QueenZone discussion #1291377

What Are We made Of?......... Money! MERQRY wrote: [img=http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/411606/brian-liar.gif][/img]

rhyeking wrote: Wow. People take a single line out of context at face value because it reinforces their belief that Brian is only after their money. Golly gee, we all know the media can'tand won't manipulate quotes from famous people to paint a picture they want or to get a clever soundbite. You can't be that gullible, people, really. You don't know what question he was directly answering, what point he was trying to make about a specific topic asked by the interviewer and you haven't heard or read the entire transcript, but go ahead, jump to the worst possible opinion of the man. This is why I find entertainment "news" hardly worth acknowledging.

GratefulFan wrote: And lamer still.  I think you need some significantly higher standards in arguments.  Like they should make sense for example.  Media certainly can and does mislead, but how would that workin this case?  Brian was misquoted and actually does work on things for money and promotion?  The article links the statement specifically to the Jackson tracks, so maybe they twisted general words meant to apply to everything and made them seem to apply just to this work? Okay then, Mooghead would have a point if Brian actually meant to say he was never, ever motivated in any action by business interests ever under any circumstance.  Did it apply to something else entirely?  Who cares?  It is still an independent statement that applies to something.  Did they make it up completely?  Nice of them, given that it's quite flattering to Brian as published. If the point is about Mooghead taking a specific statement about Michael Jackson tracks and trying to falsify it by applying it to the general case, then make that point.  Spare us the "golly gee" lectures about 'gullibility' that has no relevance to this specific circumstance. As an aside, Roger is on video demonstrating some reluctance about talking specifics about the Michael Jackson tracks because "he doesn't want to be seen as cashing in", or something to that effect. So there is sensitivity about that aspect of things in the Queen camp on this project.   In that light, Brian's statement seems credible.

mooghead wrote:

GratefulFan wrote: And lamer still.  I think you need some significantly higher standards in arguments.  Like they should make sense for example.  Media certainly can and does mislead, but how would that workin this case?  Brian was misquoted and actually does work on things for money and promotion?  The article links the statement specifically to the Jackson tracks, so maybe they twisted general words meant to apply to everything and made them seem to apply just to this work? Okay then, Mooghead would have a point if Brian actually meant to say he was never, ever motivated in any action by business interests ever under any circumstance.  Did it apply to something else entirely?  Who cares?  It is still an independent statement that applies to something.  Did they make it up completely?  Nice of them, given that it's quite flattering to Brian as published. If the point is about Mooghead taking a specific statement about Michael Jackson tracks and trying to falsify it by applying it to the general case, then make that point.  Spare us the "golly gee" lectures about 'gullibility' that has no relevance to this specific circumstance. As an aside, Roger is on video demonstrating some reluctance about talking specifics about the Michael Jackson tracks because "he doesn't want to be seen as cashing in", or something to that effect. So there is sensitivity about that aspect of things in the Queen camp on this project.   In that light, Brian's statement seems credible.

What I said has nothing to do with the Michael Jackson tracks. I'm just astounded that those words were ever said by Brian May in any context ever.