Ed Sheeran’s Macklemore dumping explanation worsens PR nightmare
A lengthy post blaming promoters for the dumping of Macklemore over pro-Palestine remarks at a concert appear to have backfired.
Singer Ed Sheeran’s attempt at damage control appears to have backfired as he faces outrage and a public relations nightmare following the removal of Macklemore from his US tour.
The singer-songwriter already faced intense criticism after Macklemore was dropped from the tour over his pro-Palestine remarks during a recent concert.
That criticism turned to outrage from some quarters late Tuesday after Sheeran published a lengthy post on Instagram in attempt to put his side of the situation and blaming the decision to drop Macklemore on his tour promoters.
New England Patriots NFL team owner Robert Kraft, a billionaire with a long history of donating to pro-Israel causes, took credit for blackballing Macklemore on Monday US time, describing the rapper’s Palestine tributes as “hate speech.”
In his post – which did not allow user comments – Sheeran confirmed that Kraft had indeed rallied other NFL stadium owners to give an ultimatum that their shows would be canceled unless Macklemore was dropped.
Sheeran said the decision ultimately did not belong to him, but to the Messina Touring Group.
You might like
“I spoke with the venues at length all week to try to build a bridge,” he said. “One of those people was Robert Kraft. I was also involved in direct talks with promoters, along with activists on both sides, to try to find a mutual resolution for all, but the venue’s and promoter’s decision was final.”
Sheeran’s statement came a day after Macklemore said he was kicked off the Loop Tour after exclaiming “Free Palestine!” during a September 5 concert at New Jersey’s MetLife Stadium while introducing his protest song Hind’s Hall.
Sheeran, who has not previously spoken publicly about the Israel-Palestine conflict, addressed criticism that he was effectively taking a side and offering tacit support to Israel by not speaking up, saying he was “not complicit”.
“I am appalled by the conflict between Israel and Palestine,” he said.
“The suffering and pain caused on both sides is a human tragedy. There are too many wars across the world causing immeasurable pain, none of which should be tolerated.”
Hours after Sheeran posted on social media about the situation and attributed the decision to the tour’s promoters, Irish acts Aaron Rowe and Beoga, the Danish band Lukas Graham, and Finneas posted on Instagram that they would withdraw from the tour in solidarity with Macklemore.
Stay informed, daily
In his own post on Monday addressing his removal from the tour, Macklemore said that his long-time friend Sheeran was put in “a f–ked up position” in which “his typical apolitical stance was being challenged in a way it never had been before”.
But critics argued that if there was anyone with the clout to take a stand against the censorious stadium owners, it would be Sheeran.
In a social media post, Will Menaker, a popular US left-wing podcaster, ridiculed Sheeran’s claim that canning Macklemore was “the promoter’s decision” rather than his own.
“Sheeran is a big enough artist that he could easily tell the promoters to go f–k themselves if he wanted to,” Menaker said, going on to describing the singer as a “lowlife coward whose music sounds exactly like he is”.
According to PollStar, Sheeran is the third-most-popular touring act of the 21st century by worldwide ticket sales through 2025, and he has regularly sold out NFL stadiums, grossing several million dollars per show.
Sheeran maintained that he had no personal views on the Gaza conflict and “just because I choose not to speak publicly doesn’t mean I don’t have them, and it doesn’t mean I don’t care”.
“There is a reason I do not use my professional platform for politics,” he said.
“My audience includes young people, often children, of all backgrounds. Those who come to my shows do not expect a political forum.
“I respect Macklemore’s strength of purpose to stand up and shout for what he believes. However, there is room for multiple approaches to the same end: Peace.”
Media and cultural critic Kaivan Shroff argued Sheeran was not actually acting apolitically as he claimed, but rather “letting a pro-Israel billionaire choose his politics for him”.
“Kraft imposed a political condition on his tour, and then Sheeran enforced it,” Shroff wrote.
“He did not remain above the dispute; he allowed the billionaire who owned the building to resolve it for him.”
Want to see more stories from InDaily Qld in your Google search results?
- Click here to set InDaily Qld as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "InDaily Qld". That's it.
