logo
Judas Priest, Rick Springfield, John Oates and Bob Geldof reflect on 40 years of Live Aid

Judas Priest, Rick Springfield, John Oates and Bob Geldof reflect on 40 years of Live Aid

The Stara day ago
NEW YORK: Forty years ago, the legendary Live Aid concerts aimed to do a lot of good - helping to raise over US$100mil for famine relief in Ethiopia and inspiring worldwide awareness for a cause it might otherwise have ignored.
Simulcast from Philadelphia and London on July 13, 1985, Live Aid was the most ambitious global television event of its time: 16 hours of live music in two different continents featuring Queen, The Who, a Led Zeppelin reunion and more.
A lot has changed in the years since.
"Live Aid, '85 to now, is the same distance as the Second World War from Live Aid," notes Rick Springfield, laughingly. "That's how long ago it was.'
Artists who performed at Live Aid - Springfield, organizer Bob Geldof, Hall and Oates' John Oates and Judas Priest's Rob Halford - reflected on the event and its impact in interviews with The Associated Press ahead of the 40th anniversary on Sunday (July 13).
Here's what they had to say:
At John F. Kennedy Stadium in Philadelphia, Springfield performed between Run-DMC and REO Speedwagon - just a taste of the diversity of performers featured on the transnational lineup.
"Run-DMC, I remember thinking, 'What is this? Three guys talking over a record player. What is that? Little did I know that it was about to change the whole game," he says, laughing.
He remembers playing an electric set - no "Jessie's Girl,' because "back then, it was just my first hit.... It hadn't gone on to become this cultural thing."
Hall and Oates' John Oates had a different experience.
His band also played in Philly - their hometown - and in 1985, his band was one of the biggest on the planet. They played near the end of the night, joined by the Temptations' Eddie Kendricks and David Ruffin and remained on stage to back the Rolling Stones' dynamic frontman Mick Jagger.
The British rockstar had a trick up his sleeve.
"He didn't tell us that he was bringing Tina Turner out," Oates says.
"We had rehearsed a certain amount of songs with him. But then when he brought her out, it just jacked up the level of energy like you can't believe."
Judas Priest singer Rob Halford counts "Mike and Tina, of course,' as one of his Philly Live Aid highlights. "Led Zeppelin, too."
But most exciting of all for the heavy metal frontman? Meeting folk hero Joan Baez.
The band had previously covered her classic "Diamonds and Rust."
"I thought, 'Oh my God, she's gonna come and kick me in the ass for wrecking her beautiful song,'" he recalls.
"She gives me a quick hug and goes, 'The reason I'm here is because my son said to me, if you see Rob Halford from Judas Priest at the Live Aid Show in Philadelphia, will you tell him from me that I prefer Judas Priest's version to my mom's version?'... It was a display of such kindness."
Twenty years after Live Aid, Geldof organized Live 8 - an even larger undertaking in the new internet era, with 10 concerts happening simultaneously and across the globe.
If the trend were to continue, there should be another event taking place this year. Notably, there isn't.
Geldof says that's because there couldn't be a Live Aid-type event in 2025. He cites social media as a cause.
In his view, algorithmic fracturing has made it impossible to create monolithic musical and activistic moments. Instead, he views the current media landscape as bolstering "an echo chamber of your own prejudices."
For something like Live Aid to work, "You need rock 'n' roll as a creature of a social, economic and technological movement," he says.
"And I think the rock 'n' roll age is over.... It did determine how young people articulated change and the desire for it.... That isn't the case anymore."
Springfield agrees. "I think we are too divided," he says.
He believes the world wouldn't be able to agree on a single cause to support, or even which musicians to back.
"You could never do a thing with the size of Live Aid unless it was some kind of universal thing of, 'Let's bring everybody together.'"
"Never say never, but I highly doubt it,' says Oates. "The landscape of music and entertainment in general has changed so drastically."
He points to "We Are The World," the 1985 charity single for African famine relief that included the voices of Michael Jackson, Willie Nelson, Bob Dylan, Ray Charles, Diana Ross, Stevie Wonder, Smokey Robinson, Paul Simon and many more, as an example.
"The idea of that happening with the stars of today all in one place, I can't even imagine that. And plus, who would they be?... How many songs are released every day?"
Halford echoes the other's sentiments. There's an undeniable "extremism in the world right now,' he says, that would make a Live Aid event challenging to pull off in 2025. But he doesn't think it's impossible. He uses January's Fire Aid - the LA wildfire benefit concert featuring Billie Eilish, Stevie Wonder and a Nirvana reunion - as a recent example.
"There will always be empathy from people,' and in the right hands, maybe another event like Live Aid could take place. "It was a tremendously beautiful, humanitarian example... that provided us opportunity to do something ourselves to help."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Inquiry upholds harassment claims against BBC presenter
Inquiry upholds harassment claims against BBC presenter

The Sun

time5 hours ago

  • The Sun

Inquiry upholds harassment claims against BBC presenter

LONDON: An inquiry into complaints of sexual harassment and inappropriate behaviour by a BBC presenter of the long-running popular series 'MasterChef' Monday upheld 45 allegations against him. The lengthy probe, commissioned by production company Banijay, examined 83 accusations against Gregg Wallace after more than a dozen people came forward in November to complain of his behaviour since 2005. The inquiry's report substantiated, among others, 16 claims that he made sexually explicit comments, 12 instances of inappropriate jokes, seven allegations of bullying and three complaints that he was found in a state of undress. It also confirmed one allegation of unwanted touching. The BBC has apologised to everyone affected by Wallace's behaviour and said in a statement on Monday it has 'no plans' to work with him in the future. 'The investigation details a substantial number of allegations of inappropriate conduct spanning 19 years. This behaviour falls below the values of the BBC and the expectations we have for anyone who works with or for us,' it added. Wallace has repeatedly denied the accusations, but sparked a further backlash last year when he blamed them on 'a handful of middle-class women of a certain age'. He wrote on Instagram last week that the report 'exonerates me of all the serious allegations ... and finds me primarily guilty of inappropriate language between 2005 and 2018'. He said he had been hired as the 'cheeky greengrocer', a person with 'warmth, character and rough edges' but now in a 'sanitised world, that same personality is seen as a problem'. He maintained he had been diagnosed with autism 'but nothing was done to investigate my disability or protect me from what I now realise was a dangerous environment for over twenty years'. The BBC cancelled two special Christmas shows of 'MasterChef' amid the furore, but no final decision has been made yet on whether to air the latest season filmed last year, the organisation said. It conceded that 'opportunities were missed to address this behaviour ... We accept more could and should have been done sooner'. The inquiry said it had looked into Wallace's autism claims saying they were relevant in understanding his difficulty reading social cues and use of humour as a 'masking technique'. The furore was only the latest scandal to hit the taxpayer-funded British broadcaster. Another prime-time show, 'Strictly Come Dancing', was thrown into crisis in 2024 amid bullying accusations. And former top news anchor, Huw Edwards, pleaded guilty in July 2024 to making indecent pictures of children, narrowly avoiding jail in a stunning fall from grace. – AFP

The streaming wars come down to two: YouTube vs Netflix
The streaming wars come down to two: YouTube vs Netflix

The Star

time8 hours ago

  • The Star

The streaming wars come down to two: YouTube vs Netflix

For many years, Netflix executives bristled at the notion that the company really had a rival. Not Hollywood powerhouses like Disney, nor tech giants like Amazon. Instead, Reed Hastings, the company's co-founder, insisted at one point that Netflix competed with people's desire to socialise, or to go to sleep. But there's no hiding from YouTube. Netflix and YouTube are increasingly locked in a fierce battle for control over the television set, a rivalry that even Netflix's executives can no longer deny. 'That was more of a fun narrative than it was, you know, the brutal truth,' Jason Kilar, the founding CEO of Hulu and a former CEO of WarnerMedia, said about those past comments. 'The brutal truth is that YouTube is indeed the biggest competitor of Netflix at this point.' The rivalry signals how the streaming wars have entered a new phase. For years, increasing subscriber numbers to their streaming services was the ultimate goal for media companies. Now, those companies are trying to increase the amount of time viewers spend on their service. On that score, YouTube and Netflix stand above the competition. The two accounted for 20% of all television viewing time in the United States in May – 12.5% for YouTube, 7.5% for Netflix, according to Nielsen. The next closest streaming competitor is Disney, whose multiple streaming services (Disney+, Hulu, ESPN+) together accounted for 5% of TV time in May, Nielsen said. And YouTube's lead keeps getting wider. Two years ago, YouTube's share of TV time was roughly half a percentage point higher than Netflix's – now it is 5 percentage points. Their strategies for success are very different, but, in ways large and small, it's becoming clear that they are now competing head-on. Top executives at both companies are beginning to mention each other in public more, sometimes dismissively. And the companies are veering into each other's turf, with Netflix executives showing an increased appetite for signing up creators who otherwise call YouTube their home – and trying to explain why their business model would be better for them. 'Who is in the biggest fight around scale and eyeball aggregation? YouTube and Netflix,' said Ben Silverman, the chair of Propagate, a production company, and a former chair of NBC Entertainment. Representatives for Netflix and YouTube declined to comment for this article. Both companies are competing from a position of strength. Netflix's revenue in 2024 reached US$39bil (RM165.96bil), and it has more than 300 million global subscribers, more than any other streaming service. The company is also hugely profitable: Netflix had more than US$10bil (RM42.55bil) in operating income last year. YouTube, which is owned by Google, had revenue of US$54bil (RM229.80bil) last year. The only media company with more was Disney. MoffettNathanson, a media analyst group, projected that YouTube would eclipse Disney in revenue this year and described it as 'the new king of all media'. The company does not disclose profits, but MoffettNathanson estimated that YouTube's operating income was just under US$8bil (RM34.04bil) in 2024. The two companies have very different approaches. Netflix is in the business of making and licensing traditional television shows, movies, documentaries, game shows or reality TV. The company hand-selects what it puts on its service, pays talent upfront and finances all the production costs, and often retains ownership of its original programs. YouTube allows anyone to post almost anything. People who upload an original video shoulder the financial cost upfront, but they also collect a cheque from YouTube based on the amount of revenue it generates. Those creators generally own the rights to their content. YouTube took a stab at making original TV shows but abandoned that game plan years ago. It worked. Now people go to YouTube for virtually anything, ranging from cat videos to music playlists to video podcasts. On average, YouTube has an audience of seven million viewers watching off a TV set at any given moment during the day, more than Netflix's daily average of 4.7 million, Nielsen said. During prime-time hours, however, when the highest concentration of viewers is watching TV, the margins are tighter. An average of 11.1 million Americans are tuned into YouTube on their TV screens at night this year while 10.7 million are watching Netflix, Nielsen said. Of course, Nielsen only measures viewership off a TV screen. Both companies have huge audiences that watch in other ways, including on a smartphone, tablet or laptop. Roughly 70% of Netflix's audience, for instance, watches its programs via a television set, and the other 30% through other devices, the company said. In March, at an event hosted by the Paley Media Council, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos compared YouTube to the minor leagues. When a creator works with YouTube, he said, that person can 'cut their teeth or develop an idea'. 'It's a little bit of a farm league,' he continued. 'And then they can come up and do something that we would take the financial risk with them.' Sarandos also suggested that Netflix remained a platform where you pay close attention to a program – an intentional choice essentially, perhaps during prime time – whereas YouTube was a far more passive viewing experience. 'There's a difference between spending time and killing time,' he said. 'We're in the how-you-spend-time business.' Neal Mohan, YouTube's CEO, responded to Sarandos' commentary at an advertiser event in France last month, emphasising that viewers 'get to decide how to spend' their time. 'Who am I to say what's spending time, engaging time, quality time, killing time?' he said, at an event hosted by The Ankler, an entertainment news outlet. 'That's, frankly, just the industry kind of talking to itself.' And when Mohan was asked what he had been watching recently, he mentioned a documentary about Brett Favre before getting a jab in. 'It was on Netflix,' he said, 'so I don't know if I was killing time there.' In recent months, Netflix has licensed shows from creators who used to be primarily on YouTube. Ms. Rachel, a children's programme that appears on YouTube, has also been streaming on Netflix since the beginning of the year, to great success. Netflix has also brought on shows like the game show Pop The Balloon and 'Sidemen', a popular British YouTube group. The company has also been in discussions with representatives from other popular YouTube channels, including Mark Rober, Dude Perfect, Danny Go and Gracie's Corner, according to two people familiar with the negotiations. Jad Dayeh, a senior partner at the William Morris Endeavor talent agency, said Netflix executives had taken a much greater interest in YouTube over the past year or so. 'They're unfazed by, like, Apple and HBO Max – it's very clear that they do not care what Apple is doing,' he said. 'But they're more conscious of what YouTube is doing.' Similarly, Oren Rosenbaum, a partner at the United Talent Agency, said: 'They're jealous of each other. I don't think either one wants to admit that to themselves or each other. But when you have conversations with each of them, there is that jealousy.' Both companies have tech roots. And in the tech world, there is often a competition between two or three top companies for leading market share in any given industry. Amazon battles Microsoft in cloud computing. Microsoft, Google and Amazon compete in the upper rungs of artificial intelligence. And Apple and Google go head-to-head for the top of the smartphone market. As with the competition between the iPhone and Android smartphones, Netflix and YouTube are essentially two different systems: a closed platform (Netflix) versus an open one (YouTube). And while Netflix's recommendations for viewers are far ahead of many of its streaming competitors', YouTube has more data inputs from users to make even more precise recommendations. 'When you open up YouTube you are going to get a far more surgical presentation of things to entertain you than you will ever get at a traditional streamer,' said Kilar, the former Hulu and WarnerMedia CEO. Of course, within all of video entertainment, in particular mobile viewing, the companies also fiercely compete with TikTok and Instagram. But Kilar believes that in the coming years, Netflix will continue to take viewing share from its traditional Hollywood rivals. But he thinks YouTube has greater potential to expand its viewing time, given the growth trajectory of shorter videos, particularly with younger audiences. 'I'm bullish on both companies, make no mistake, but I am relatively more bullish on YouTube,' he said. During the go-go cable years, entertainment executives used to repeat the mantra, 'content is king'. Dayeh, the talent agent, said that these days 'audience is king' – and two players stand to benefit the most. 'Netflix was like, 'We want to be a studio', and they became a platform,' he said. 'YouTube was a platform that is now becoming a studio. But what they both did was create these forums that are for everyone. 'That's where the battle starts to really shape up,' he said, 'because they're competing for the same everyone audience.' – ©2025 The New York Times Company This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

Stars and their watches: Celebrities' wrists sparkle and dazzle at the Met Gala
Stars and their watches: Celebrities' wrists sparkle and dazzle at the Met Gala

The Star

time12 hours ago

  • The Star

Stars and their watches: Celebrities' wrists sparkle and dazzle at the Met Gala

Making his Met Gala debut, a member of the K-pop group Seventeen, walked the red carpet wearing a Piaget Polo diamond watch. The Met Gala, an annual fundraising gala for the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute in New York City, celebrated the Costume Institute's new exhibition, 'Superfine: Tailoring Black Style', this year. One of the biggest events in fashion, many of the world's most famous and influential came dressed in their luxurious best for a historic Met Gala that paid tri­­bute to Black fashion and emerging designers for the first time. This was also a first in more than 20 years, for a menswear theme at the event that ignited a showcase of creativity and bold interpretation. Together, the stars from the fashion, entertainment, sports and business world raised a record of US$31mil for the Met's Costume Institute.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store