Another S**t stirring article in The Independent today !

[Cabinessenceking]

I wonder, regardless of his intentions, how Mike can live with all the hatred he has fostered over the years. I mean, how can such a well-known guy from one of the greatest bands of all time continuously f*** up in some way. Someone here said he said the wrong thing, or failed to be concise about hwat he meant. I can understand that, but how can he be making such grave mistakes? Has he even doen a press release to explain it since the firestorm erupted? Either he is the biggest moron in rock or he is the mightiest troll of rock! Have I just been trolled by Myke Luhv? I certainly hope so.

[filledeplage]

Put the blame where the blame is due - Mike f***ed this up by using the wrong words and saying what was already known by some fans on this board in such a way to make it sound like something other than what it really is.

We knew the "band" situation months ago - however, at the same time it was reckless of him to come out with this kind of statement and make it appear that the three original members were cut off from "The Beach Boys". And that's how it appeared to me, knowing what the backstory was the whole time I was reading coverage.

Now there are tens of thousands of people thinking Mike fired a few fellow Beach Boys, that's his own fault for saying what he said as he said it and not leaving such things to the professionals they pay to work the PR angle.

Or maybe he really wants to be "the bad guy" in some strange way, because this dust-up surely hasn't helped his image and probably won't help ticket sales for his upcoming tour either.

I don't know why people like this can't just bask in their success of performing their music to enthusiastic crowds, enjoy what the hell they have and what they get paid to do, savor the moment, and shut the f*** up.

GF2002 - just for a minute, I'm going to be the devil's advocate. (That is easy after listening to my peers dump on my favorite band for over a decade. Like child's play.)

Just suppose the venues were after Mike for "reasonable assurance" of performance of these already booked shows.  And, the venues were nervous about the possibility that the Touring Band would be a no show, and, they would have ticket holders madder than hornets in August. We now know that people book their vacations around the Band.  So plane tickets, hotels, rental cars.  That multiplied by the number of ticket holders.  People freaking out, relying on the word of the venue that the music would be there with the Touring Band. (I held a ticket for the Mararishi tour, so I can feel their pain.)

Suppose further, that Mike was asked to make a public statement because the venue kept getting hundreds of phone calls asking if the "Band" was going to perform. The purpose of the statement would be to assure the ticket holders and venues.
They have a right to that assurance.  Given that this reunion tour is closing less than a day or so prior to the booked dates, what was he to do?  

This is just a "hypothetical."  

Could he win?  Either way?  

[ontor pertawst]

Right, Mike's hand was forced by the incredible power of a dinky venue in Waco, Texas... inundated as they were by hundreds of phone calls. Nutty Jerry's was a bloodbath and a repeat would be unthinkable! This is Mike "Alpha Male" Love we're talking about here. You think he's gonna break a sweat over swatting down some podunk promoter like a bug if that's what he needed to do? Or turning on the charm and making it work somehow if that's what he wanted?

Rather than these convoluted reasons, wouldn't the obvious answer be that this is what Mike Love prefers doing with his time? I mean, he's said as much. The guy can't stop and has been in love with the "lean and mean" touring setup for how many decades now? He doesn't want to take orders or accommodate Brian's camp, deal with Al's craziness -- he wants to tour on his own terms with his own people working as employees and not equal partners. Less aggravation, more money, random pointing at Ladies of a Certain Age and Type, a comfortable routine.

 It's not because of the horrible pressure of living up to incredibly difficult to extract yourself from Waco commitments. This is what the man does and the time for spouting "whole is greater the sum of it's parts" bullsh*t is about OVER. Back to business as usual tomorrow.

[oldsurferdude]

I wonder, regardless of his intentions, how Mike can live with all the hatred he has fostered over the years. I mean, how can such a well-known guy from one of the greatest bands of all time continuously f*** up in some way. Someone here said he said the wrong thing, or failed to be concise about hwat he meant. I can understand that, but how can he be making such grave mistakes? Has he even doen a press release to explain it since the firestorm erupted? Either he is the biggest moron in rock or he is the mightiest troll of rock! Have I just been trolled by Myke Luhv? I certainly hope so.

Cabin-Luhv all the above names for Myke Luhv. Mightiest troll(that's what they like to call me around here), the biggest moron in rock, and don't forget what I've been saying for years here-The Most Hated Person In A Rock and Roll Band Ever-Myke Luhv. And remember, don't feed the troll(me)!!

[SMiLE Brian]

Right, Mike's hand was forced by the incredible power of a dinky venue in Waco, Texas... inundated as they were by hundreds of phone calls. Nutty Jerry's was a bloodbath and a repeat would be unthinkable!

Is Mike performing for the Branch Davidians at their compound?

[filledeplage]

Right, Mike's hand was forced by the incredible power of a dinky venue in Waco, Texas... inundated as they were by hundreds of phone calls. Nutty Jerry's was a bloodbath and a repeat would be unthinkable!

I'm thinking of a double night casino gig on a long holiday weekend.  I don't care if they were playing in a church hall.  A contract is a contract.  And as I recall (I could be incorrect.) there was confusion as to "whom" would be playing.  Which band.  

Frankly, after having seen them play at a charity event, I did not get the impression that they took those responsibilities any less seriously.  They gave it their "all" and did not deliver a lesser show, because they were not playing in front of "big wheels."  

[guitarfool2002]

Put the blame where the blame is due - Mike f***ed this up by using the wrong words and saying what was already known by some fans on this board in such a way to make it sound like something other than what it really is.

We knew the "band" situation months ago - however, at the same time it was reckless of him to come out with this kind of statement and make it appear that the three original members were cut off from "The Beach Boys". And that's how it appeared to me, knowing what the backstory was the whole time I was reading coverage.

Now there are tens of thousands of people thinking Mike fired a few fellow Beach Boys, that's his own fault for saying what he said as he said it and not leaving such things to the professionals they pay to work the PR angle.

Or maybe he really wants to be "the bad guy" in some strange way, because this dust-up surely hasn't helped his image and probably won't help ticket sales for his upcoming tour either.

I don't know why people like this can't just bask in their success of performing their music to enthusiastic crowds, enjoy what the hell they have and what they get paid to do, savor the moment, and shut the f*** up.

GF2002 - just for a minute, I'm going to be the devil's advocate. (That is easy after listening to my peers dump on my favorite band for over a decade. Like child's play.)

Just suppose the venues were after Mike for "reasonable assurance" of performance of these already booked shows.  And, the venues were nervous about the possibility that the Touring Band would be a no show, and, they would have ticket holders madder than hornets in August. We now know that people book their vacations around the Band.  So plane tickets, hotels, rental cars.  That multiplied by the number of ticket holders.  People freaking out, relying on the word of the venue that the music would be there with the Touring Band. (I held a ticket for the Mararishi tour, so I can feel their pain.)

Suppose further, that Mike was asked to make a public statement because the venue kept getting hundreds of phone calls asking if the "Band" was going to perform. The purpose of the statement would be to assure the ticket holders and venues.
They have a right to that assurance.  Given that this reunion tour is closing less than a day or so prior to the booked dates, what was he to do?  

This is just a "hypothetical."  

Could he win?  Either way?  

The "artist", in the case Mike and "The Beach Boys" (minus Al, Brian, Dave), usually has little or no direct connection to how shows are booked, how tickets are made available and sold, how a concert at a given venue is advertised or promoted.

Basically, they are a small part of the machine, and on the level of The Beach Boys, there are professionals and professional agencies in place to handle these kinds of day-to-day logistics and operational matters, especially on tour.

Bands and artists pay (often very well) groups of agents, PR firms, agencies, marketers, and all who are employed under that umbrella. The artists will give interviews to promote upcoming shows in the local media, local to those towns and cities, but as far as actually doing the nuts-and-bolts organizing and scheduling, the artist needs to either get into a car and be driven to a radio or TV station, or simply take a phone call at a specific time to give a prescheduled interview.

The artist would not be responsible for any or all dealings with the actual ticketholders, as all of that is handled by those hired and paid to handle it...or contracted to do this service.

What Mike did was f*** it up by saying things that probably should not have been said in public while a tour is still going on.

There is no way around the responsibility finger pointing directly at him, because had he not said anything and left it to the professionals, there would be no room for misinterpretation nor any of the firestorm that has erupted over this.

I have to restate, even after knowing what this band scenario would be after the "Reunion" tour, the wording was awful. Which is why big stars hire pros to handle this kind of thing.

It is ironic that so far - as of right this moment - the only reaction from the BB/Mike camp has been an "official" canned statement from Mike's spokesperson. I think a personal reply would be in order, in light of what I see as a lot of hurt feelings and misunderstandings of a simple issue that was reported months ago.

[filledeplage]

Put the blame where the blame is due - Mike f***ed this up by using the wrong words and saying what was already known by some fans on this board in such a way to make it sound like something other than what it really is.

We knew the "band" situation months ago - however, at the same time it was reckless of him to come out with this kind of statement and make it appear that the three original members were cut off from "The Beach Boys". And that's how it appeared to me, knowing what the backstory was the whole time I was reading coverage.

Now there are tens of thousands of people thinking Mike fired a few fellow Beach Boys, that's his own fault for saying what he said as he said it and not leaving such things to the professionals they pay to work the PR angle.

Or maybe he really wants to be "the bad guy" in some strange way, because this dust-up surely hasn't helped his image and probably won't help ticket sales for his upcoming tour either.

I don't know why people like this can't just bask in their success of performing their music to enthusiastic crowds, enjoy what the hell they have and what they get paid to do, savor the moment, and shut the f*** up.

GF2002 - just for a minute, I'm going to be the devil's advocate. (That is easy after listening to my peers dump on my favorite band for over a decade. Like child's play.)

Just suppose the venues were after Mike for "reasonable assurance" of performance of these already booked shows.  And, the venues were nervous about the possibility that the Touring Band would be a no show, and, they would have ticket holders madder than hornets in August. We now know that people book their vacations around the Band.  So plane tickets, hotels, rental cars.  That multiplied by the number of ticket holders.  People freaking out, relying on the word of the venue that the music would be there with the Touring Band. (I held a ticket for the Mararishi tour, so I can feel their pain.)

Suppose further, that Mike was asked to make a public statement because the venue kept getting hundreds of phone calls asking if the "Band" was going to perform. The purpose of the statement would be to assure the ticket holders and venues.
They have a right to that assurance.  Given that this reunion tour is closing less than a day or so prior to the booked dates, what was he to do?  

This is just a "hypothetical."  

Could he win?  Either way?  

The "artist", in the case Mike and "The Beach Boys" (minus Al, Brian, Dave), usually has little or no direct connection to how shows are booked, how tickets are made available and sold, how a concert at a given venue is advertised or promoted.

Basically, they are a small part of the machine, and on the level of The Beach Boys, there are professionals and professional agencies in place to handle these kinds of day-to-day logistics and operational matters, especially on tour.

Bands and artists pay (often very well) groups of agents, PR firms, agencies, marketers, and all who are employed under that umbrella. The artists will give interviews to promote upcoming shows in the local media, local to those towns and cities, but as far as actually doing the nuts-and-bolts organizing and scheduling, the artist needs to either get into a car and be driven to a radio or TV station, or simply take a phone call at a specific time to give a prescheduled interview.

The artist would not be responsible for any or all dealings with the actual ticketholders, as all of that is handled by those hired and paid to handle it...or contracted to do this service.

What Mike did was f*** it up by saying things that probably should not have been said in public while a tour is still going on.

There is no way around the responsibility finger pointing directly at him, because had he not said anything and left it to the professionals, there would be no room for misinterpretation nor any of the firestorm that has erupted over this.

I have to restate, even after knowing what this band scenario would be after the "Reunion" tour, the wording was awful. Which is why big stars hire pros to handle this kind of thing.

It is ironic that so far - as of right this moment - the only reaction from the BB/Mike camp has been an "official" canned statement from Mike's spokesperson. I think a personal reply would be in order, in light of what I see as a lot of hurt feelings and misunderstandings of a simple issue that was reported months ago.

That is not the picture I'm seeing.  This seems to be a fan petition, gone viral.  And, not under a buffered umbrella of a PR person. 

And while I realize that there are many layers from soup-to-nuts - from booking to performance, my take is that it is a very "hands on" operation, and the Band is very responsive to the requests of the people booking the band, and that means of doing business has made the Touring Band such a success. 

That old saying...if "you want something done right, you do it yourself."  Sure they have agents, etc., and they aren't lugging amps and equipment around, and are transported, but seem to have their finger on the pulse of their gigs.   

[oldsurferdude]

Yesterday's Guardian : among Mike's crimes listed is the "come and look at my huge turd" story from that leading and notoriously accurate  authority on The Beach Boys - Wouldn't It Be Nice :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/lostinshowbiz/2012/sep/27/mike-love-sacking-beach-boys

Outstanding, well written, defining, spot on, brilliant, captivating, honest, heartfelt, factual,intriguing , eye opening article. Well done, Guardian!!

[I. Spaceman]

Yesterday's Guardian : among Mike's crimes listed is the "come and look at my huge turd" story from that leading and notoriously accurate  authority on The Beach Boys - Wouldn't It Be Nice :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/lostinshowbiz/2012/sep/27/mike-love-sacking-beach-boys

Outstanding, well written, defining, spot on, brilliant, captivating, honest, heartfelt, factual,intriguing , eye opening article. Well done, Guardian!!

I'd hate to see what you'd say if you read The Great Gatsby.

[Banana]

Nutty Jerry's Entertainment Complex didn't realize that the band they were booking was NOT the full 50th Anniversary version of the band...but rather Mike's touring band??  Shame on them for not doing their due dilligence.  Seriously? 

[Cam Mott]

What is wrong with Mike et al stating the truth as it stood at the time in reaction to a misunderstanding by a vendor as to who was going to be at the future post reunion concerts to avoid future confusion? It seems to me the only real problem is a bunch of over reaction to a truth.

[KittyKat]

Nutty Jerry's Entertainment Complex didn't realize that the band they were booking was NOT the full 50th Anniversary version of the band...but rather Mike's touring band??  Shame on them for not doing their due dilligence.  Seriously? 

That's beyond Nutty Jerry's abilities.  That's why he refers to himself as Nutty Jerry.  

[guitarfool2002]

Mike and Brian and Al and David need to come forward and address this - stepping back a bit, the reaction to this is unreal. Putting out an "official spokesperson" comes off looking like a cop-out.

I can see some blame on all sides, actually, and especially if some venue owner can't read a booking contract it's not the band's fault. However, there seems to be a huge misunderstanding...HUGE...even within the BB's camp, and it needs to be addressed for the sake of the fans. It has already gotten ugly.

[guitarfool2002]

What is wrong with Mike et al stating the truth as it stood at the time in reaction to a misunderstanding by a vendor as to who was going to be at the future post reunion concerts to avoid future confusion? It seems to me the only real problem is a bunch of over reaction to a truth.

But why would an individual contract or booking issue with one venue on an upcoming tour be aired out in public? If it had stayed business-like on all sides, and no public comment was even offered on it short of advertising the actual gig when it came up, none of it would have been picked up as a news story. The vendor, the booking agency, management, etc. works it out and the deals are signed - no need to turn it into anything but clearing up a contract issue with a concert venue and promoter.

If the Mike and Bruce touring Beach Boys did not prepare for these inevitable issues to come up in advance, then we have to think someone in that camp who was booking these fall concerts may have dropped the ball, because anyone could see where there *might be* confusion as to which band will be booked. We, here, were even joking about that months ago on this board!

Is the suggestion now being offered that all of this was in reaction to a question about a single venue booking a show? All of those deals are handled with contracts and private meetings, so why not keep it that way instead of opening up a public case file on it?

[filledeplage]

What is wrong with Mike et al stating the truth as it stood at the time in reaction to a misunderstanding by a vendor as to who was going to be at the future post reunion concerts to avoid future confusion? It seems to me the only real problem is a bunch of over reaction to a truth.

But why would an individual contract or booking issue with one venue on an upcoming tour be aired out in public? If it had stayed business-like on all sides, and no public comment was even offered on it short of advertising the actual gig when it came up, none of it would have been picked up as a news story. The vendor, the booking agency, management, etc. works it out and the deals are signed - no need to turn it into anything but clearing up a contract issue with a concert venue and promoter.

If the Mike and Bruce touring Beach Boys did not prepare for these inevitable issues to come up in advance, then we have to think someone in that camp who was booking these fall concerts may have dropped the ball, because anyone could see where there *might be* confusion as to which band will be booked. We, here, were even joking about that months ago on this board!

Is the suggestion now being offered that all of this was in reaction to a question about a single venue booking a show? All of those deals are handled with contracts and private meetings, so why not keep it that way instead of opening up a public case file on it?

Because it is now "newsworthy" - no less so, in 1967, when Carl was arrested for "draft dodging." And in the middle of a tour.  How would ticket holders reading in the newspapers, and watching TV, know that Carl would show up for the concert.
My first BB concert. April 28, 1967! 

And, Carl did "appear and perform."

[Doo Dah]

Here's the story (not the video) from this morning's show.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505270_162-57522120/beach-boys-members-to-reunite-perhaps-for-last-time-in-london/

Perhaps the full video will surface in the next few days, along with the panel discussion afterwards. Like I said, it's just an echo of the general story that's gone viral. Nuance? Who needs that? All you need is LOVE (and Bruce)

[guitarfool2002]

I'll restate that I was one who was joking about those poor non-fan spouses, girlfriends/boyfriends, etc who would buy Beach Boys tickets thinking it was for the "reunion" band versus the "Mike and Bruce" touring band, and possibly get a big surprise when they actually went to the show. But there should not be any confusion in the first place!

Now that is an easy one - if it isn't made explicitly clear who you are buying a ticket to see, it becomes an issue of fraud or deceptive business practices. In this case, I need to say it again, if there was even an inkling that there would be such confusion about which Beach Boys band would be playing at which venue, to the point where Mike himself had to step in and publicly "clarify" what was going on in an interview (the 2012 equivalent of adjusting the microphone at the HOF induction???    ), then someone who they are paying to book and promote these shows didn't do their job...period.

What bugs me even more, now, is that details we knew on this board months ago seem to have escaped the other band members, and not just the press/media.

I'd suggest there wouldn't have been such misunderstandings in the first place if it were handled correctly all around. I mean, seriously, you can't take a story this far out of context and blow it so far out of proportion without something to trigger that kind of reaction in the first place.

[I. Spaceman]

A failure to communicate has always been much of the problem regarding the band's history. Same as everyone else, I guess.

[Disney Boy (1985)]

Yesterday's Guardian : among Mike's crimes listed is the "come and look at my huge turd" story from that leading and notoriously accurate  authority on The Beach Boys - Wouldn't It Be Nice :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/lostinshowbiz/2012/sep/27/mike-love-sacking-beach-boys

Outstanding, well written, defining, spot on, brilliant, captivating, honest, heartfelt, factual,intriguing , eye opening article. Well done, Guardian!!

I'd hate to see what you'd say if you read The Great Gatsby.

Actually, music journalist Alexis Petridis - who wrote this (very, very funny) article in the Guardian - is a very well-respected music writer and very well-informed, particuarly on the Beach Boys, of whom he is a big fan.
His reviews of The SMiLE Sessions, That's Why God Made The Radio and Brian's dreadful xmas album are brilliant, accurate, knowledgeable and well-written and i strongly recommend reading them.
So he got his source wrong on the notorious Mike Love turd story? Not a biggie (the error, not the turd). Like most Beach Boy fans i imagine he's probably reluctant to have to re-read Wouldn't It Be Nice, even if just skim-reading for a quote.
Feel free to dismiss as 'sh*t stirring' any articles by non-fan rush-job hacks, but Alexis Petridis knows his stuff... 

[oldsurferdude]

Yesterday's Guardian : among Mike's crimes listed is the "come and look at my huge turd" story from that leading and notoriously accurate  authority on The Beach Boys - Wouldn't It Be Nice :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/lostinshowbiz/2012/sep/27/mike-love-sacking-beach-boys

Outstanding, well written, defining, spot on, brilliant, captivating, honest, heartfelt, factual,intriguing , eye opening article. Well done, Guardian!!

I'd hate to see what you'd say if you read The Great Gatsby.

See "Getting Straight"(1967-68) Elliot Gould. Probably before your time.

[I. Spaceman]

I wasn't dismissing the article or writer, I was just amused at the adjectiferous praise of OldMikeFan.

[I. Spaceman]

Yesterday's Guardian : among Mike's crimes listed is the "come and look at my huge turd" story from that leading and notoriously accurate  authority on The Beach Boys - Wouldn't It Be Nice :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/lostinshowbiz/2012/sep/27/mike-love-sacking-beach-boys

Outstanding, well written, defining, spot on, brilliant, captivating, honest, heartfelt, factual,intriguing , eye opening article. Well done, Guardian!!

I'd hate to see what you'd say if you read The Great Gatsby.

See "Getting Straight"(1967-68) Elliot Gould. Probably before your time.

Seen it, it is from 1970. Guess you're too old to remember details like that.

[Disney Boy (1985)]

Ah ok. Well for those who've never read him, here's Alexis's excellent review of All I Want For Xmas (written, of course, prior to the release of That Lucky Old Sun):

In the five years since meeting LA indie band the Wondermints, Brian Wilson has done things that no one had previously thought possible. The former Beach Boys leader has re-created his 1966 masterpiece, Pet Sounds, live. Last year, he finally completed the most famous unfinished album in rock history, 1967's Smile.

Amid the critical acclaim, however, Wilson and the Wondermints' other release of 2004, Gettin' in Over My Head, proved much more problematic. It too went to unbelievable lengths - panning 14 years' worth of unreleased songs for material and calling upon the services of Paul McCartney, Elton John and Eric Clapton - but proved only that Wilson was incapable of making a decent new album. With that in mind, and no more unfinished masterpieces to complete, the Wilson-Wondermints partnership should have retired with dignity intact after Smile. But Wilson is probably more famous now than at any time since the mid-1960s, and there is money to be made.

You can see why Wilson might want another go at producing a Christmas album: it was the one thing his rival Phil Spector achieved that Wilson, despite several attempts, couldn't top - at least until Spector managed to get himself charged with murdering a B-movie actress. Even at 22, when Wilson seemed capable of pretty much anything, he couldn't manage it. The Beach Boys Christmas Album was released in 1964, the year of I Get Around, Don't Worry Baby, Fun Fun Fun, and All Summer Long. But it was their fourth album in 12 months, their ninth in two years. Two weeks after it was released, Wilson had a nervous breakdown en route to a gig in Houston. Few Beach Boys releases bear such stark testament to the crippling pressure their songwriter and producer was under. The material is thin - on one bootleg, Wilson himself is heard describing Christmas Day as "a fucking piece of sh*t" - and the arrangements schmaltzy. Played next to Spector's legendary A Christmas Gift for You, it sounds desperately hokey.

Played next to their later effort, however - 1977's Merry Christmas From the Beach Boys - it sounds like a work of untrammelled genius. A contractual obligation album so pitiful that the label they were contractually obliged to turned it down, the 1977 effort features a song called (Loop de Loop Flip Flop) Santa's Got an Airplane and another containing the chorus: "Melekalikimaka is 'Happy Christmas' in Hawaiian talk-a." These, it should be noted, were the tracks eventually considered worthy of release 20 years later. They left the really bad stuff in the vaults.

That, sadly, is where What I Really Want for Christmas should be. For all its awfulness, at least Merry Christmas From the Beach Boys has a horrible fascination about it, albeit of the craning-your-neck-to-see-inside-the-ambulance variety. What I Really Want For Christmas is the least fascinating album of Wilson's career, and may well be the least fascinating album of Christmas - which, given the seasonal presence of G4 in the charts, is not a phrase to bandy lightly. It features two new songs: Christmassy, which is appalling, and the title track, which is even worse.

There are remakes of the two best tracks from the Beach Boys' Christmas Album, Little Saint Nick and The Man With All the Toys, which - thanks to the weirdly emotionless, strained bark that constitutes Wilson's default vocal setting these days - conclusively wring the last drops of joy from the material. The rest are carols, rendered in a peculiarly unappealing Pet Sounds-cum-1980s-AOR style. They serve no purpose whatsoever beyond proving that the Wondermints can do a pretty accurate Beach Boys impression, something even the most bewildered observer - plucking a name at random, Brian Wilson, say - must have worked out by now.

You have to concede that Wilson's relationship with the Wondermints has given him a new lease of life. But to what end? To bark his way haltingly through We Wish You a Merry Christmas like a hostage reading a prepared statement from his captors? If the organisation around Wilson really wanted to give Beach Boys fans a Christmas present, they should, as Pet Sounds suggested, go away for a while and leave this fragile, confused man in peace. This, by contrast, is pure humbug.

[guitarfool2002]

Consider this, I know I have been doing that after watching this thing grow and grow...This is CBS news, the LA Times, Rolling Stone - they're not fanzines, they're not rags, they're not someone's cheap-ass blog where they live out an "Almost Famous" fantasy of being a rock critic writing on an iPad while waiting for algebra class to start...these publications and sources have entire teams of supposed fact-checkers and legal advisers whose sole job it is to make sure the stories are accurate and that they won't get sued for libel or worse before they hit the public.

So it becomes a case of either those major media outlets being *that sloppy* in their journalism, or the way this was handled by the Beach Boys and certain members and managers being either that true, or them being that naive or incompetent to not see storm clouds forming over these comments.