OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Macklemore dropped from Ed Sheeran tour over pro-Palestine comments

30 sources · updated 2026-09-17
Left 47% Center 17% Right 37%
14 left · 5 center · 11 right

What happened

In early September 2026, rapper Macklemore opened for Ed Sheeran's Loop Tour at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, telling the crowd a reason he joined was to say 'Free Palestine,' then performing his song 'Hind's Hall' as images of Gaza appeared on the video board; he added that criticism of Israel and 'being against genocide in no way is a criticism of' Jewish people. On September 14, promoter Messina Touring Group said Macklemore would not perform remaining U.S. dates after venues notified it they would 'not allow a concert to take place with Macklemore on the lineup,' which it said would otherwise cancel the tour and affect hundreds of thousands of fans. Macklemore alleged that New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft told Sheeran he could not perform at Gillette Stadium and had rallied other stadium owners to the same ultimatum; Kraft confirmed he barred Macklemore from Gillette, citing 'recent actions,' material from the New Jersey shows, and 'a broader history of antisemitic rhetoric and imagery'—coverage linked that history in part to a 2014 appearance in which Macklemore wore a hooked prosthetic nose, wig, and fake beard, a look he said was not intended as a Jewish stereotype and later apologized for—and stating the venue would not 'provide a platform for hate speech.' On September 15, Sheeran said the promoter, not he, made the decision after he spent a week trying to 'build a bridge' with venues including Kraft, that Macklemore's contract was with the promoter, and that people who attend his shows 'do not expect a political forum.' Supporting acts Finneas, Aaron Rowe, and Lukas Graham and Sheeran's backing band Beoga then withdrew from the tour; Macklemore said he would donate his entire $1 million net earnings from the tour to six Palestinian aid organizations and invited Kraft to match it, and Kraft said Sheeran had already asked him to commit $2 million to match Sheeran's own donation for aid in the region.
Sourcing check · Mostly on the record · 30 articles

20 of 27 articles cite a named source for the story. It started with unnamed sources; a named source appeared 2 hours later.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 20 of 27
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Ed Sheeran, Messina Touring Group, Finneas, Aaron Rowe, Beoga and Macklemore
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 3 of 27
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: social media post, market data, social media posts, statement
Credits another outlet 1 of 27
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: AFP
Unnamed sources 0 of 27
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Sep 15, 13:03 UTC by NBC News, with no named source. First named source 2 hours later, from NBC News. First document 3 hours later, from ABC News (social media post).
Not counted 3
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Right-leaning coverage omits the clarification Macklemore delivered to the MetLife crowd the night after the first controversy, stating that criticism of Israel is not a criticism of Jewish people. Left-leaning coverage reports that disclaimer in the same pieces that carry Kraft's charge of antisemitic rhetoric, so the dispute stays on the page. Right-leaning write-ups skip the disclaimer and move on as if the antisemitism question were already closed. Missing that sentence, the ouster reads as a venue blocking hate speech rather than a fight over whether the speech was hate. Left-leaning coverage names the MetLife set "pro-Palestine remarks." Right-leaning coverage calls that performance "anti-Israel rants." NBC News puts that first label in a headline about celebrities backing the rapper. The New York Post uses the second label to explain why he was yanked from the tour. Which owners besides Kraft put the cancellation threat in writing, and what footage or words did they say had crossed the line?
Bottom line

You can read Daily Wire on the ouster and finish convinced Macklemore is an antisemite, because those stories never include his MetLife line that criticizing Israel is not criticizing Jews.

The receipts — 1 fact one side's coverage lacks
  • Michael Rapaport posted a video celebrating the ouster and calling the Gaza genocide fake individual casein Fox News · absent from left-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning coverage presents the ouster as stadium owners, led by Kraft, using an economic ultimatum to silence Palestinian advocacy rather than as a routine booking dispute. Sources treat the MetLife remarks as speaking against mass killing of Palestinian civilians, citing a United Nations commission's finding last year that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza—Israeli officials called those findings 'distorted and false'—and quote Macklemore that if his words were 'more offensive than the tens of thousands of Palestinian children being killed by Israel, then there was a fundamental disconnect.' The walkouts are framed as artists refusing a chilling precedent: Finneas wrote that 'Artists must not be silenced when they speak up for the oppressed'; Rowe said he could not let 'billionaires... silence the rightful voices' against 'Israeli genocide'; Beoga blamed 'the zionist lobby.' Lawmakers including Jayapal and Omar, and figures such as Ms. Rachel, Thunberg, and Hadid, are cited backing Macklemore; Hill contrasted a stadium welcoming Ye after a song titled 'Heil Hitler' with barring a performer who said 'Free Palestine.' Ms. Rachel wrote that Sheeran 'caved to people who refuse to accept what the world knows,' and Macklemore's $1 million pledge is presented as returning the story to Palestinian lives.
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage presents the MetLife remarks as anti-Israel rants and antisemitic hate speech that private venues could refuse to host. Outlets highlight Kraft's statement that Macklemore 'crossed that line,' the 2014 costume, and Pink's response that he 'took the mic to tell all of the Jews in the stadium that it wasn't about them' and that it 'scared me, and it scared people I love.' Sheeran is described as correctly keeping politics off a family-oriented stage and as having tried to 'build a bridge' before the promoter acted under venue threats; headlines cast the walkouts as every band 'rage quit[ting] to back [an] antisemite' and as an 'anti-Israel mob' attempting to shame Sheeran into canceling. Rapaport celebrated the removal and called Macklemore's claims of genocide, occupation, and apartheid 'fake'; Kraft is quoted that advocacy 'should not come at the expense of the Jewish community or obscure the responsibility of Hamas,' a designated terrorist organization, and that Macklemore was 'only sharing selective information.'
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest argument is that a handful of stadium owners imposed a commercial veto on political speech about Palestinian civilian deaths, evidenced by the promoter's warning that keeping Macklemore would cancel shows for hundreds of thousands of fans and by fellow acts quitting rather than accept that condition—while Hill's contrast with Ye underscored an alleged double standard. The right's strongest argument is that venues may exclude speech they judge antisemitic, evidenced by Kraft's stated mix of the New Jersey presentation, the 2014 imagery, and omission of Hamas, and by Pink's first-person account that the stadium remarks frightened Jews in the audience. The central unresolved tension is whether onstage 'Free Palestine' advocacy and images of Gaza constitute political speech that concentrated venue power should not suppress, or hate speech that private operators may refuse to platform—and which party on a tour (owner, promoter, headliner, or opener) has the effective right to decide.

30 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.