John Mayer on “Live Earth”

Here is an article written by John Mayer over at Huffington Post that I thought was well said. Money quotes:

“I hope that for all the cynicism that’s existed around this subject, we can all uncross our arms long enough to give this event a chance to impact the world in the way that I’m beginning to feel that it could. Now isn’t the time to dissect the rights and wrongs. (If you’re hoping Live Earth doesn’t work, you have a lot of soul-searching to do.)”

“The star of the night is an idea, and all eyes will be on it. And to that effect, I hope that Mr. Gore and the event organizers will keep in mind that for as much as we the artists represent their message, their message represents us.”

“To the journalists who will lay in wait for the perfectly maligned moment of hypocrisy, you will probably find one if that’s how you want to spend your time. Just use this as a measuring stick; give Live Earth’s initiative at least as much benefit of the doubt as you’ve given to the iPhone, or a new Radiohead album.”

Click here to check out the Live Earth website. Videos of all the different performances can be found there. (Bon Jovi’s “Wanted..” performance in NYC takes the cake!)

10 thoughts on “John Mayer on “Live Earth”

  1. maybe it’s just because i don’t like john mayer, but this quote only makes me more upset about live earth.

    it’s all just another lame attempt to do something “profound” that’s screwed up from the beginning because it’s organized in a top-heavy manner that makes waste a necessity.

    the idea that the events would at least attempt to be carbon neutral shows how ridiculous the whole deal was.

    and at least with something like live aid and farm aid, there were supposed to be legitimate attempts to do something tangible.

  2. i guess it’s not as easy for you to give al gore the same benefit of the doubt you like to give mark driscoll 😉

    I think sometimes profound change can be unseen and I believe that this event will lead to many meaningful acts of change that may not be immediately visible or tangible to the rest of the world. Do you believe that raising awareness doesn’t lead to tangible change? If you don’t believe this event has the potential to have this kind of effect, then I guess the burden of proof lies with you.

  3. no, i didn’t mean that no tangible actions will happen, i meant that past efforts were directly linked to tangible action (i.e. raising money for a cause, regardless of how effective the efforts were). this was not. that’s what i was getting at. am i saying that no good will come of this? no, not at all. but is this the best way to make change come about (because, come on, there’s no need to raise awareness, everyone knows about global warming, and if they disagree no amount of stastics and/or musicians playing will make them change their minds)? i really don’t think it is. there are better, more effective ways to do this.

    touché about the mark driscoll/al gore thing, though. but i’m not necessarily unwilling to give gore the benefit of the doubt. i have no doubt that gore’s intentions here are good and honest (even though i’m not so sure about driscoll’s intentions, and i think methodologically, driscoll does plenty bad and wrong). that’s not the issue. it’s more about the overall organizational structure of this event.

    to really affect change, and i think this is where jesus was coming from, you have to start on a grassroots level, kind of bottom-up movement. because change is about individual people and relationships. there are no individuals and relational dynamics involved when it’s coming from faceless corporations and demagogues. this is pretty much the exact opposite of what was happening, you know what i’m saying? that doesn’t mean it’s all horrible and wrong. but it does mean that there are better, more effective ways to help out with this cause.

  4. it’s sort of silly to sit on the sideline and cry out how terrible the event is. at the end of the day, events like Live Earth don’t hurt. to root against it is like rooting for someone to not recycle their coke cans. i can certainly understand that it’s not a perfect solution to the problem and I don’t think the organizers of this event are expecting it to have that result. it’s a piece of the puzzle in a sense. I’m sure there can be faults found with this event, but as Mayer pointed out, to sit back and highlight the flaws while not hoping this event has a positive impact might be a sign some soul-searching is in order.

    I also have to point out that the idea of this event started with two individuals who shared a relational dynamic and both cared about inspiring some sort of change…the two being Kevin Wall and Al Gore. i also doubt that all the venues filled with people all over the world were void of “relational dynamics”.

  5. i’m not saying that the entire event is devoid of relationships. i’m talking about the overall presentation and organization (a top-heavy kind of mushroom shape, so to speak) of the event. while listening to the radio yesterday (non-music related radio) i heard an unending amount of advertisements saying “(corporation name) doesn’t like global warming. that’s why (corporation name) is sponsoring live earth.” that’s the kind of stuff i’m talking about. it’s whack.

    once again, to say that NOTHING positive will come of this is stupid. that’s obvious. but i certainly don’t think it’s a piece of the puzzle. anything that says “reduce our carbon footprint” but contributes to a carbon footprint on a fairly large, though not gigantic, scale (just like what the arctic monkeys said about live earth) doesn’t seem like it can fit as a piece of the puzzle.

    and you’re right, sitting there on the sideline crying is silly. that’s why i’m not doing that. to say that i’m sitting on the sideline and crying about it isn’t very fair. as it happens, i’m out on a daily basis doing what i can to be a good steward of what god has given me in an ecological sense. and i’m also working/talking with others about these issues, and we are resolved to live out the kingdom in real, tangible ways that involve ecological responsibility.

    so to say that i’m sitting on the sideline crying, insinuating that i’m some whiny bitchy baby who isn’t out there doing stuff in the real world on an regular basis is pretty presumptuous. and to be quite honest, it kind of hurts. just because we disagree — and i think that live earth is an inefficient way to help matters — doesn’t mean that i’m doing nothing. i’m not upset with it because i think that being ecologically responsible isn’t a top priority (as i’ve stated). i’m upset with it because i don’t think it’s a very ecologically, and sociologically, responsible way to go about things.

    am i doing all i can, either? no, and that’s saddening. but i’m striving to improve and run the race that is ahead of me, not sitting on the sideline.

  6. is it presumptuous of me to presume that you don’t care much about the climate crisis when you are so passionately dissing an event that’s sole aim is to raise awareness to the problem? sorry if i misread you. no where in any of your comments before your last did you suggest that the issue was important to you.

    so to be clear, you care about being a good steward of creation, but you dislike events that help raise awareness in helping to encourage others to be good stewards. 10-4.

    p.s. the artic monkeys take is so lame i don’t even know where to start. here’s the quote for laughs and giggles:

    Drummer Matt Helders says, “It’s a bit patronising for us 21-year-olds to try to start to change the world, especially when we’re using enough power for 10 houses just for stage lighting. “It would be a bit hypocritical.” Bass player Nick O’Malley adds, “And we’re always jetting off on aeroplanes.”

    So by that logic, musicians can’t talk about the climate change issue at a concert? I guess it would have been better for all the bands who played to do all their own seperate shows that day, using that much more energy, while not saying anything about the issue…..and they could make their regular pay without that peskyness of playing for free to support an issue they care about……..brilliant.

  7. I think in a lot of ways, famous people are doing what they can “on a grassroots level”–organizing a concert is on their level. It’s using the resources and know-how they already have. They are encouraging us to use the knowledge we have…

  8. why would i waste time talking about how wrong live earth is and how there are better ways to change things if i didn’t care about it? if i didn’t care, then i would have just said, “live earth is dumb. global warming is dumb.”

    why would i say “there are better, more effective way to do this” when talking about being good stewards if i didn’t care? why would i spend an entire paragraph talking about better ways to affect change in this matter if i didn’t care at all about it?

    once again, just because we disagree about methodology doesn’t mean i’m riding an SUV around and throwing bottles on the street. it’s just like other times when you’ve assumed that since i have defended mark driscoll (and not defended his views, because i disagree with him almost always, but defended against the misrepresentation of his views) that i agree with him and disagree with you.

Comments are closed.