Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveMacD
As for “false advertising,” all they needed to do is have a band photo without Stevie for the front cover. During the press for the album, they only needed to explain that Stevie wasn’t involved in the project due to solo commitments, but was still a member in good standing and would be rejoining them for the upcoming world tour.
|
I agree that this should have been called a Fleetwood Mac album and that it frankly is a Fleetwood Mac album in many respects, but this sounds far more complicated than doing what they actually did, which was slap a different name on it. The publicity tour would have been a never-ending explanation of what fans AREN'T getting rather than a celebration of the music itself.
What they should have done, but didn't have the courage to because of financial considerations, is given Stevie the ultimatum. They could have called it a Fleetwood Mac album then. The reason they didn't is why kicking Lindsey out over "scheduling conflicts" is so infuriating. One member refuses to record, the other asks for a delay (if you buy the company line). To
a band, one of these objections seems like a much bigger deal than the other. (Not to mention the fact that Lindsey was likely fine with keeping the schedule and sprinkling in solo dates, but that's a digression.)
And therein lies the sad truth about the band that we all love... for some of the members, it stopped being about the music a long time ago.