Who controls the stage?

Reader note: first published September 16, 2026; updated September 21. It reflects the reporting linked below, rather than a settled outcome. Linked performance material may contain strong language and distressing imagery.

A concert performance can include more than songs. During his September 4 and 5 appearances supporting Ed Sheeran at MetLife Stadium, Macklemore combined music with Palestinian advocacy and projected imagery. Reporting describes his performance of Hind’s Hall, a protest song connected to the student occupation at Columbia University, alongside images of destruction in Gaza. We have not reviewed complete recordings of both sets. Rolling Stone’s account of the performances and removal.

What is established: On September 14, Messina Touring Group announced that Macklemore would not perform his remaining support dates on the U.S. Loop Tour. In a statement supplied to Rolling Stone, the promoter said upcoming venues would not allow concerts with him on the lineup. That confirms the promoter’s decision and its stated reason. The individual venue communications have not been independently examined here.

The explanations differ: Macklemore attributes the removal to pressure over his Palestinian advocacy. Robert Kraft’s statement about Gillette Stadium cites material presented in New Jersey and what he characterizes as a broader history of antisemitic rhetoric and imagery. Kraft says the decision does not reject advocacy for Palestinian civilians. Macklemore disputes the antisemitism characterization. These are the parties’ positions; describing them does not settle the dispute over the performance. ABC’s reporting includes both accounts.

On September 15, Sheeran said the promoter made the removal decision and held Macklemore’s contract. He described unsuccessful discussions with venues and others, and said continuing the tour reflected obligations to fans and people working on it. His statement helps explain his position; the contract and complete decision process remain outside the evidence reviewed here. Read Sheeran’s statement as reproduced by Variety.

Artists withdrawing: Aaron Rowe, Lukas Graham, Finneas, and Beoga withdrew from different parts of the tour. ABC Australia’s September 16 report, credited to AP and Reuters, identifies Rowe and Lukas Graham as intended replacements on the remaining U.S. dates. Finneas had been scheduled for South America, while Beoga had been joining Sheeran for several songs during his main set. These voluntary withdrawals are distinct from Macklemore’s removal. Our account relies on reporting; the original Instagram posts were not accessible for this review. Read the account of the artists’ roles.

There is also an organized call for further action. In a September 14 statement and September 15 response, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) urges Sheeran to reinvite Macklemore or cancel the U.S. tour, and calls for a boycott in the meantime. This is the organization’s demand, not confirmation of a cancellation. We have not established that its appeal prompted the individual artists’ decisions. Read PACBI’s statement.

Beyond the stage: The dispute also affected radio access. Ireland’s Classic Hits Radio announced that it would remove Sheeran’s music from its playlist starting September 17. In the explanation reproduced by ITV, the station cites listener reactions and solidarity with the Irish artists who withdrew, and says the decision is not a personal judgment on Sheeran. This is a decision by one broadcaster, not evidence of a wider radio ban. Read the station’s own announcement.

On September 16, Macklemore announced that he would donate his $1 million in net tour earnings to six organizations supporting Palestinians and invited Kraft to match it. Kraft subsequently said Sheeran had already asked him to commit $2 million to match Sheeran’s donation for humanitarian aid in the region. These accounts come from statements reproduced in reporting; the original social posts were inaccessible in this review, and we have not independently verified payment or receipt. The announcements do not resolve the dispute over access to the stage. ITV’s account of the statements.

In a September 16 report, Philadelphia station 6abc says that CAIR Philadelphia filed a public-records request about the decision to exclude Macklemore from the Philadelphia concert. We have not reviewed the request or any response; its filing is not proof of who made the decision. Read 6abc’s local reporting.

Billy Penn at WHYY reported plans for a protest outside the September 19 concert. Its September 17 account also describes ticket holders who said the venue had begun issuing refunds after they objected to the lineup change. These individual accounts do not establish a general refund policy or eligibility for every purchaser. Read Billy Penn’s reporting.

The Philadelphia performance: The September 19 concert began. AP reports that Sheeran opened with remarks describing the situation in Gaza as “catastrophic and unjustifiable,” while saying he wanted his shows to emphasize unity and humanity rather than politics. This account relies on AP’s reporting, not our review of a complete recording. It establishes that the performance started, not how the entire evening concluded. Read AP’s report.

The planned demonstration also became an actual gathering: The Philadelphia Inquirer reported protesters assembling near the stadium before the show. That is distinct from evidence that the concert was prevented from proceeding. Read the local report. Neither development resolves the outstanding questions about Macklemore’s removal or reinstates the withdrawn artists.

Fuller reporting on Sheeran’s September 19 remarks adds an important point about control of the stage. In the speech reproduced by Variety, he expressed concern about venues approving performance content in advance, acknowledged making mistakes and apologized. He also explained that commitments to his audience were why he was continuing the tour. These are his stated concerns and explanation; they do not establish the contractual powers or decisions of each venue. We have not independently reviewed a complete recording of the speech. Read Variety’s fuller account.

What remains unresolved: We need the complete performance context, the terms governing the booking, and each venue’s account of its involvement. Rolling Stone also reports differing stadium ownership arrangements, including public ownership. That calls for checking ownership, operation, and decision authority separately before drawing conclusions about governmental involvement or legal responsibility.

The immediate question is concrete: how did objections to a performance become conditions on where an artist could appear? A further question is whether other performers change what they say or make after seeing this outcome. The first has a documented decision to investigate. The second requires evidence beyond an assumption that everyone will feel its consequences.

A question to carry forward: What should an audience be able to learn about the decisions that change the performance it was expecting to encounter?

Have a correction, additional evidence, or a response to this story? Write to the editor. Please include the article title and relevant sources.