Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

MySpace Organizes Sudan Fundraiser 164

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the court-of-public-opinion dept.
tanman writes to tell us CNN is reporting that MySpace is sponsoring a series of 20 concerts as an effort to raise awareness about the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan. From the article: "The concerts will take place October 21. Artists include TV on the Radio in Philadelphia, Alice in Chains in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Ziggy Marley in Medford, Oregon, Citizen Cope in Seattle, Gov't Mule in Spokane, Washington, and Insane Clown Posse in St. Petersburg, Florida."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MySpace Organizes Sudan Fundraiser

Comments Filter:
  • I only hope (Score:4, Funny)

    by holdenholden (961300) on Monday October 09, 2006 @11:31PM (#16373955)
    I only hope that the concerts will not be broadcast from the profiles of 400 million users simultaneously.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by bblboy54 (926265)
      Damnit! We better break out the lottery balls and round up the horses.... If nothing else clogs the tubes, that will!
  • Fox? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by eurleif (613257) on Monday October 09, 2006 @11:37PM (#16373983)
    Couldn't Fox (MySpace's owner) raise a lot more awareness with their news network than they could with concerts?
    • by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot.kadinNO@SPAMxoxy.net> on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:16AM (#16374203) Homepage Journal
      Sure, but that assumes that the point is to actually do something in Sudan, and not improve the tarnished image of the online service that they forked out a bunch of dough for, and are currently burdened with. It's a little bit of a Hail Mary, but hey, when you've got a web site that most people only know of because they've seen it on the news in the same sentence with "pedophile," you can't really go wrong.

      Why would News Corp give a damn about people in Sudan? Here's a hint: they don't.

      The only reason they're raising money for people in Sudan is that it's the least-offensive cause some focus group could come up with. Right now, MySpace needs the most heart-warming, family-friendly but not totally-unhip image resuscitation that money can buy.
      • by Turn-X Alphonse (789240) on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:29AM (#16374265) Journal
        In the news in the UK (not all owned by the same guy who owns Fox and The sun) Youtube and Myspace is the new poster child of the internet. Very rarely does a day go by when youtube is not mentioned on something or Myspace is mentioned. It's even got to the point where live quiz shows have hosts giving out their Myspace URLs and giving away free gifts to random people on them.

        While in the US it's "kekeke pedos" here in the UK it has a positive image and is doing "good things"
        • Makes perfect sense. (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot.kadinNO@SPAMxoxy.net> on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:46AM (#16374359) Homepage Journal
          While in the US it's "kekeke pedos" here in the UK it has a positive image and is doing "good things"

          Explaining why this "fund raiser" is being conducted almost exclusively in the U.S. (It would be exclusive, except for a show in Toronto.)

          From TFA:
          The concerts will take place October 21. Artists include TV on the Radio in Philadelphia, Alice in Chains in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Ziggy Marley in Medford, Oregon, Citizen Cope in Seattle, Gov't Mule in Spokane, Washington, and Insane Clown Posse in St. Petersburg, Florida.

          Other concerts will take place in Sacramento, San Diego and San Francisco, California; Melbourne, Florida; Atlanta; Louisville, Kentucky; St. Paul, Minnesota; Reno, Nevada; Baltimore; Asheville, North Carolina; Charleston, South Carolina; Milwaukee; and Washington, D.C.

          A Canadian show will take place in Toronto.
        • by joe 155 (937621)
          ah, you've fallen into the old trap - pretty much all that comes out about mySpace is from Rupert. None of his papers are allowed to report the bad news about them, like "child sexually molested by old person after using MySpace"... He owns so many of the newspapers that it can be hard to keep track, but they have pretty much been ordered to keep pushing it as often as possible, I think it's been in the times about 40 times in the last 6 months...

          Still, the Telegraph is spending huge amounts of money o
          • I haven't fallen for the trap. I don't watch news on anything but the BBC late at night and I don't read the news papers. So all in all I don't think I have :)

            But yes I know what you're saying. It's one big circle jerk with 1 man at the helm.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by sumdumass (711423)
        While most of what you speek is probably true, the Fox news channels have been talking about the sudan problems, releif efferts, and possible military actions for a while now. It gets mixed in with all the other problems in that continental area over the last 30 or so years.

        The problems seem to be with releif organizations wanting the UN to actualy do something about it. This conflicts with the UN's current agenda of "bitch about yet another US led war" or "something the US has done to destroy the world" or
        • by killjoe (766577)
          Why would the UN do anything? They could not stop the US from invading iraq. They could not stop israel from setting lebanon back fifty years and displacing a million people.

          Didn't the president say he was going to free the people of the world from tyranical leaders and deliver democracy to the world?

          Maybe the rest of the world is just waiting for bush to follow through on his word. Why bother doing something when bush promised to do it. He promised in front of the entire world and he is a man of god. He wo
    • Look, corporations *never* operate benevolently. Those that do go out of business pretty quickly. They are always out to make a profit.

      This fundraiser is not about being nice. It's a deal that they're making with you: They'll do this fundraiser to raise money for a good cause. They're doing it for publicity. You may or may not bite and send some money to Sudan. Who cares?!?!

      It's all about profits, and that's not a bad thing - the profit motive is what creates incentive for XYZ corporation to pay attention t
  • ICP (Score:2, Funny)

    by tyleroar (614054)
    All the ICP fans I know are huge fans care very deeply about humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan. (Oh shit, is that funny because ICP fans don't care about that, or because there are no ICP fans?)
    • Insane Clown Posse is also one of the reasons why nobody takes the Internet Cache Protocol seriously. I used to have "Experience working with ICP" on my resume but I have switched to a more conservative "Experience implementing ICP (RFC2186)".
  • 1994 called (Score:5, Funny)

    by BeeBeard (999187) on Monday October 09, 2006 @11:48PM (#16374049)
    It wants its music back. But keep that Insane Clown Posse CD. 1994 said you could just keep that.
    • by Savatte (111615)
      Forget about Sudan, I feel bad for Florida. This is a disaster from which they may never be able to recover.
  • Great. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AndyAndyAndyAndy (967043) <`afacini' `at' `gmail.com'> on Monday October 09, 2006 @11:52PM (#16374071)
    So now I can hear from every teenager out there about how important things are in Sudan. And how much it means to them personally. "Hey, put this in your profile if you care about the Sudan cause! But don't forget to comment up. Because it means so much to me." Puke.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rm999 (775449)
      Yeah, I really hate it when kids care about world matters and politics.

      I bet you you'd be just as dissapointed if those same teens didn't care at all.
      • Not really, no. The problem is none of them actually care / know what the fuck they are talking about. The vast majority know what they are told from outlets exactly like myspace and from others. Point is, kids "care" so much as they look a bit more interesting to their peers. There are very few who are actually concerned and involved with these issues.

        Don't get me wrong, it'd be great if these kids were engaged and involved. It's just not happening.
        • by rm999 (775449)
          Your basic argument is that kids think acting like they are involved in world politics is "cool." Err... no. I was a child just a few years ago, and I recall nothing of the sort. The people who cared about politics did so because it was in their personalities. Just because they are young and often misguided in how to go about it (holding parties instead of listening to NPR) does not mean they are not trying.

          I used to agree with what you are saying regarding Tibet, but I actually found that kids under 21 kne
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Look at how many people care about what is happening in Palestine? There are marches and protests all around the world, with TONS of coverage. Now compare the plight of the average Palestinian versus the average Sudanese refugee at the hands of the janjaweed militias. Palestinians are effectively living like kings in comparison, Darfur has 100x as many dead from killings in the past year as in the past 50 years in Palestine, over 10x as many refugees pushed out of Sudan compared to Palestine. Sudanese p
      • Now compare the plight of the average Palestinian versus the average Sudanese refugee at the hands of the janjaweed militias.

        The BIG difference is that in Sudan, our own countries aren't on the "bad guys" side. That's why many of us a livid about the Palestine issue. See the cluster bombs that depopulated the south of Lebanon? The ones which were mostly dropped the day before the ceasefire in a callous "hurry while we still can" way? The ones where over 30% now lie unexploded and are killing/maiming toda

        • The BIG difference is that in Sudan, our own countries aren't on the "bad guys" side.

          Wait, so the "good guys" side in the Palestine conflict is the one setting off bombs in shopping malls and buses in Israel, right? Gimme a break. This one's a little tough to turn into a black-n-white kind of issue.

          • Wait, so the "good guys" side in the Palestine conflict is the one setting off bombs in shopping malls and buses in Israel, right?

            What you need to ask yourself is this: why is killing someone using a 22 million dollar GPS guilded missle any different that using 22 dollar IED strapped to someone chest? I really want to understand your rationale here. You mention people setting off one bomb in Israel, meanwhile they are dropping thousands of mines over CIVILIAN areas in Lebanon, depopulating the area which

            • What you need to ask yourself is this: why is killing someone using a 22 million dollar GPS guilded missle any different that using 22 dollar IED strapped to someone chest? I really want to understand your rationale here.

              I didn't. I said the Palestinians weren't "good guys," and that the situation over there doesn't have a protagonist. I never said the Israelis were saints. That said, if I were to rank things, I'd say that targeting military installations is lower on the asshole list than targeting civi

  • by Baloo Ursidae (29355) <dead@address.com> on Monday October 09, 2006 @11:57PM (#16374097) Journal
    ...MySpace did a series of benefit concerts for children lured by sexual predators over the Internet, given that they seem to facilitate it more than anyone these days?
  • Marketing (Score:4, Informative)

    by elucido (870205) on Monday October 09, 2006 @11:57PM (#16374099)
    How much money will actually make it to the Sudan?

    I don't see how having a concert or two is in any way related to solving real world problems. What? You going to party your way to a better environment?

    This is a perfect way to sell tickets and raise profits. It will be like Live8.
    • Not that it really matters... Any aid that gets to Sudan will probably end up being hijacked by African warlords anyway.
      • by elucido (870205)
        Exactly, you cannot give aid to governments, you can only give to individuals, and you have to be precise about it. You give to individuals who want to start businesses.
    • by roseblood (631824)
      They aren't working to get money to Sudan. They are working to "raise awareness about the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan."

      So it goes like this:

      1) Get a cause
      2) get a band
      3) sell tickets to band
      4) get some thing to the venue to "raise awareness about the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan." [think posters, a few hippies manning an info booth, the band making a brief comment about "the humanitarian relief efforts in Sudan."]
      5) ???
      6) profit (if the band can fill the venue with paying customers)
    • by SQFreak (844876)
      It's a publicity stunt, of course, for MySpace and News Corp. The difference between this and Live 8 is that the locations they scheduled (with the exception of Philadelphia and Seattle) are pretty small and the bands aren't that popular. Not as popular as the Live 8 bands, anyway. The point is, it's pointless, yet I still want to know why they picked the cities they did (partially because I'm from one of the smaller ones).
  • Doesn't Matter (Score:2, Insightful)

    by PWill (1006147)
    MySpace still sucks. This is just like the crap that WalMart and the tobacco do. They do a few nice things, and then publicize the hell out of them, to make them look better. I bet they spend more money publicizing the event than they actually donate...
    • by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot.kadinNO@SPAMxoxy.net> on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:33AM (#16374299) Homepage Journal
      Well yeah -- I mean, if they really wanted to send money to Sudan, you'd think that one of the brain surgeons there at News Corp would realize that it's a little ridiculous for a giant multinational corporation with $25 billion in revenue to sponsor a fucking fund raiser, in order to get regular folks to send in a couple of bucks here and there, as if they were the Pigs Knuckle, Arkansas Rotary Club ... if the goal of the whole process was "let's send money to Sudan," Rupert Murdoch could probably just cut a check out of his petty cash fund and be done with it.

      As they are not doing that and are conducting a fund raiser, however ironic, I think it's safe to assume that the ultimate goal of the process is not, in fact, sending money to Sudan.

      As to what the real motive might be, I'll leave that up to you to consider.
    • by RexRhino (769423)
      They do it as a token effort to make people like you happy. Of course those companies could care less about doing charity. They are companies, and they basicly are a social tool used to provide products and services in exchange for money, in order to make a profit. That is the function they serve in society. There are also charities, and they are social tools used to provide aid or further some humanitarian goal in a non-profit manner.

      Some people, of course, think that because charities are a good thing (ch
  • Oh great in addition to being malnourished most underaged kids in Sudan will now have to live with the fact that they're going to be in the radar of Myspace predators now
  • I think Insane Clown Posse, juggalo bitches.
  • by Tablizer (95088)
    I already gave all my money to some e-mail dude in Africa who promised to pay me back once I filled out some paper-work for him. He never did.
  • by marko123 (131635) on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:25AM (#16374237) Homepage
    I used to think Darfur was just a fairy tale
    Until that genocide until that first smile
    But if I had to do it all again I wouldn't change a thing
    Cause this war is everlasting

    Sudanly "gangaweed" has new meaning to me
    There's beauty up above and things we never take notice of
    You wake up Sudanly you're in poverty

    Girl you're everthing a man could rape and more
    One thousand words are not enough to say what I feel inside
    Holding dismembered hands as we walk along the shore
    Never felt like this before now you're dying in Darfur

    Each day I pray this love affair would last forever
    There's beauty up above and things you never take notice of
    You wake and Sudanly you're at war
  • Although I think that the organizers are attempting to hitch a ride on a hot-topic issue that celebrities are rallying around, I still believe that it's a good cause and deserves our attention. It's such a shame that organizations like the UN seem unable/unwilling to address these types of problems globally, I'm starting to wonder whether or not the UN still has a place on issues like this. It seems that US billionaires are doing more good in Africa than entire countries, and even small companies are tryin
    • by chill (34294)
      No, every little bit doesn't help for Sudan. Food and relief supplies get to the people who need it only when the Sudanese gov't wants it to. That is to say, almost never. Please explain to me why this deserves our attention. No, I will not accept "so someone will DO something" as an answer.

      Do WHAT?

      In Sudan it is the government inflicting this genocide on its own people. They are not interested in stopping.

      The genocide in the Sudan will stop only with one of three possible outcomes:

      1. The Sudanese gov'
    • by packeteer (566398)
      Are you really saying that we should get behind Myspace' fundraising becuase the UN wont provide aid to Sudan? Where is the closest place for me to puke. This is exactly what they are trying to convince you to feel and its silly to go along with it.
  • by JoeLinux (20366) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {xunileoj}> on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:31AM (#16374279) Homepage
    I too, concur that this is a tragedy of epic proportions, but, I think, is being ignored by both sides of the aisle for political reasons.

    The Right, unfortunately, knows that our military cannot support serious actions to halt the genocide that is happening. As typically strong supporters of our military, they don't want to see the military face losses on top of what they are incurring in Iraq. Such an act could quickly become a political lightening rod.

    In order for the Left to support such an action, they would have to support invading a sovereign nation whose official ties to terrorism are only hints and whispers, and without official UN approval, which is exactly their protest against the Iraq Invasion. Even with knowledge that the Iraqi government was killing their own citizens, The Left opposed invasion. To suddenly support a Darfur excursion would end up making them look like extreme hypocrites.

    Also, the lesson we learned from Vietnam is that in order to win the war, we would have to wage war on the "tail" side of the agressors, drawing their front-line troops away to defend their home turf. That turns in a CQB (Close-Quarter Battle), which inflicts heavy losses on an invading force. Or we carpet bomb the mostly muslim north, allowing for the (pardon me for saying this) anti-US Muslim propaganda machine to run at full tilt again.

    Remember, these conquering forces have many 10-year-old boys with AK-47s. All you have to do is take away the gun, and suddenly, "THE UNITED STATES MILITARY IS KILLING MUSLIM CHILDREN" shows up on CNN.

    Then there will be protests at a University, but that's ok.

    If I might suggest a situation for history to repeat itself, I propose Kent State.

    I support evacuation. The issue I see is that any provisions sent to the region would just as likely end up feeding conquering Janjaweed forces as hungry Christians.

    After evacuation, our forces could carpet bomb at will, knowing that any movement in the area was hostile invaders.

    In my opinion, the Sudanese Government is attempting genocide. The ironic part is that it is mostly African (Read: Black) population that is bearing the brunt of this, and the Arab population is causing it. I think this is a problem of politically correct crisis. You can't support one side without appearing biased against the other. No politician will touch it, so no action will happen.

    Which is truly unfortunate.

    Of course, there is a solution [youtube.com] to all of this, and I think it should be widely deployed after evacuation:

    But, I wonder how the people who were opposed to the Iraqi Invasion are going to react. Are they going to admit that invading Iraq for the reasons stated were acceptable after all, or simply wait for the UN to draft up a strongly worded letter to the Sudanese government?

    Joe
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      >...admit that invading Iraq for the reasons stated were acceptable after all,

      Humanitarian assistance was not one of the reasons stated. Nor was Saddam's ghastly human rights record a reason for the invasion: he was just as bad back at the time of the handshake [gwu.edu].

      >Then there will be protests at a University, but that's ok.

      >If I might suggest a situation for history to repeat itself, I propose Kent State.

      The people who moderated this up may be unfamiliar with the event he is proposing to repeat. In 19
    • by RexRhino (769423)
      You are thinking too much about the Left, and the Right, and forgetting about other points of view.

      Like what about the people who couldn't really care one way or another about Iraqi attrocities, or Sudanese genocide? People who feel the U.S. military should stay out of all conflicts that are not a direct response to an attack or stopping an eminent attack on the United States?

      Many of the people opposed to the invasion of Iraq, are just as opposed to doing anything in Sudan. Not everyone opposed to the Iraq
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Stalyn (662)
      First off it should be noted that the majority of victims in Darfur are Muslim and this is a case of Arab vs. African violence.

      The US doesn't want to send troops because their soldiers would just end up becoming the targets. So instead of pacifying the situation it would only become worse (see Somalia 1993). The UN had promised 20,000 troops in the area but Sudan openly objected and declared that such a force would be seen as invaders. The UN then backed down with the hope the AU would increase its forces a
    • Great post, but you forgot one critical thing that guarantees no one will stick their necks out for those being slaughtered:

      They don't matter.

      It's harsh, but true. What is going on is a strictly local affair in a place with few if any Europeans, no significant resources that the world still needs, and is too poor to fund terrorist misadventures outside their own border.

      No one has any material interest in seeing this stopped. It's morally questionable to put the sons and daughters of any nation on the line t
    • by packeteer (566398)
      The Right, unfortunately, knows that our military cannot support serious actions to halt the genocide that is happening. As typically strong supporters of our military, they don't want to see the military face losses on top of what they are incurring in Iraq. Such an act could quickly become a political lightening rod.

      In order for the Left to support such an action, they would have to support invading a sovereign nation whose official ties to terrorism are only hints and whispers, and without official UN ap
      • by packeteer (566398)
        The Original poster's home URL leads to a list of files which include an image of a dead student at Kent State and the text "pwn3d". How does this guy get modded +5?
    • It' rather telling that you find --> this [pacificnet.net] <-- funny.

      You seem so eager to kill people. Are you certain there is not something terribly wrong with you?

  • We can do better (Score:3, Insightful)

    by delirium of disorder (701392) on Tuesday October 10, 2006 @12:31AM (#16374281) Homepage Journal
    Want to listen to better music and still help the people of Sudan? Check out the Genocide in Sudan compilation [barnesandnoble.com]. All proceeds go to UNICEF and The UN Refugee Agency. Or you could donate directly to UNICEF [unicef.org], the UN Refugee Agency [unhcr.org], or the UN world food programme [wfp.org]
  • by Anonymous Coward
    That is, if it were the Christians killing the Muslims in Sudan, there would be no such fundraiser. Shame.
    • by RexRhino (769423)
      Actually, yes... It was Christians (or at least former-Communists who were traditionally Christian) killing Muslims in the former Yugoslavia (at least that was what the propoganda said), and there were similiar fundraisers.

      So quite clearly the fundraiser for Christians killing Muslims came first.
    • ... in Bosnia, not only did they get nice little fundraisers, they got a US-lead military campaign. Which was about the only effective part of the operation (and I'm being generous calling it effective), since the UN, as per usual, let the genocide continue in the supposedly safe areas right under their nose. Now the area is mostly lawless, overseen by a toothless UN agency whose only mandate is protecting their mandate, and has a growing Islamic terrorist problem.

      All in all, a pretty successful internati
  • Until the bastards in Khartoum are ousted from power.
  • "Is the Sudan a two-door or four-door, and does it have a dock for my iPod?"
  • I misread that as "MySpace Organizes Sudden Fundraiser", and was expecting to read that MySpace is in financial troubles and needed to raise some money fast.

  • But WTF good will 'raising awareness of the humanitarian crisis in Sudan' do for ANYONE?

    What, someone's going to feel all guilty and donate another $5 in aid that can be sent to Sudan for the gov't to either take for the military or give to the janjaweed?

    All the compassion in the world doesn't help for crap unless someone is willing to man up and kill bad guys. And frankly, if you have to kill *lots* of bad guys (because, say, previous generations/governments couldn't or wouldn't come to grips with the pr

The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.

Working...