Now about this current trial, I don't believe Morrissey is a racist though he has said some offensive and stupid things over the years. But in this case, it does seem NME really stitched him up just for controversy / sales / a good story. That editor
Conor McNicholas is a total fool and I hope he and NME get what's coming to them.
Yep this is pretty much how I saw it.*
Throughout the court case both Morrissey and Marr's lawyers (what was weird was they clearly weren't working in tandem and this obviously hurt them big time) went to great pains to clarify that throughout the life of the band the only contractual signatures ever required were Morrissey's and Marr's.
Now I'm sorry but if you are in a business (which The Smiths also were) and you believe you are entitled to/receiving 25% of an arm of that business don't you DEMAND to see some paperwork? Don't you threaten to walk if this doesn't get sorted out?
The sense I got was that Mike and Andy hoped that The Smiths would become big enough that their 10% would mean something. And let's face it, bar the break-up it would've probably happened. With the backing of a major label all Marr and Morrissey had to do was write another 'How Soon is Now' or their own 'Losing my Religion' and they would've been over the top. I'd say the chances of that were pretty high.*
Look I'm not one of these Mike and Andy haters, business obviously wasn't one of their strengths and they clearly loved being part of the band. But at the same time you have to either draw a line in the sand (which they didn't) or live with the consequences. The fact they didn't draw that line is because they knew they would be replaced and Morrissey and Johnny swiftly move on. Harsh but true.
This court case to me seemed like having 2 bites of the cherry.
As for the NME case, I think it would be most fitting if after all the years they have hunted him, Morrissey has the honour of putting them into the ground. **
Is that lying? I suppose so, but-- and I hate to sound like a member of George W. Bush's legal team here, trying to chop up an argument too finely-- I think the "deception", such as it was, always had the nature of putting off an inevitable conflict about money rather than malicious intent. I'm sure, to that end, Johnny deliberately weaseled out of several uncomfortable conversations between '83 and '87. But so did Morrissey, and my point is really that both were deceitful. I don't believe either Morrissey or Marr should be singled out as a lying bastard. They were both guilty of fudging the books as long as they could to preserve the band, and for their part Rourke and Joyce were guilty of not being smart enough to demand a proper contract.
My feeling is that the business side of The Smiths was an unholy catastrophe caused by a lack of management, one which involved some stupidity, some spinelessness, and some mendacity. Nobody was untainted, nobody was unscathed. To me it's almost like each of the four members was innocent and also somewhat responsible in different ways. There's no one "bad guy" on that side of things. The real roots of the problem were The Smiths' lack of proper management, and it's in that part of the story where you find some...interesting behavior.
Last edited by Worm; May 30, 2012 at 01:19 PM.
There's some evidence to suggest lying and deception. But there's compelling evidence to suggest something else at work, something that didn't show up in transcripts and statements: conversations the four guys didn't have, agreements that were avoided, important matters pushed aside for another day, and so on. The communication between them was crappy at best. It's like a marriage when both parties don't speak about anything truly important for years and years and years. Heads are planted in the sand. Problems are allowed to fester. It happens all the time. There's a lack of truth and honesty, but it's not really a case of deliberate lying, if you see the distinction. In these kinds of situations, there can be dishonesty without malicious, deliberate liars. I think Marr paid up and remained friends with Andy precisely for this reason. He probably saw himself as both innocent of fraud and yet, at the same time, partly responsible for the dishonesty prevalent in the group's affairs. It seems like that might have been the more mature reaction.
Last edited by Worm; May 30, 2012 at 03:16 PM.
Seems he got an apology online and in the magazine - good on him
The apology was a bit weak but its all over the media and is being presented as a clear victory for Morrissey.
Am glad it behind him - only good things are just around the corner now
- Why has this thread been moved/merged? This thread is about a link to an article on TTY which invited fans to attend the Court Case (which has been removed a long time ago.)
The story has moved on alot now. NME have aplogised and the case has been dropped don't you think that deserves its own thread????
Last edited by smiler; June 12, 2012 at 05:40 PM.
Turns out, after all his bluster, he capitulated. Beautiful."...the settlement did not involve payment of any damages or legal costs..."
The NME haven't conceded that the article either portrayed him as a racist, or misrepresented him in any other way and yet Steven has just rolled over and accepted it. So much for wanting to have his day in court to clear his name. "If a fight broke out here, tonight..." etc.
To add insult to injury, he'll have to pay out a shitload of cash to lawyers. This has made my day.
Most people know you ask for more than you desire in these situations and you negotiate down. Moz gets his name cleared, some additional pub in the press making the NME looks like the saddos they are and pisses in the Cheerios of all of his detractors... again. LOL!