Cut Ed Sheeran the slack he deserves & get the facts straight

Ed Sheeran learned an expensive lesson recently.

Silence allows somebody else to write your story.

Macklemore was removed from the remaining U.S. dates of Sheeran's Loop Tour after performing pro-Palestinian material and saying “Free Palestine” during his September 4 and 5 appearances at MetLife Stadium.

Almost immediately, the internet did what the internet does: Blame Ed Sheeran because he's the easiest target..

There's only one problem with that. For those who listened and paid attention, Sheeran spoke up and noted that having Macklemore tossed wasn't his call.

According to Messina Touring Group, the promoter of the tour, venues told them they would not allow concerts with Macklemore on the lineup. Messina said keeping him could have resulted in cancellation of the tour and affected hundreds of thousands of fans, and of course, would have cost them millions of dollars in profit.

Macklemore was therefore removed from the remaining support dates, and Sheeran was caught in the middle.

He struck a chorus of sour notes by choosing to remain either silent or keep any reaction toned-down to the point no one was actually listening. He also pulled one of the more notable gaffes many people do in such situations.

He waited.

Oh, Ed. If only you had my phone number

By the time he explained what happened, the narrative had already hardened: Ed Sheeran is the one who got rid of Macklemore.

Once again, social media warriors get it all wrong. The available evidence didn't' support something so simple, adn we know a good conspiracy or misinformation session is never quiet.

Sheeran later said he had spoken with Robert Kraft and other venues, trying to build a bridge and working with the promoter and activists on both sides. But to no avail. The venue and promoter's decision was final.

We'll get to the person who made the hard call at Gillette Stadium. Believe that.

Then, at his Philadelphia concert, Sheeran finally gave the explanation many people had been waiting for.

I mean, it was an excellent speech, despite the fact he was reading it from a teleprompter. It could have used a bit more sincerity and emanating from the heart, but it was necessary save for one tiny issue.

It was too late, and that's the frustrating part. He could have started there.

Sheeran didn't need to make a political declaration, defend every or any position Macklemore holds. Let's be honest and not stray from the fact Macklemore has already show an ugly side when it comes to respect for Jewish people.

Sheeran simply needed to say immediately: “This wasn't my decision. I'm trying to find a solution.”

That is perfect narrative control. Get the facts out before the internet fills the vacuum.

Which brings me to the aforementioned guy who actually made the call on Macklemore and started this mess.

Robert Kraft, the owner of Gillette Stadium in Massachusetts and owner of the NFL's New England Patriots.

That's his house. He has the authority to decide who performs there.

Which despite some of the least informed bellowed about, that's not censorship in the constitutional sense. A private venue owner is not the government, and the First Amendment does not require a private stadium to host every performer who wants the stage.

But power doesn't disappear simply because its exercise is legal.

Kraft said Macklemore's recent actions, along with what he described as a broader history of antisemitic rhetoric and imagery, crossed a line for him and Gillette Stadium. That history includes Macklemore's infamous 2014 costume that was widely criticized as invoking antisemitic stereotypes, and it was shockingly offensive.

Macklemore apologized at the time, but the image lingers forever. So does the controversy and the fact he made the decision to wear it in the first place.

So Kraft is entitled to his position. Macklemore is entitled to his. And the audience is entitled to judge both.

Here's where the story becomes interesting.

What happens when the power of the venue begins determining what an artist can say on the stage?

We've now opened up a huge chasm of issues.

Macklemore chose his narrative, he knew exactly what he was doing when he made his comment about Palestine. He,s made Palestinian advocacy part of his public identity for quite some time. He performed “Hind's Hall,” a pro-Palestinian protest song that supports college student demonstrations and calls for a ceasefire in the Gaza war. He spoke about Gaza and repeatedly used his platform to say “Free Palestine.” He subsequently pledged $1 million of his tour earnings to Palestinian relief organizations.

He chose his narrative, and he gets to choose it. Without apology and hopefully understanding the consequences.

Which brings us to a hard and fast rule of "Control the Narrative":You have the right to choose your narrative. You do not have the right to choose the consequences.

Macklemore exercised his right to speak.Kraft exercised his authority over his venue. The promoter made a business decision after venues said they would not host Macklemore.

And Macklemore now lives with the consequences of what he chose to say.

That's how a free society is supposed to work.

As for those who screech, "YOU'RE A PERFORMER, SO JUST SHUT UP AND RAP ALREADY!"

Really?

Have we forgotten American music history?

Country Joe McDonald and the Fish weren't exactly singing lullabies about Vietnam.

At Woodstock in 1969, McDonald performed the anti-war “I-Feel-Like-I'm-Fixin'-to-Die Rag” and led the infamous crowd “Fish Cheer,” which had evolved into an obscenity-laced protest against the Vietnam War. His activism had consequences: a planned Ed Sullivan Show appearance was canceled, and he was later arrested and fined over the cheer.

The list of those who used their art to make a political statement is long and distinguished.

Joan Baez. Bob Dylan. Marvin Gaye. Bruce Springsteen. Neil Young. Billie Holiday. Public Enemy. Kendrick Lamar. Sam Cooke. The Isley Brothers. Helen Reddy. Buffalo Springfield. U2. John Lennon. I could go on for hours.

Music has never existed in a vacuum. Artists have used songs and stages to challenge presidents, wars, racism, injustice and governments for generations, and sometimes we celebrate those artists precisely because they refused to shut up.

You don't have to agree with Macklemore, buy his music, attend his concerts, or support his politics.

But “shut up and sing” isn't some sacred American principle. It is the opposite of the tradition of protest that helped define American music.

Which brings me to close with "Control the Narrative"in this case, something everyone should use.

Sheeran didn't control the narrative because he waited. He let someone else control it for him.

Macklemore did control his narrative, deliberately and loudly, and then backed it up.

Kraft controlled his venue, taking a stand for what he believed was wrong.

Messina controlled the tour decision, allegedly for the fans b ut also for the money.

And the internet controlled the first version of the story because everyone jumped into the

argument before anyone had all the facts.

That's the real lesson: Control your narrative before someone else controls it for you.

But understand that you don't get to control everybody else's narrative.

Macklemore gets to speak. Kraft gets to object. Sheeran gets to explain. Venues get to make business decisions. Fans get to walk away or stay, and the public gets to decide what it thinks about all of them.

That's the deal.

Say what you believe. Stand behind it. Understand the consequences.

And when somebody tells your story for you, speak up before that story become the truth everyone will remember.

Be dangerously intelligent. Stay ahead of the game. "That's Control the Narrative™".