Moment of reckoning for ‘Mr Nice Guy’ of music, who embraced Macklemore’s political cred only for pro-Palestine rapper to be dropped under pressure from billionaire
claiming Robert Kraft – owner of the New England Patriots – had pressured Sheeran by threatening to pull his stadium from the tour dates and urging other venues to do the same. Sheeran’s team confirmed multiple venues had objected to Macklemore staying on the bill
“The stakes for him would have been very, very high,” said Dorian Lynskey, the author of 33 Revolutions Per Minute: A History of Protest Songs. “Taking a stand meant potentially cancelling the rest of your tour, with all the refunds, people who work on the tour losing their work. It’s an enormous thing.”
Bragg also acknowledged the practical realities. “Undoubtedly Ed has contractual obligations, and he’d get sued and it would cost him money,” he said. “I can understand it.” But he believes Sheeran could have drawn a cleaner line between defending Macklemore’s right to speak and endorsing every word of it.
“He doesn’t have to come out and say ‘free Palestine’. Put purely on the grounds of free speech, he can say an artist must be able to express their view. He needs to let people know how he feels about billionaires deciding what can and can’t be said from a stage,” he said.
This thread is completely lacking nuance (as expected). The nuance isn’t about whether there’s a genocide (there obviously is) but rather what is expected of Ed Sheeran in this situation. You could make an argument that Sheeran taking a stance is worth the lost revenue/jobs, it’s just not as clear cut as people are making it out to be.
I mean, presumably Sheeran signed a contract with these venues and promoters with everyone knowing Macklemore was on the bill. I dunno why Sheeran would necessarily be going down for violation of contract here…
He could have just said “if you don’t want us to perform as planned then talk to my lawyers”
Maybe mentionning the words colonized, occupied and genocided and not acting like October 7 was an attack on Jews and not pretend it is where history started
There isn’t really any nuance, here. Ed Sheeran is absolutely zero danger, here, it’s not like he’s deep in poverty and has to weigh the morality of being a Walmart security guard against feeding his family. Bro just has to go “you are mad about someone speaking out against obvious genocide and I will not be attaching my name to yours.”
He literally just has to go “ok, fuck you then” and go home. Everyone else did, he’s just a huge loser.
Are you saying Ed Sheeran is evil? Because that seems extreme. All he did was not say publicly he is against the genocide. It’s fucked up, but not evil. Otherwise most of the population is evil.
Wait a second. That’s all he did? Nonsense. The whole story exists because he booted Macklemore… Turns out he was slightly active in supporting genocide.
He became evil when he did the bidding of a Pro-genocide billionaire. He had the resources to say “Fuck you” and walk while paying off all the crews for the remainder of his tour when he was told to remove an anti-genocide artist from his tour and he didn’t.
When the wealthy and powerful are cowards in the face of evil, they’re part of the evil.
He would be fine. He could never perform again and still never have to work. However, those concerts provide a lot of jobs. The tour getting canceled impacts the livelihood of many more than him. People would be out jobs, and genocide would still be happening.
Across the span of a tour, it could easily be $100-$150 million in salaries for all the job, possibly much more. He could afford to pay those salaries once (if he could magically make his net worth liquid), but if the possibility of future tours was canceled as well, there would be more opportunity cost.
To be clear, if he truly cared abput people he wouldn’t be as rich as he is. My opinion is that he should have taken a stance. But I am saying it really isn’t as clear cut. Regular people’s lives would absolutely be impacted, especially as the economy further declines.
This thread is completely lacking nuance (as expected). The nuance isn’t about whether there’s a genocide (there obviously is) but rather what is expected of Ed Sheeran in this situation. You could make an argument that Sheeran taking a stance is worth the lost revenue/jobs, it’s just not as clear cut as people are making it out to be.
I mean, presumably Sheeran signed a contract with these venues and promoters with everyone knowing Macklemore was on the bill. I dunno why Sheeran would necessarily be going down for violation of contract here…
He could have just said “if you don’t want us to perform as planned then talk to my lawyers”
Maybe mentionning the words colonized, occupied and genocided and not acting like October 7 was an attack on Jews and not pretend it is where history started
There isn’t really any nuance, here. Ed Sheeran is absolutely zero danger, here, it’s not like he’s deep in poverty and has to weigh the morality of being a Walmart security guard against feeding his family. Bro just has to go “you are mad about someone speaking out against obvious genocide and I will not be attaching my name to yours.”
He literally just has to go “ok, fuck you then” and go home. Everyone else did, he’s just a huge loser.
A rich person can’t be bought. If they do something evil, they’re doing it for love of the game.
Are you saying Ed Sheeran is evil? Because that seems extreme. All he did was not say publicly he is against the genocide. It’s fucked up, but not evil. Otherwise most of the population is evil.
Wait a second. That’s all he did? Nonsense. The whole story exists because he booted Macklemore… Turns out he was slightly active in supporting genocide.
He became evil when he did the bidding of a Pro-genocide billionaire. He had the resources to say “Fuck you” and walk while paying off all the crews for the remainder of his tour when he was told to remove an anti-genocide artist from his tour and he didn’t.
When the wealthy and powerful are cowards in the face of evil, they’re part of the evil.
He would be fine. He could never perform again and still never have to work. However, those concerts provide a lot of jobs. The tour getting canceled impacts the livelihood of many more than him. People would be out jobs, and genocide would still be happening.
That’s a really flimsy argument, though. He could pay them, and not even notice. It would be church change to him.
Across the span of a tour, it could easily be $100-$150 million in salaries for all the job, possibly much more. He could afford to pay those salaries once (if he could magically make his net worth liquid), but if the possibility of future tours was canceled as well, there would be more opportunity cost.
To be clear, if he truly cared abput people he wouldn’t be as rich as he is. My opinion is that he should have taken a stance. But I am saying it really isn’t as clear cut. Regular people’s lives would absolutely be impacted, especially as the economy further declines.