (along with their bands, of course) have taken the genre into exciting new directions. And none of them have been shy about taking public stands on contemporary issues.
I admit I am a longtime fan of all three. Their extensive music catalogues sit at home and are on regular rotation (CDs for me, not that digital streaming nonsense). I’ve had the pleasure of seeing these three perform live on what has become too many occasions to recount—rarely did I leave thinking I still haven’t found what I’m looking for.
Yet I acknowledge that, as is the case for everyone, age has taken a bit of a toll on these performers.
Bruce is looking more physically frail of late, but he is 75, for goodness’ sake. And his live shows, although not as intense as the glory days decades ago, are still quite the event.
Of the three, Bono has lost the most off his vocal fastball over time, but he was never the most overpowering live performer to begin with. U2’s shows were always more about imagery and Edge’s sonic magic. Bono is a perfect frontman to augment that combination.
Ed Vedder and his band Pearl Jam have held up the best over time. For my money, they are the top live rock band out there today. And live performance quality is such a critical metric for assessing musicianship. Pearl Jam is on my Mt. Rushmore of American rock bands.1
When Rock Stars Speak Up
Recently, all three artists made news for speaking out against President Trump and his policies. I offer three observations on the topic:
First, these artists have a fundamental right to speak their minds. If what they say bothers you, don’t attend the show, or change the station channel. They have freedom of expression, and you have freedom of choice.
Second, I disagree with much of what Bruce, Bono, and Ed recently posited when it comes to President Trump and his policies. But you can’t claim to support free speech while also wanting to silence opposing opinions. So, I am more than ok with them taking stances on issues that I disagree with.
Third, all three musicians are suffering a credibility gap with their recent round of lecturing. What/who they advocate for is not consistent with what they do and how they do it. This self-inflicted conflict sullies their advocacy positions.
A short revisit of recent events will illustrate my last point.
Bruce (best album: The River, with honorable mention to Nebraska)
It all started with the Boss, during his May concert in, of all places, Manchester, England. Springsteen took a break in the set to harshly criticize President Trump, calling the Trump administration “treasonous” and accusing it of “persecuting people for using their right to free speech and voicing their dissent.”
Those are some serious accusations; ones that I believe to be quite a stretch. The current president is a lot of things, but I would not classify him as a traitor. But, hey, if that’s how the Boss feels, so be it. He’s got the mic and it’s his show.
Yet Springsteen’s criticism carries two cringe-worthy components.
First, it is bad form to see an American going to another country and start bad-mouthing our leadership and nation (those who argue taking aim at the sitting president in the way Bruce did is not the same as taking aim at the country are really stretching things). If one desires to rip America, go ahead, but do it here. Keep it inside the family, so to speak. Especially for a celebrity who has become synonymous with Americana, as Springsteen has.
Second, it is wildly ironic for Springsteen to complain about the US government attacking free speech and dissent to a Manchester crowd whose UK government is currently stifling free speech and dissent to a level that is Orwellian. Try posting on UK social media platforms views regarding immigration, crime, climate change, or a host of other topics that are counter to the official government ideology, policy, or view. Doing so can get you censored, banned, or even land you in hot water with authorities.
A little research on the plight of free speech in the UK prior to the Manchester stage lecture would’ve done Springsteen a lot of good. Complaining about how bad it is in the US on a topic where it is much worse in the place where you are speaking from is not a good look. Doing so without being aware of how much worse it is in your host country is irresponsible.
Bono (best tour: Zoo TV, 1992-1993)
President Trump, frustratingly true to form, went after Springsteen shortly after the Manchester speech.
Bono quickly came to Springsteen’s defense, saying in an interview with Jimmy Kimmel that, “We’ve got a lot of very religious Catholics, evangelicals, conservatives, who are very, very, very angry with the person that they voted into office, having demolished instruments of mercy and compassion.” Bono was referencing the scaling back of funding for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which has been tied to multiple incidents of fraud and incompetence. Bono also appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast and claimed USAID cuts resulted in 300,000 deaths.
Bono’s clarion call for American taxpayers to pour enormous and continuous amounts of money into solving the world’s ills is longstanding. He was effectively doing so since the days when he was waving a white flag on a hazy stage at Red Rocks while belting out Sunday Bloody Sunday.
Yet Bono suffers a coinciding, longstanding credibility problem on this issue; one that pops up again with his recent denunciation of President Trump’s injection of accountability into government spending. Because Bono’s preaching on what others should do does not appear to be consistent with his own financial maneuvers.
U2 and Bono have a long history of doing what they can to minimize taxes.2 Not that there is anything wrong with that, particularly in America, where keeping as much of what you earn is coded in our collective DNA. But those taxes Bono/U2 avoided paying could’ve been used to help fund those government humanitarian efforts Bono is passionate about and that he says face existential budget cuts in America because of President Trump’s policies.
Instead, you end up with an uber-wealthy celebrity who on one hand minimizes his taxes and on the other hand criticizes a sitting American president for forcing reform at an agency to protect US taxpayers (what many, including me, consider to be consistent with the president doing his job). And, to add a dose of audacity, Bono speaks on behalf of the global poor and American voters/taxpayers while doing so.
That won’t win converts to his message.
Ed (best song: Given to Fly)
The incident involving the last of our rock trio was one where I was in attendance to observe first-hand.
The final show of Pearl Jam’s Dark Matter World Tour was in Pittsburgh this past May, and it came a few days after Springsteen’s Manchester concert speech. During the encores at the end of the show, Vedder took a few minutes to defend Springsteen and take several shots at President Trump. It was delivered with the typical and lovable Vedder mannerisms. He noted at the very end of his comments how his views were consistent with “the working…people of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.”
The nearly three-hour show was, not surprisingly, outstanding. The ‘working people’ of Pittsburgh in attendance were pleased. Many of them made a stop at the expansive merchandise counters that were impossible to miss throughout the arena. A friend I was with purchased a Pearl Jam baseball hat for $40. That’s insane for a cheap trucker hat, but that’s how in-concert purchases go, from hats to shirts to beer.
Once the hat was in hand, I asked my buddy if I could see it. I was more interested in what was inside the hat than the exterior design. I had a sneaking suspicion as to where that hat was manufactured. I was pretty sure it was not made by union labor in the Steel City. Sure enough, the tag inside the brim proudly proclaimed, “MADE IN CHINA.” Oh no.
That’s an embarrassing problem for the Pearl Jam frontman. Stopping the concert to deliver a speech on civil discourse and dedicate it on behalf of the ‘working people of Pittsburgh’ while before and after you are milking them with overpriced merchandise made in Chinese sweatshops is a horrible juxtaposition and stark self-contradiction of message.
The Valuable Trait of Self-Awareness
Some people lack self-awareness, which can be problematic for them at times. But when celebrities embrace advocacy and lack self-awareness, it can mushroom the problematic into an ongoing credibility crisis. That’s what’s in danger of happening with Bruce, Bono, and Ed.
I think highly of all three artists, beyond the music. Even though I strongly disagree with their current anti-President Trump stances, I appreciate and support many of their prior and current advocacy efforts. I will always respect Bruce for supporting steelworkers in the 1980s when times were beyond bleak in places like my hometown of Pittsburgh. Bono and U2 played a short set in a Kyiv subway station that was serving as a bomb shelter during the current war; how many rock bands did you see doing that? And Ed Vedder, a baseball fan, has been a supporter of two Pittsburgh inspirations: the Roberto Clemente Museum and Sean Casey’s Clubhouse.
All three artists deserve some degree of benefit of the doubt, particularly when exercising freedom of expression.
But doing so comes with a related responsibility not to act personally in a way that contradicts what you are publicly advocating. When such conflict occurs, a rational rebuttal becomes a fan’s duty in practicing civil discourse.
Hopefully, it results in greater self-awareness for the frontmen—leading to words and actions that are consistent between their public stages and personal lives.
Rock on.
•