We did not give generously at Live Aid!
The 25th anniversary of Live Aid is being used as an example of how generous people can be in supporting good causes. Nonsense: the concerts were all about commerce, not charity – self interest rather than selfless philanthropy.
Sir Bob Geldoff’s musical extravaganzas in London and Philadelphia in July 1985 are being used as a model of grass-roots aid for global causes – the spirit that Britain’s new prime minister is trying to tap for his Big Society. But the people who crammed into Wembley and the JFK stadium gave nothing – they bought tickets to see some of the best acts of the day.
The £25 entry fee allowed concert goers to hear Jagger, Bowie, McCartney, Queen, U2 and many more – including Sir Bob’s own Boomtown Rats. But the decision was a commercial transaction: no-one who hated the music went simply to give money for the starving in Ethiopia – no-one paid more than they thought the event was worth simply to help charity. Indeed, for such a hit parade, the price was cheap: people got more than they paid for.
The generosity came from the artists not the audience, assuming all the entertainers performed for nothing. But while top artists can command enormous fees for an appearance, the marginal costs of performing are very low – almost the opportunity cost of giving up a hot afternoon.
And the cache of being on that list of performers was high: many middling groups would have paid to be included. Not only did it improve the reputations of those who did generously give their services, it improved their record sales because of the global television exposure. Sir Bob got his knighthood.
Including all the ticket sales, TV rights, donations and other sources of funds, Live Aid is reckoned to have raised £150m. The audience benefited from attending a once-in-a-lifetime event, the artists benefited from association with it and Ethiopia gained financially and through a raised profile to generate further aid.
So everyone won. But it is a mistake to say the generous public put its hands in its pockets to alleviate famine. Many of those attending may have known little and cared less for the plight of the starving Ethiopians. The public bought tickets to see a line up of artists for which they would have paid anyway. So while Live Aid’s anniversary is worth celebrating, it is not a model that proves there is an inherent pool of generosity waiting to be tapped by a new generation of politicians and lobbyists.
