Former Beatle Paul McCartney

[andy-hughes]

Why do the media always refer to Paul Mccartney as 'Former Beatle Paul McCartney' as though there might be some confusion with some other Paul McCartney.

I would guess that anyone who is remotely interestested in Mr M will be fully aware that he was once a Beatle, and those that don't will not be interested anyway.

Interestingly, Bob Geldof is never tagged 'Former Boomtown Rat Bob Geldof' and Lionel Ritchie is never called 'Former Commadore Lionel Ritche', and Tina Turner doesn't appear to be narrowed down from other Tina Turner with the addition of 'Formerly of Ike and Tina Turner' and I would suggest that Paul McCartney is a bigger musical icon and star than the rest put together.

Any thoughts?

[sasskins]

Maybe it's to remind people.

[Smowball]

Good point Andy, I dont know what they do that either. ( from former single woman smowball!)

[Mick-Talbot]

Yeah but what about Prince ?

[ladybirder]

Lazy journalism?

[Ann]

It does seem silly Andy - well spotted, I had never thought of it before. There is, and will only be, ONE Paul McCartney for his music.............

[murraymints]

there's a whole generation..or two..who have no idea who Macca is..let alone the significant contribution to the evolvement of music that he made in/with the Beatles...

[Zeuhl]

Once a Beatle, always a Beatle.

They were a phenomonomonon

[snags]

''Yeah but what about Prince ?''

Naseem Hamed... the boxer?

;-p

[jno]

While kids may have heard of the Beatles, it's quite possible they don't know straight off who the members were. It's been more than 40 years.

Whereas they definitely won't have heard of the Boomtown Rats, so identifying anyone that way would be pointless.

[maggiebee]

Agree murraymints, but if they have no idea who Macca is then they probably don't know who The Beatles are either.

[gingejbee]

I'm surprised they didn't mention his age and number of marriages in the same sentence.

[Ann]

<I'm surprised they didn't mention his age and number of marriages in the same sentence>
And also the value of his house! Thats what they usually put in newspaper articles ....

[Zeuhl]

It defines Ringo more appropriately.

Sir Paul has tried so hard subsequently to supercede it - it must p*** him off L O L

[sunny-dave]

It's from the same lazy journalism that produces headlines along the lines of "Mum dies in accident" "Grandad is fire hero" "Third Cousin Twice Removed wins lotto" ....

... as if the main defining attribute of all these people is their relationship to other people, who we don't know either

[jno]

how else would you describe him? "Rock star Paul McCartney" is hardly enough; it'd put him on a par with "rock star Jon Bon Jovi", which he certainly isn't. You describe people by their most significant characteristic, and that's Beatle membership. (Same for Ringo.)

Alternatively, you could not describe him at all; but that's a bit of a non-starter for the media, who need to explain exactly why the story they're telling you is important, This means identifying the people in it.

[andy-hughes]

jno - then why not 'formerly of Sonny and Cher' Cher then? The list goes on, and I maintain, when you have been as big a music and cultural figure as Paul McCartney has been, and continues to be, the world knows exactly who he is if they are interested in reading further than the headline, and not at all bothered if they don't - so my point stands I think.

[The Builder]

Andy, I guess a lot of journalists are given The Concise Encyclopaedia of Clichés for Christmas. Prices always soar or plummet. They never seem to "go up a bit" or "go down a bit". Rivers always "burst their banks", never just overflowing.
My favourite gripe is when they refer to Paul McCartney (69). I've just driven home (46) in my van (8), to go on my computer (3). Then I shall read The Times (12 hours) and have lunch (best before next Tuesday). ;o)

[weecalf]

Maybe its because the beatles were counted as talented so if a former member is going to be introduced then we can expect a talented singer. Dissappointment springs to mind.

[NOX]

Seems from your list to occur when someone is past their sell by.
You wouldn't mention Sonny and Cher when referring to Cher but you would mention the Beatles when referring to Paul MaCartney because Cher was bigger AFTER her alliance with Sonny Bono as a solo artist and Paul McCArtney after he left the Beatles was just a lingering nonentity.

[jackthehat]

Perhaps it's just in case anyone remembers 'We all stand together/The Frog Chorus'............?