The hypocrisy of Glastonbury: A story told through their posters
Glastonbury Festival has finally come to an end, which means that the radio can go back to normal and annoying DJs can stop talking about its unexplainable “aura” and “vibe”. (A quick note to BBC Radio 6, if something is unexplainable, stop trying to explain it). However, while the festival itself might be over, the conversation surrounding it certainly isn’t, as this year’s Glastonbury might have proven to be its most controversial yet.
If you don’t already know, which is unlikely, the sets of Bob Vylan and Kneecap have been laced with controversy. The two led pro-Palestinian chants and made statements about the British government’s failure to acknowledge the genocide in Gaza. One of the chants led by Bob Vylan, which has particularly caught people’s attention, is “Death to the IDF”.
Glastonbury festival wasted no time in condemning the chant, taking to social media in a bid to scathe the punk duo and their proclamations. “Glastonbury Festival was created in 1970 as a place for people to come together and rejoice in music, the arts and the best of human endeavour,” the festival wrote, “As a festival, we stand against all forms of war and terrorism. We will always believe in—and actively campaign for—hope, unity, peace and love.”
They continued, saying that they have 4,000 performers over the weekend, and that it is inevitable that with that many people, there will be some acts with political opinions that don’t align with their own. While they accept this, they said they did not condone Bob Vylan’s chant and disclosed that the duo had crossed a line with it.
“We are appalled by the statements made from the West Holts stage by Bob Vylan yesterday,” they said, “Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the Festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.”
2025 is the first year Glastonbury has ever interfered with the politics of their acts. Not only have they spoken out against what Bob Vylan said, but they also allowed Kneecap’s set not to be livestreamed, instead only showing replays of their performance with large sections cut. The statement they posted above about Vylan’s set seemed to be their attempt to remain on the right side of history, while also being apolitical. It felt odd and was naturally met with a great deal of backlash.
So, you are left with two camps: one who are outraged by what Bob Vylan said, and another saying that what they said isn’t what people should be talking about. The duo shared a statement on social media to this effect, saying that they are being used as scapegoats to distract from the main issues.
“Today, a good many people would have you believe a punk band is the number one threat to world peace,” they wrote, “Last week it was a Palestine pressure group, the week before that it was another band.”
They continued: “We are not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people. We are for the dismantling of a violent military machine. A machine whose own soldiers were told to use ‘unnecessary lethal force’ against innocent civilians waiting for aid. A machine that has destroyed much of Gaza.”
Speaking on being shoved into the spotlight, “We are a distraction from the story. And whatever sanctions we receive will be a distraction”.
“We are being targeted for speaking up. We are not the first. We will not be the last. And if you care for the sanctity of human life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up, too.”
Bob Vylan
There has been controversy surrounding the media’s coverage of the atrocities in Gaza for a while now. Gary Lineker came under fire when he, a BBC reporter who is supposed to remain impartial, spoke out against what was happening. “I know where I stand on this,” he said, “What’s going on there [Gaza], the mass murder of thousands of children is probably something we should have a little opinion on”.
Realistically, even with the controversy surrounding the punk rap duo, there hasn’t been any change in the debates surrounding the conflict in Gaza. One side is still calling for a ceasefire and is frustrated at the way it is being covered in the media.
Meanwhile, mainstream media continue to assert that they must remain impartial in the way that they report on these conflicts, which, in most cases, tends more towards trying to paint the aggressors in a neutral light or redefining antisemitism. That hasn’t changed; it’s just the focal point of the argument has shifted slightly, and it doesn’t appear that opinions have moved much in either direction on that front either.
What is news is Glastonbury’s involvement in the debate. The festival seems to be trying to keep both sides happy, leaning towards impartiality in a bid to side with their broadcasters, but also condemning war crimes in a bid to appeal to the artists that play the festival and the people that attend. The majority of people were furious with the festival’s decision to side against Bob Vylan, re-emphasising what the band themselves said, that they’re not the story and the organisers are missing the point.
The debate over Glastonbury’s comments and whether the festival has done enough (or anything) to highlight the atrocities going on in the Middle East will rage on. But something that seems to be particularly interesting is its hypocrisy compared to 2022, and its stance on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. While the festival seems unwilling to involve itself in global conflict this time around, it didn’t have a problem doing so when Russia invaded Ukraine, going so far as to release a Ukraine appeal poster that fans could buy for £25.
They also confirmed that the money raised from these posters would be sent to War Child’s Emergency Fund, which helps children caught up in the conflict in Ukraine. It seems strange that Glastonbury will not even mention Gaza in 2025, but was raising money for Ukraine in 2022.
The question remains: Is it pressure from their broadcaster that results in this hypocrisy? Or are the organisers merely ignorant towards these contradictions, possibly as a choice?
That same year, they released Free Press posters. There is potential for confusion here, as they may just be referring to free press images that are available, but if that’s the case, it’s unclear why they are charging for them. Free press in journalism refers to the expression through any form of media being free of government interference. It appears that Glastonbury cannot do this while they are governed by the BBC, as this prohibits them from upholding the expression of the artists performing at their festival.
Not only was Kneecap’s set edited, but the BBC themselves have confirmed they should have cut Bob Vylan’s set once the chant happened. “The BBC respects freedom of expression but stands firmly against incitement to violence,” they claimed, “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves. We welcome Glastonbury’s condemnation of the performance.”
There has been a debate raging about how well this conflict has been covered, and that debate rages on following Glastonbury. No one has changed sides, no one’s arguments have changed; they have just evolved slightly. What has changed is that this controversy has given us insight into what appears to be blatant hypocrisy by the festival’s end. The story is told through their own posters, as three years ago, they were happy to speak out about global conflicts and raise money for them, but now, they plant themselves firmly in the centre of impartiality.
