Headliners 2023

[FloorFiller]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

There’s an argument to be made that if diversity is one of their big aims then they should look to book a diverse set of headliners regardless of the circumstances instead of falling down on that when the original plans go awry and regardless of what male bands might be available. So in this case they could’ve passed on AM because the others are more iconic to book a female act.

Yes GFL are a business but they are a very fortunate one with a very dedicated, passionate fan base that will sell out the event pretty much regardless so in my view they should feel able to go with making these changes which then hopefully starts to set precedents for the industry. 

You’re totally missing out on the fact that the original trio was AM, Taylor and Elton, and then Taylor dropped out and was replaced with GnR, so not booking AM was never an option as the original trio ticked the right boxes. They COULD have bumped Lizzo up from her Taylor sub slot and weakened the lineup in the name of diversity, but instead they decided to keep her as a sub and book another huge stadium act above her. 

[Ozanne]

4 minutes ago, FloorFiller said:

You’re totally missing out on the fact that the original trio was AM, Taylor and Elton, and then Taylor dropped out and was replaced with GnR, so not booking AM was never an option as the original trio ticked the right boxes. They COULD have bumped Lizzo up from her Taylor sub slot and weakened the lineup in the name of diversity, but instead they decided to keep her as a sub and book another huge stadium act above her. 

Then if diversity is a big aim for the festival they could change things around and promote an act that achieves that. Which is my original point was that it was odd Emily seemed to pass the responsibility onto the industry. 

[Suprefan]

4 minutes ago, FloorFiller said:

You’re totally missing out on the fact that the original trio was AM, Taylor and Elton, and then Taylor dropped out and was replaced with GnR, so not booking AM was never an option as the original trio ticked the right boxes. They COULD have bumped Lizzo up from her Taylor sub slot and weakened the lineup in the name of diversity, but instead they decided to keep her as a sub and book another huge stadium act above her. 

Or bump Lizzo and use your extra resources to find somebody else. But likely they chose to  tick off a Michael bucket list act. Since Emily wrote Elton a letter begging him to play, Michael had a chat with Axl and sorted it out over a pint.

[FloorFiller]

5 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Then if diversity is a big aim for the festival they could change things around and promote an act that achieves that. Which is my original point was that it was odd Emily seemed to pass the responsibility onto the industry. 

When you lose a stadium headliner and Guns N Roses, another stadium headliner, come along and offer to step in in what will probably be your only chance of booking them, you don’t turn around and say ‘no sorry, we’re gonna bump Lizzo up instead’. Like has been said, Emily never said anything about there needing to be a female headliner, just that the lineup overall would be as diverse as possible, which it is. And we’re getting two female headliners next year. And the year after that, possibly all male again, or all female, but more than anything, the biggest and best headliner trio they can feasibly book. 

[Suprefan]

15 minutes ago, FloorFiller said:

When you lose a stadium headliner and Guns N Roses, another stadium headliner, come along and offer to step in in what will probably be your only chance of booking them, you don’t turn around and say ‘no sorry, we’re gonna bump Lizzo up instead’. Like has been said, Emily never said anything about there needing to be a female headliner, just that the lineup overall would be as diverse as possible, which it is. And we’re getting two female headliners next year. And the year after that, possibly all male again, or all female, but more than anything, the biggest and best headliner trio they can feasibly book. 

But watch when its only 1 cause something happened. Then Emily is going to have to explain all of that in another interview on how she was outbid or plans changed with female artist X and then its like The 1975 cause they were just knocking about.

 

Emily expressing disappointment is one thing when the desired result didnt pan out, but then lashing out because you got the rug pulled out from under you is another thing altogether. Maybe she has just had it with the big promoters who clearly have more resources and such just taking some of the talent away and its hit this sort of breaking point. 

[Zoo Music Girl]

5 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

But watch when its only 1 cause something happened. Then Emily is going to have to explain all of that in another interview on how she was outbid or plans changed with female artist X and then its like The 1975 cause they were just knocking about.

 

Emily expressing disappointment is one thing when the desired result didnt pan out, but then lashing out because you got the rug pulled out from under you is another thing altogether. Maybe she has just had it with the big promoters who clearly have more resources and such just taking some of the talent away and its hit this sort of breaking point. 

Where has she lashed out?

[sisco]

6 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

But watch when its only 1 cause something happened. Then Emily is going to have to explain all of that in another interview on how she was outbid or plans changed with female artist X and then its like The 1975 cause they were just knocking about.

 

Emily expressing disappointment is one thing when the desired result didnt pan out, but then lashing out because you got the rug pulled out from under you is another thing altogether. Maybe she has just had it with the big promoters who clearly have more resources and such just taking some of the talent away and its hit this sort of breaking point. 

Go on… say the name, say it…..

[FloorFiller]

8 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

But watch when its only 1 cause something happened. Then Emily is going to have to explain all of that in another interview on how she was outbid or plans changed with female artist X and then its like The 1975 cause they were just knocking about.

 

Emily expressing disappointment is one thing when the desired result didnt pan out, but then lashing out because you got the rug pulled out from under you is another thing altogether. Maybe she has just had it with the big promoters who clearly have more resources and such just taking some of the talent away and its hit this sort of breaking point. 

I doubt many people outside of our internet bubble of obsessives will bat an eyelid when/if there’s only one female headliner next year. We all know things change with this kind of stuff, but what’s most important is that she’s actively trying to make a difference, even if it sometimes doesn’t pan out the way she hoped. Losing Taylor is a fucker, but hardly Emily’s fault that her touring plans changed, and I just hope Taylor has merely delayed her Glastonbury appearance rather than deciding not to go through with it altogether - the two female headliners next year would certainly suggest that she’ll be one of them. 

[DJL]

47 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Yes GFL are a business but they are a very fortunate one with a very dedicated, passionate fan base that will sell out the event pretty much regardless so in my view they should feel able to go with making these changes which then hopefully starts to set precedents for the industry. 

They are a business whose model is that they have to sell out, who almost didn’t 15 years ago which they said put them in significant trouble, they had to cancel two festivals, got criticised for selling too many tickets in 2022 and when they announced this year’s line-up spoke about the current financial issues affecting them.  
 

I don’t agree they would sell out pretty much regardless - a couple of very wet years and some crowd trouble could make a big difference and some people (likely not us!) quickly start considering if they can catch big acts elsewhere.

[Ozanne]

1 hour ago, FloorFiller said:

When you lose a stadium headliner and Guns N Roses, another stadium headliner, come along and offer to step in in what will probably be your only chance of booking them, you don’t turn around and say ‘no sorry, we’re gonna bump Lizzo up instead’. Like has been said, Emily never said anything about there needing to be a female headliner, just that the lineup overall would be as diverse as possible, which it is. And we’re getting two female headliners next year. And the year after that, possibly all male again, or all female, but more than anything, the biggest and best headliner trio they can feasibly book. 

Then diversity isn’t as a big a deal for them as they make it out, they rightly highlight the issue a few years back and have done good work since. However when push comes to shove they resorted to a safe male booking. Why when things get tricky did they resort to a full headline lineup when there are other acts available?

Yes I know the headliners aren’t the be all and end all but lots of people do consider them really important and they get the most attention so it’s natural for the focus to be there rather than down the billing. 

39 minutes ago, DJL said:

They are a business whose model is that they have to sell out, who almost didn’t 15 years ago which they said put them in significant trouble, they had to cancel two festivals, got criticised for selling too many tickets in 2022 and when they announced this year’s line-up spoke about the current financial issues affecting them.  
 

I don’t agree they would sell out pretty much regardless - a couple of very wet years and some crowd trouble could make a big difference and some people (likely not us!) quickly start considering if they can catch big acts elsewhere.

I totally get it’s really tough for them but if they are to see a downturn then right now is the best chance they will ever have to take risks with their bookings although I doubt it’ll impact ticket sales at all compared to the weather or price rises!

[Justiceforcedave]

42 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Why when things get tricky did they resort to a full headline lineup when there are other acts available?

What other acts were available Saturday night (physically and contractually?)

[Justiceforcedave]

2 minutes ago, Justiceforcedave said:

What other acts were available Saturday night (physically and contractually?)

The answer btw is: We will never know.

[Matt42]

The moral of the story is to not put all your eggs in the Swift basket

[MEGABOWL]

3 hours ago, Ozanne said:

There’s an argument to be made that if diversity is one of their big aims then they should look to book a diverse set of headliners regardless of the circumstances instead of falling down on that when the original plans go awry and regardless of what male bands might be available. So in this case they could’ve passed on AM because the others are more iconic to book a female act.

Yes GFL are a business but they are a very fortunate one with a very dedicated, passionate fan base that will sell out the event pretty much regardless so in my view they should feel able to go with making these changes which then hopefully starts to set precedents for the industry. 

Diversity is an aim in that they’re trying to make the whole line up as balanced as possible, something they’re doing pretty well with. It isn’t the only thing they’re aiming for as we don’t live in a fantasy land where Emily can book whoever she wants (as referenced by Emily in Fridays Guardian article). Headliners are difficult for all sorts of reasons and as said many times, no promises have ever been made about Female headliners. Quite the opposite. To judge them on that is to judge them on an external and arbitrary set of criteria, which is unfair.

Yes they have a loyal fan base but as said previously if they start taking that for granted they’re in trouble. Emily will remember the years previously where they didn’t sell out and hopefully isn’t arrogant enough to think they can start booking whoever they want and assume that people will hand over well over £300. 

 

[FloorFiller]

Just now, Matt42 said:

The moral of the story is to not put all your eggs in the Swift basket

Or, y’know, for fucking everybody to not completely misinterpret what Emily has said about the 50/50 gender split.

[MEGABOWL]

1 minute ago, FloorFiller said:

Or, y’know, for fucking everybody to not completely misinterpret what Emily has said about the 50/50 gender split.

This. 

[Matt42]

3 minutes ago, FloorFiller said:

Or, y’know, for fucking everybody to not completely misinterpret what Emily has said about the 50/50 gender split.

I am not convinced that Swift was the only female headliner who was up for it. I also think they will have turned acts away on the basis that they thought Swift was doing it.

Hence my view that in future don’t build your lineup around an act that could just not follow through. 

[Neil]

11 hours ago, MEGABOWL said:

As GnR are a massive band with limited time left to tour, it makes sense to grab them now whilst they can.

it hasn't made sense for almost each one of  the last thirty years? 😛 

[FloorFiller]

Funny thing is, if they’ve actually managed to book two of Dua/Taylor/Madge for next year, the already pretty thin female headliner pool gets even smaller and creates bigger problems down the line. Granted, now that pop has been welcomed to the festival headliner conversation it’s a hell of a lot bigger than it was ten years ago, but you’ve still gotta factor in 1. Acts being available and 2. Wanting to do it, so I fear this years all male headliner backlash won’t be the end of it by a long shot.

[clasher]

The question really isn't how many headliners are female. The question is whether Emily is (knowingly or unknowingly) sexist with her booking.

Considering she clearly values the quality/size of the headliner acts over their gender tells me she probably isn't.

One of the headliners is an absolute gay icon too, but nobody seems to count that in their diversity quotas.

[FloorFiller]

1 minute ago, Neil said:

it hasn't made sense for almost each one of  the last thirty years? 😛 

Same could be said for any number of old acts who’ve only popped up recently. Why Cat Stevens only now? Was he a last resort? 

[MEGABOWL]

1 minute ago, Neil said:

it hasn't made sense for almost each one of  the last thirty years? 😛 

It’s probably taken this long to have any confidence they’ll go on stage before midnight, and it’ll be more than one of them 😄

[clarkete]

8 hours ago, MEGABOWL said:

How can I possibly be misconstruing something when I link to the actual interview so anybody can listen to it, pointing out where the relevant bit starts and how long the relevant bit lasts? 😆

 

As I have said many times she has never made a promise about Female headliners, as the bit you quote bears out. We know she would like more and when they’ve been available they’ve been booked. But the criticism is unfair.

She made a more nuanced point than you quote. 

For some reason you never include  that aspect. 

Based on your other comments it's not due to brevity 😝

Edited March 5, 2023 by clarkete

[MEGABOWL]

1 minute ago, clasher said:

The question really isn't how many headliners are female. The question is whether Emily is (knowingly or unknowingly) sexist with her booking.

Considering she clearly values the quality/size of the headliner acts over their gender tells me she probably isn't.

One of the headliners is an absolute gay icon too, but nobody seems to count that in their diversity quotas.

She’s battling on Two fronts here.

First, the existing tides of the industry and its old-fashioned ways along with the unavoidable reality of who is available and big enough.

Second, those who say she isn’t doing enough or going fast enough.

[MEGABOWL]

6 minutes ago, clarkete said:

She made a more nuanced point than you quote. 

For some reason you never include the that aspect. 

Based on your other comments it's not due to brevity 😝

Oi! I’ve been on nights and had a lot of spare time 😉😄

She talks on the subject for over a minute, uninterrupted. Either you transcribe all of that every time or you quote, accurately and with sourcing. I did a History degree and am involved in writing procedural documents in my job so I know how important the latter is.

My point is always this. Yes we know Emily *wants* more Female headliners (which is A Good Thing and I’ve never denied it something she *wants*) but she’s never made any *promises* and accepts that some years there will be all-Male headliners (along with hopefully some where it’s all-Female). That isn’t accidental and is all in that interview.

Edited March 5, 2023 by MEGABOWL
Pressed Reply by accident