On behalf of some silly charity, a mish mash of names put together by Guy Chambers who should know better - a massacre of He Ain't Heavy. Buy the superlative Hollies version kids; ignore the crap cover.

It's for theHillsborough campaign. Also the Twat Factor winners single will also be a charity single with money going to Some childrens charity.Should inflate sales a bit.

"Silly charity" indeed! You're happy to refer to the Hillsborough capaign when it suits your purposes.

JK2006 wrote:
On behalf of some silly charity, a mish mash of names put together by Guy Chambers who should know better - a massacre of He Ain't Heavy. Buy the superlative Hollies version kids; ignore the crap cover.

I have to agree. Buy the Hollies version, and, if you so wish, give a donation to the charity of YOUR choice. (Mine shall be to a LOCAL pet rescue centre).

JK can you please stop your tirade against charity singles when your darling protege Alex Day
did one last year in order to boost his profile and his record. I hope he paid out to the charity
as promised.

He did indeed Bob and is going to give £30,000 to Save The Children if this one reaches the top but neither were, or are, "charity records" - the charity is a by product, like those that benefit from Bruce Springsteen's success.

I'm fine with generosity. I hate music only created because of a "charitable" motive which is usually inferior but one is not allowed to say so.

Well they all have their place I guess but good answer JK

why would you do or say anything that might prevent a charity from raising money via a song? no matter how bad in your opinion the music is? Would it not just be nice to either stay quiet on it or get behind it? im sure the families who have had to wait for years for the truth to come out as much emotional and financial expense of the hillsborough enquiry are deeply thankful to finally be receiving some support

Bad music stops good music getting heard; takes up the airwaves; annoys the ears; continues the lie that "we don't make good music anymore".

Charity - great. Doing it for reasons that interfere with good music? Bad.

Donate by all means. Just don't inflict crap music on us.

One wonders if it would be a "silly charity" if it was your child, partner (if possibly in your case no comma there hey?) or your mum, dad or friend who died that day? Or you who was still suffering as a result of the failings of others when you were attending a game of football?
If it was you and your family that had been fighting more than 20 years for the truth to come out?
People like you make me sick.
Your ignorance for an allegegly educated msn is quite shocking snd this seems solely like a remark to provoke controversy and therefore extra publicity for yourself you narcissistic imbecile. I have absolutely no doubt that you are good friends with the toad Mckenzie from your time contributing to that disgusting tabloid.

Everyone has an opinion and that should always be the case but there is never a need to be so deliberately cruel and insensitive at any time.

You should be ashamed.

And as for 'don't inflict crap music on us' - haven't you gig an off switch ? Change the channel on the radio? Put a cd on? Don't buy the 'crap' music you mention?

What a fool you are.

Give cash to the needy. To those starving in Africa. To those whose lives were ruined by tragedy. To those bravely fighting against police and political cover up.

Just don't inflict ghastly music on us whilst pretending to care about others. And don't condemn those who have the honesty to comment on the musical quality of something, whether they are right or wrong. And don't use the coverup word "charity" to defend behaviour otherwise selfish, as many do.

'don't inflict ghastly music on us whilst pretending to care about others.'

It's a way to get the issue, and keep the issue in the public eye after years of horrific lies and cover up's, it's also a way to raise money so that the families of the victims can afford to continue their fight for justice, remember that these are ordinary people without the means to promote an agenda unlike yourself.

If your child or a member of your family died attending an event that was supposed to have adequate safety and security measures in place, a concert for example, and it turned out that the people responsible for your loved ones safety not only failed in their duty, but then deliberately pointed the finger of blame at those who lost their lives and then covered the whole thing up for over 20 years, would you do whatever you could to try and find justice for your family while hopefully ensuring that nothing else like this could happen again? Or would you just leave it alone in case someone who couldn't be bothered to buy a copy of NME or read a music blog have their musical tastes forever sullied by a charity record?

Thank the lord Mr Blobby, The Teletubbies and Bob the Builder never got to number one, The Arctic Monkeys and The Streets would never have happened.

The fact that you used the word 'pretending' hints at your true feelings on this issue though.

I'm totally in support of the brave and dedicated fighters trying to expose the bent, corrupt police behaviour. Their crusade has assisted my own.

I'm totally against making crap charity records and clogging up the charts with the result that talent and real hits get ignored.

JK2006 wrote:
Bad music stops good music getting heard

In that case, stop your friend Simon Cowell from inflicting any more crap on us. That doesn't even raise money for a good cause. So on a scale of naffness, that's worse.

JK2006 wrote:
On behalf of some silly charity, a mish mash of names put together by Guy Chambers who should know better - a massacre of He Ain't Heavy. Buy the superlative Hollies version kids; ignore the crap cover.

Which, despite all the negatives, has made numero uno and defeated the X-Factor winner (thankfully).

Song originally pitched to the Hollies by Cyril Shane.

Indeed it has; still think it's crap though.

It's number one instead of yet another piece of Cowell-sponsored crap.
It's raising money for a good cause instead of Cowell.
Good enough reasons not to be churlish about it. Grow up.

And please allow us adults to express our opinions on the musical quality of tracks.

JK2006 wrote:
And please allow us adults to express our opinions on the musical quality of tracks.

Fair point...... though sometimes a charity track does warrant praise, such as Band Aid - "Do They Know It's Christmas?"

- A great original song performed by the biggest and best artists of an era
- Top 5 all time most loved Christmas single and second best selling single of all time
- Impetus for Live Aid and subsequent Ethiopian charity fund raising
- Inspiration for multiple other charity records

I know JK doesn't like this track or the associated charity work but in the interest of balance (and particularly at this time of year) it is worth singing the praise of Bob Geldof. He may have character flaws (few in this business haven't) but he has done a lot of good for charity and a lot of good for the music industry.

Didn't like the track (preferred the US one); no problem with the "associated charity" cause though felt very wary about the practical efficiency and know it detracted from other, more experienced organisations, probably provoking deaths as a result. I like Bob but thought it unwise for him to shake hands with the Devil; a wily cove (just ask Max).