Sam Leach - KEEP
-
sorry about all the typos on that post, yikes~
-
(((yawn))) sorry just got in from work
-
mikeskapla:
I think all Sam was trying to say is that there is more to the story then meets the eye (and yeah Sam knows Baker and Macca more than anyone of this board) -- we probably don't know the extent of the story. A press release or statement is just intended to give enough to the press so the story will go away -- we all doubt that Macca has any interest at pouring his heart out every bit of it to the media -- usually sackings are pretty private affairs. In terms of people have personal opinions one way or another about Baker that's fair game but saying that anyone of us is on the real story seems off base. Cheers! Mike
Mike, you must not have read the unwarranted attack launched against by Sam in the Broadcast forum. That was a hell of a way to say 'there's more to the story than meets the eye'.
No, none of us knows the absolute truth, but I believe Paul's own words and trust them above anyone elses.
-
Stylegurll Are you saying Sam launched an unwarranted attack or unwarranted attack was launched against Sam? Sam made his point strongly from the vantage point of being more on the inside by a mile then we are -- and wondering how people can have such strong opinions about what transpired without truly knowing what went down. I think Dom made some underwarranted hits on Sam but then backed off. I put about zero stock in reading this situation based on a press release. Although, it's not in music by profession I deal with the media and have written around 1000 press releases -- press releases by design are not intended to give the full story but just enough to control the spin of it. Basically Baker in his press release or statement seemed to be aiming to get a story that more or less comes across that his relationship with Macca is cool so it's other factors that were involved alas Heather. Macca came back with a press release or statement of his own saying that it wasn't about Heather -- naturally to defend his wife. Both tacts made sense. In Macca's statement he actually in a sense complemented Baker by saying that of late Baker's work doesn't meet the quality of his past work -- alas implying that Macc was quite happy (despite the slams on Baker overall job from other people on these threads) with Baker in the past but very recent developments warranted this. And Macca didn't say what these recent developments are. My point is like most press releases -- I can't see how anyone can read them and say that's the whole picture. By design when you play with the media you don't reveal the full story why would you -- again this sort of event is private neither side has anything to gain from spilling the full beans. One thing is clear is that we don't know the whole picture. And, is it plausible to me that Sam who has a relationship with Baker and Macca -- has some insight into the situation that we aren't aware of it -- heck yes. Cheers! Mike
-
Mike, Sorry for the typo in my previous post. It was Sam that launched the attack. Go back and read the second page of the thread. Dom did what others would have done-he defended himself. I don't remember anyone here claiming to know the 'real' story. I only remember people expressing opinions. Just because we are not 'insiders' doesn't mean we cannot comment on the situation. Baker should not have mentioned Heather in his statement at all. Simply say the split was amicable and he was pursuing other projects. The public didn't need to know anything more. Paul was put in the situation of having to defend his wife and also explain his decision. That was really unfair to him. I agree that this type of thing is very personal and private, that is why I was angered by Geoff's decision to drag his boss's wife into it. Running to the tabloids after quitting/being sacked was unprofessional plain and simple. There is no defense for that. ~Tashi
-
Weel said, Mike.
-
Tashi You are referring to this post where Sam said "Who the hell are you to criticise Geoff Baker ??? And what could you possibly know about him or this situation. You are totally ignorant of Geoff and his friendship with Paul. " Reading that post Sam's point seem to hang on criticizing Geoff in the context of this situation as opposed to in general. Granted he said it in a strong fashion but the whole nature of that thread was people making strong opinions and they seem fairly one sided -- I gather Sam was aiming for some balance and to communicate to all of us that there is more to this story. Cheers! Mike
-
Hello Sam, Have just been reading that thread in "The Broadcast" and, for what it's worth, I fully support what you wrote. I am not a 'star-struck syncophat' or whatever people supporting your stance were called - I don't regard you as a 'star' for a start (!), just a decent bloke and a great author. I don't know whether 'Dom' knows the great feeling of hatred for "that rag" 'The Sun' in Liverpool or why. Maybe he doesn't know what a red rag to a bull such a comment would be to a Liverpool supporter and Liverpudlian. What 'The Sun' did was unforgivable. I agree with your comment about Paul's image with the 'under-35s' and Glastonbury. After his show, Paul was on the cover of the NME (average reader age about 18!) and sales of Beatles and Paul's solo albums rocketed nationwide. If he wasn't popular with that age group before Glasto, he has made giant steps towards popularity to the younger age groups since. I am also amazed at the large scale of the attack on Geoff Baker. I have read the press releases, read Paul's comments and basically thought - "oh well, that's that then". This isn't a war breaking out, people dying or a mass-famine, it's a rock star's publicist leaving the fold! Paul & Geoff had differences - who's going to leave the Paul McCartney empire? It's not going to be Paul McCartney, is it? Some people seem to want to defend Paul's honour, reputation or god-knows what, but I honestly don't think it's necessary. Something has gone wrong there between Paul and Geoff and if people think they know what's going on or the complete circumstances when they aren't involved in 'the inner sanctum' then they're mistaken. You can't expect anything but utter rubbish from the tabloids, either. Why it has to be turned into who's right and who's wrong I don't know. It's unneccesary and causes bad feeling. It's evident that many people who know and have met Geoff have a lot of good things to say about him and Paul, in his statement, points to years of friendship - not employment or service, but friendship. It should be left there. Comments about Geoff as a 'pot-head' and a 'stoner' are completely uncalled for. I don't buy the fact that Geoff was pushed out the door for being a pot smoker. Surely Macca, after spending time in a Japanese prison for 'the herb' wouldn't be that hypocritical? I suppose Dom has the right to criticise Geoff's publicity work, especially if there were blatant lies being published, but it's a largely unbalanced depiction to pick on the negatives when, if you took an objective view of his career with Paul, they are probably isolated incidents far outweighed by the good work he did for Paul. He was there for a long time, after all. I though Dom's comments about you riding on the back of the Beatles' success was uncalled for, insulting and untrue. I suggest you send him a copy of your book - as long as he sends you a cheque, of course! The biggest impression that I got of you from your book was your wit, cheek and total, unabashed love of Rock 'n' Roll and The Beatles. You didn't deserve the things that were said about you in that forum, Sam. All the best, JLB. PS. Am posting this here as opposed to the original thread because it is a message to Sam and concerned more about the impact of what was said to and about Sam than Geoff himself.
-
Hear, hear!! Sam Leach and Geoff Baker are both great people.
-
stylegurrl:
Mike, Sorry for the typo in my previous post. It was Sam that launched the attack. Go back and read the second page of the thread. Dom did what others would have done-he defended himself. I don't remember anyone here claiming to know the 'real' story. I only remember people expressing opinions. Just because we are not 'insiders' doesn't mean we cannot comment on the situation. Baker should not have mentioned Heather in his statement at all. Simply say the split was amicable and he was pursuing other projects. The public didn't need to know anything more. Paul was put in the situation of having to defend his wife and also explain his decision. That was really unfair to him. I agree that this type of thing is very personal and private, that is why I was angered by Geoff's decision to drag his boss's wife into it. Running to the tabloids after quitting/being sacked was unprofessional plain and simple. There is no defense for that. ~Tashi
i guess what you mean is that he should have said nothing if he's got nothing good to say... but i find it interesting that some people here have got nothing better to do than to change people's opinons and convince them why a shit-person baker is...
-
sam rocks...
i hope he doesn't decide to leave the board because of the events of the last 48 hours
this would be a big loss for the community
-
Thanks JLB!
Great post! I'm SHOCKED at the way Sam is treated, even in his own thread!
-
JLB Good points -- basically my opinion about Baker is colored by his articles from Club Sandwich which I think are fantastic. In terms of Baker sensationalizing stories that comes with the turf -- playing the media is about playing up events. If he went too far in some cases I'd rather have someone like that doing my publicity then someone who doesn't care enough to try. Moreover, in my view Macca doesn't lose points with the public based on exgerrations about his rehearsals, etc -- people don't really care one way or another. Baker simply seemed to be adept at taking events that are mundane to the casual music fan and hyping them up. He's in the business of hype. Going to Macca's concerts its clear that he has no shortage of under 35 year old fans. No question in my mind Macca was made BY SOME media to seem uncool in the early 80s when he did softer pop alas Say Say Say, Ebony Ivory. But, that has nothing to do with Baker -- he didn't work for Macca back then. And, based on his concerts alone Macca's recovered with the 80s generation (in fact I recall a recent saying its cool to pick Macca as your favorite Beatle again) and is doing great with younger fans who made up a big part of the sales for the Beatles 1 album.
-
Nick2004:
(((yawn))) sorry just got in from work
Hi Nick hehe i feel the same way!
-
JLB and mike, you both made some great points and that's good to see
-
Starr:
Nick2004:
(((yawn))) sorry just got in from work
Hi Nick hehe i feel the same way!
I been spending most of my night sleeping since 7pm i havent spoken to Connie today, and i have no credit on my cellphone i miss her
PS What has been going on in that other thread?
-
Hi Tashi Don't mean to pick on you i know we've agreed on a lot of posts just disagree on this one. Basically Dom responded to a post that said I'm glad that Geoff isn't working anymore for Paul. Sorry to say this Dom replied Me too, and I'm even more pleased that this hopefully means he won't be representing Apple anymore either. That's if he was to blame for the lies/exaggerations contained in the press releases that have come out from MPL and Apple over recent years. They were very tabloid - not a lot of fact and a hell of a lot of 'guff'... maybe he can go back and work for The Sun, more his style. The point The way it came across was pretty strong -- basically Dom characterized Baker's work and style and implied not just that he exegerrates but lies. In Sam's defense not that he needs me to defend him but since I agree with him i'll do it anyway (sorry Sam!) he responded to Dom's post with equally strong passion from the vantage point of actually knowing Baker and his relationship with Macca. The rest of the debate digressed into Dom being upset at Sam's point about who is he (Dom) to make these comments with Dom implying at one point that the fact that he isn't an insider makes his view point more valid becuase he's not colored by personal relationships. Personally, I think that point is silly (but again Don is entitled to make it) I've gathered that Sam thought it will silly to -- and they basically debated back and forth. Dom took some personal shots, too -- so I don't see why you want to pick on Sam from coming on too strong. Sam's point is that he is coming from the vantage point of knowing what's going on -- is on point considering that the information in terms of what's going is really not public. But, the comments back and forth I think was just a generic debate -- the thread was definitely tilted towards slamming Baker -- and Sam tried to bring some balance into it -- and on that thread you wouldn't be able to pull that off unless you came on strong. Cheers! Mike
-
I have no idea what you guys are all talking about lol
so i'll just say a quick hello!
-
Id just like to add people if you have lovely things to say about Dear Geoffie.. Please post them.. in broadcast!!!~ I think it only fair that Geoff has some positive things written about himm... Good call Mike as always (almost :lol
& Geoff Lynn's beard ......
-
Starr:
I have no idea what you guys are all talking about lol
so i'll just say a quick hello!
*waves* HELLO