NEWS
EVENTS
The Benefit Concert
Other | Monday 7th October 2013 | Harry
Live 8 was one of the biggest global spectacles of recent times. Around two billion people tuned in to watch the concerts worldwide and such exposure inevitably translated into commercial gain for the artists involved. According to figures put forward by HMV, the week after Live 8 saw sales of The Who’s Then and Now rise by 863% while sales of Pink Floyd’s best of collection rose a staggering 1343%. While this is hardly surprising, it does at times cause the cynical amongst us to question the authenticity of an artist when performing at a benefit concert.
In 2005, organiser Bob Geldof said that while he struggled to cobble together enough artists to fill the bill at Live Aid, the response to Live 8 was unprecedented, with hundreds of acts putting themselves up for consideration. Taking into account the success of Live Aid twenty years previously, did artists like Razorlight and Dido want to play the concert because they really believed in the cause, or was it purely for the exposure?
An enlightening episode took place during the2007 Live Earth concert at Wembley, when comedian Chris Rock, one of the event’s guest hosts, was quoted as saying "I hope that Live Earth ends global warming, the same way Live Aid ended world poverty". Is this clearly a case of a sponsor not believing in the cause and an inauthentic display of support?
The legitimacy of celebrities as political actors is a contentious issue in the field of social and political studies. While there is no doubt that many artists and celebritiess support worthy causes selflessly, it can be argued there is a more undesirable vanity involved in some celebrity endorsements.
But does it matter? If the organisers get themselves a big name and attract people to their cause and the artist sell a few records out of it, then isn’t that a happy outcome for everyone?
Political and popular culture expert John Street argues that Live 8 can ultimately be seen as successful in terms of influencing politicians. As Street stated in an interview with politics.co.uk, ‘‘If you look at Live 8 and the sequence of events, it precedes the decision to end Third World debt. The fact they happen in that sequence doesn't mean it's causal. But there was clearly an indication that Bono and Bob Geldof made an impact on how political leaders were thinking, and made it hard to say no to what was being proposed.’’ If the concert is ultimately a success, then it’s hard to argue that the performers presence, whether they believe in a cause or not, isn’t justified.
So are the artists in it for themselves? Well sometimes the answer is probably yes. But it doesn’t matter - while the artist may benefit more than anyone, just the presence of a famous act at a charity concert can make a difference.
