Absolutely. Also whether or not he is a hypocrite is up in the air - the post you responded to certainly didn't make that case with any merit (despite implying

Absolutely. Also whether or not he is a hypocrite is up in the air - the post you responded to certainly didn't make that case with any merit (despite implying it). David Gilmour's point is correct, and the other users is assuming he hasn't used his money to help upcoming artists (which is also irrelevant) while also unilaterally deciding that David Gilmour can't speak about anything without immediately ponying up with receipts because he has too much money. Call me crazy, but I'm for free speech without attaching a requirement that when you hit a certain monetary goal that your speech is no longer valid (even hypocritical) if you don't immediately and publicly give x% of your money to be counted as 'acceptable speech'. The fact this has to be said for something as uncontroversial as 'the music industry eats its own, and has gotten worse in recent years' is wildly preposterous.