Do benefit concerts really make a difference?

Question

(No religious content here, but R&S always has interesting opinions)

In 1985, Bob Geldof spearheaded the largest benefit concert the world had ever seen -- Live Aid. It's role was to raise awareness of and relieve famine in Ethiopia. More than two decades later, some would argue that famine is worse now than it was then.

Two years ago, Live 8 was organized to bring awareness to the poverty issue that faces many countries. In retrospect, it seems little more than a cause du jour, and a good excuse to get Pink Floyd to reunite.

This past weekend, Live Earth was held at venues worldwide in order to bring awareness to the environment. It wasn't even covered by MTV (at least not in the States), and was covered by Bravo, a network many would not associate with music nor social and/or political causes.

In 20 years, will people realize that Live Earth made a difference, or that it was just a pretty good concert? What about Live Earth's predecessor benefit concerts?

Answer 1

No.

Answer 2

Well, a concert just makes the act of dropping money in the collection plate or the act of stopping to read the tracts on the bulletin board a little more enjoyable. Nobody can actually control what Ethiopians do after they get that one or two free meals.

Answer 3

Honestly, I think the Live Earth concert will be remembered as a hypocritical, staged vehicle of shameless self-promotion: for Al Gore and the "stars" who performed. For all their hype, the Live Earth concert actually NEGATIVELY impacted the environment:

1) The 150 "stars" performing at the concert used private jets to fly a total of 222,623.63 miles to the various concert sites. This resulted in the release of 31,500 tons of carbon emissions into the air.

2) If you add the carbon emissions of the viewers who drove to these events, a total of 74,500 tons were released into the air.

3) 1,025 tons of waste were generated by the various concert sites. At the NY site, unions prevented the possibility of recycling ANY of the waste at all.

So how on earth could these concerts have been "carbon neutral" as Al Gore repeatedly claimed? And isn't it interesting that truly dedicated, eco-friendly bands like Radiohead REFUSED to perform?

Things that make you go "hmmmmmm ....."

EDIT: The person who gave my answer a "thumbs down" either dislikes Arsenio Hall or the truth.

Answer 4

I think it's a reason for people to feel good about themselves, to feel like they're making a change in the world, but in actuality they're just listening to some guy promote a cause and then never act on it, and listen to some tunes as well

I've actually wondered, if we gave 500 million dollars to a few people who do budget work for a major US city, and told them to make a budget for a city in Ethiopia with that 500 million dollars, then put in a city council to help decide what needs to be done (building hospitals, hiring engineers to build, etc) if it would become prosperous in the span of 20 years. Probably wouldn't but it'd still be a better way than just holding a concert.

Answer 5

NO.

Look at all of the performers.

LIBERAL

At a concert about Global Warming, why wear a T-shirt that says "More Trees, Less Bush"

They don't really care, all just a publicity stunt.

How much energy did it take to power the Live Earth concerts?

Answer 6

They do help a little. They educate people. They get people involved. It might not stop the whole issue, but it's baby steps, it's enlightening people, and it's helping a little bit. That's better than nothing, right? If we can divert people from the huge important issue of things like Paris Hilton and make them aware that there are other, perhaps more important issues to think about, then all is good...

Answer 7

I'm always awed by these huge benefit concerts. In my mind, celebrities can skip the concerts and give a $mil each to the cause. Instead, they want to show off their talents and take our money at the same time. I don't watch this mess, because it makes no sense.

Answer 8

Live Earth was RIDICULOUS. Concerts at all seven continents, including Antarctica? Each band/performer probably took his or her own private jet to the concerts, too. I don't even want to think about the pollution. So much for saving the earth.

In the end, benefit concerts only serve to throw money at the problem.

Answer 9

Only to those that perform at them. It gives them face time to an audience that may not have heard of them, or to reunite for a wad of cash. Otherwise, they are a waste of effort. None have ever made a difference.

Answer 10

People go to those things for the music and to meet chicks. Anyone who is really interested in "the cause" already knows about it.

Answer 11

Yes, and no. Concert itself doesn't make lot of difference. But after Mettalica's concert to help Africans. Seven governments donated 50 trillion dollars. That will save lot of lives. If there is lot of benifet concerts I belive it can make little impact at a time until a world is a better place.

~James