Juliane Liebert (Der Spiegel interviewer): "The recording [of the interview] is available"

A

Anonymous

Guest
People care about his music and legacy. But there has come a point for many where they can no longer stand by all of this.

But are they really "standing by all of this" by continuing to be a fan of his music? Can you not be a fan of an artist's work even if you disagree with something they said? Supporting Morrissey, as an artist, after he has said this, is very different from somehow supporting or defending sexual harassment (even if that's what you feel HE did). I think that's the problem here: people rightly oppose sexual harassment and they're conflating what someone may have SAID in an ill-considered way ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT with SEXUAL HARASSMENT ITSELF. Those are different things and are not morally equivalent at all. Continuing to be a fan of Morrissey right now is very different from continuing to be a fan of Spacey. Basically, I don't think that I have to choose between supporting Morrissey as an artist and opposing sexual harassment/violence; the former does not mean I am condoning, ignoring, supporting, enabling, etc., the latter, and it's sloppy and simplistic to talk as if it does.
 

No1uno

Member of the Month™
Subscriber
To the blind defenders - Think about this one for a second. Considering all of the bat shit crazy comments Morrissey has thrown out (particularly over the last decade where his relevance has declined) do you honestly believe he is not capable of saying these things?

I think he is capable.

I think BMG first thing said, drop your website, its shit. It has weird ass mentally unstable statements and links (monarchy conspiracy videos so forth). BMG knows, we all know, nobody buys crazy. He had solid promotion, he legitimately worked to get his art out there playing tv shows only to preform in front of the hosts which looks plainly uncomfortable (disregarding the cardigan). He was working to sell.

These interview actions do not extend the reach of his art.

I would like DavidT to request, for journalistic purposes, and post this audio interview. It is what this site is here for. I think it should be on here, so we can hear if it actually came from his mouth.
 

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
Morrissey is the one who supplies the clickbait quite willingly. The situation is exactly as you describe. They want to sell advertising and make a buck. He provides the quotes to get his name out there.

Even Uncle Skinny will someday have to see that it is not about selling records or making money. Those goals make way too much sense. Everyone does that. His goal is to cause outrage and be a hated figure by all but the Mozbots.

.


nope, sorry, it's the decision of the medias to present the information how they want and how they want is want benefits them the most. It doesn't matter what the artist says, the media or specific media or person will or may twist what an artist says or does to fit their agenda, even changing the questions with slight editing in order to shape the answers how they see fit. Did M say a mouthful? yes he did, that's IF he said it.







Hi DavidK :love:

.
 
Last edited:

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
I think he is capable.

I think BMG first thing said, drop your website, its shit. It has weird ass mentally unstable statements and links (monarchy conspiracy videos so forth). BMG knows, we all know, nobody buys crazy. He had solid promotion, he legitimately worked to get his art out there playing tv shows only to preform in front of the hosts which looks plainly uncomfortable (disregarding the cardigan). He was working to sell.

These interview actions do not extend the reach of his art.

I would like DavidT to request, for journalistic purposes, and post this audio interview. It is what this site is here for. I think it should be on here, so we can hear if it actually came from his mouth.

'to request, for journalistic purposes, and post this audio interview.'

Would be interesting. Though, it doesn't matter, if we don't know the exact wording of the questions asked him. And the interviewer admitted to editing the questions. Which is really too bad.



Hi DavidK :love:
 
Last edited:
M

Musician

Guest
.


nope, sorry, it's the decision of the medias to present the information how they want and how they want is want benefits them the most. It doesn't matter what the artist says, the media or specific media or person will or may twist what an artist says or does to fit their agenda, even changing the questions with slight editing in order to shape the answers how they see fit. Did M say a mouthful? yes he did, that's IF he said it.








.
The McCartney video doesn't apply to this situation. He did not backtrack saying he did not say those things.
 

Cornflakes

"A bit iffy" ★★☆☆☆ - AV Club
'to request, for journalistic purposes, and post this audio interview.'

Would be interesting. Though, it doesn't matter, if we don't know the exact wording of the questions asked him. And the interviewer admitted to editing the questions. Which is really too bad.

I don't see what difference editing the questions makes, given what the answers were. Unless she said "Call Berlin the capital of rape or I will shoot you in the head."
 

Vegan

Well-Known Member
I dunno. I think he gave a churlish, petulant answer in that interview and it's boomeranged on him. He didn't choose his word carefully enough. I think it's fairly obvious he was TRYING to say "yes the allegations are horrible" but we must ALSO scrutinize the accusations less anyone be automatically declared guilty. If Moz was saying the dozens upon dozens of accusations against Swinestein are all unreliable he would be dumber than the current (illegitimate) POTUS
 

countthree

Well-Known Member
Show us the recording!! YouTube is free and records can be uploaded in a couple of minutes.

If she was questioned, she should have made the records public inmediatly. She has nothing to lose, hasn't she?

Why the mistery?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
'to request, for journalistic purposes, and post this audio interview.'

Would be interesting. Though, it doesn't matter, if we don't know the exact wording of the questions asked him. And the interviewer admitted to editing the questions. Which is really too bad.

NO, editing doesn't usually matter when referring to content. It happens in pretty much every single journalistic interview for print. I just recently did an interview with a professional musician, and the interview consisted of about 10 questions. The audio from that interview ended up being 30 minutes long, and the complete transcription of the interview had to be cut, in order to meet the word limit. Nothing should get compromised or twisted when you edit things down for time/space but usually kit has to be done (Usually it's the less interesting/irrelevant bits). Any ethical journalist will not alter or change an interviewees words, and if one does the threat of a lawsuit is all too common and real these days, so you just don't. Obviously that is one of the reason interviews are recorded as well, besides the writer being able to transcribe for print.
 

Morrissey-so-old.com

If your reading this your an idiot.
Morrissey said those things and you know what he’s not sorry for it and that’s his f***ing problem, the way he has remorse for animals he should have them for human beings as well. The thing he can do as a man is apologize to people and his fans and say he was misquoted or what he was trying to say came out the wrong way but typical asshole offers no apology, for his f*** ups and just passes the blame along.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The article from Der Spiegel online can't not be read in full, as you have to pay. The international version in English it doesn't contain a translation of the article. If feeling bad about Morrissey's comments and they have a recorded version, why not to release it here through a link? Editing usually makes things get a different meaning. If it was so long, rather than cutting sentences or words here and there, wouldn't have been easier to stick to the time for the interview and so publish it as it was?



Apologies if someone has already posted this.



Related item:
 

Ugly Devil

Well-Known Member
I hope they release the audio with a morrissey instrumental of Sorrow will come in the end part...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
.


nope, sorry, it's the decision of the medias to present the information how they want and how they want is want benefits them the most. It doesn't matter what the artist says, the media or specific media or person will or may twist what an artist says or does to fit their agenda, even changing the questions with slight editing in order to shape the answers how they see fit. Did M say a mouthful? yes he did, that's IF he said it.








.
Your enlargened font and continual ball-washing, media-shaming and denial of simple truths - despite readily available facts - basically sum you up. Constant spin, at the unrequeates behest of your sub-par hero!!!

You’re the Trump of the Morrissey world.

Wear that badge proudly son! As long as you’re not procreating, it’s good for a laugh.
 

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
I don't see what difference editing the questions makes, given what the answers were. Unless she said "Call Berlin the capital of rape or I will shoot you in the head."

maybe she did. We'll never know now.



Hi DavidK :love:
 
Last edited:

Ketamine Sun

<><><><><><><><><><>
The McCartney video doesn't apply to this situation. He did not backtrack saying he did not say those things.

no he said that the media need to take some responsibility in what they print.





hi DavidK :love:
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
Show us the recording!! YouTube is free and records can be uploaded in a couple of minutes.

If she was questioned, she should have made the records public inmediatly. She has nothing to lose, hasn't she?

Why the mistery?
An angry American 'fan' I know (or rather ex-fan, as they hate Morrissey now, and are doing all they can to destroy his career) contacted the journalist asking about the audio. She confirmed she has it, but has referred the matters to Der Spiegel, so it's up to them whether they want it released or not. I guess the paper could have all sorts of reasons for not wanting it released, but we'll wait and see.
 

!Viva Hate!

Well-Known Member
Release the unedited tapes. They might make a difference.

For some.

Morrissey could hypothetically rape a baby seal to death on stage and some people would try and spin it into something positive.

He's just trying to save a species from becoming endangered, bro.
 

Trending Threads

Top Bottom