2025 Headliners

[CaledonianGonzo]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

she brought up 2 female headliners for 2024 unprompted in the podcast. 

Oh - the 'we have one signed and we're hopeful for another one' thing.  That was obviously Dua and Madonna, so she was being specific about certain acts rather than making a commitment to a ratio.

[incident]

Just now, CaledonianGonzo said:

Oh - the 'we have one signed and we're hopeful for another one' thing.  That was obviously Dua and Madonna, so she was being specific about certain acts rather than making a commitment to a ratio.

 

Yeah, it was never a commitment of any kind - even though some people misinterpreted it that way (and apparently, still do).

[stuie]

Bloody Madonna... ruining gender diversity. 

 

 

[StoneCircle]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

Bloody Madonna... ruining gender diversity. 

 

 

 

Perhaps Madge might play next year? 🤞🏻

[NorthernSoul52]

Madonna is so far from a safe pair of hands to book, it's ridiculous. You can't account for the unforeseen, of course.

[MEGABOWL]

You can see why Emily doesn’t talk to the press much when even regulars on here who should actually listen properly to what she’s saying wilfully misrepresent it even when what she actually said has been discussed lots. She’s got no chance with the tabloids, Social Media clickbaiters and the like

[CaledonianGonzo]

I've never trusted her since she said Lizzo was the 4th headliner.

[stuie]

4 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I've never trusted her since she said Lizzo was the 4th headliner.

 

Lizzo would have got a better crowd than SZA did 🙂 

[stuie]

7 hours ago, StoneCircle said:

Perhaps Madge might play next year? 🤞🏻

 

There's nothing to suggest that she might and sadly I can't will it into existence 🙂 

 

I do hope that it was left on a 'not never, just not now' basis. 

[NorthernSoul52]

17 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I've never trusted her since she said Lizzo was the 4th headliner.

Tongue-in-cheek or not, that was a howler of a gaffe.

[MEGABOWL]

20 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

I've never trusted her since she said Lizzo was the 4th headliner.

Yeah that’s wasn’t her best moment 😆

 

Though TBF, if I was blindsided by the ridiculous outrage about what was actually a massive coup (the only time they’ve ever got three actual current stadium acts to headline) I’m sure she was.

[CaledonianGonzo]

6 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Tongue-in-cheek or not, that was a howler of a gaffe.

 

2 minutes ago, MEGABOWL said:

Yeah that’s wasn’t her best moment 😆

 

Though TBF, if I was blindsided by the ridiculous outrage about what was actually a massive coup (the only time they’ve ever got three actual current stadium acts to headline) I’m sure she was.

 

Except, again, she didn't say it.

[fraybentos1]

27 minutes ago, MEGABOWL said:

You can see why Emily doesn’t talk to the press much when even regulars on here who should actually listen properly to what she’s saying wilfully misrepresent it even when what she actually said has been discussed lots. She’s got no chance with the tabloids, Social Media clickbaiters and the like

Tabloids? This is the BBC article:

 

Glastonbury Festival organiser Emily Eavis has said she has recently been offered a "really big American artist" who she hopes will headline next year.

 

She didn't reveal their identity, but told BBC podcast Sidetracked she is aiming to book two female headliners.

 

10 hours ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

Oh - the 'we have one signed and we're hopeful for another one' thing.  That was obviously Dua and Madonna, so she was being specific about certain acts rather than making a commitment to a ratio.

 

Ok maybe she was talking about Dua and Madonna but if you are saying you're getting flack for having 0 female headliners in 2023 then for 2024 say you're aiming for 2 female headliners, you're kinda backing yourself into a corner. 

 

Which is exactly how it played out cause she booked SZA to do it to a tiny crowd. She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost cause she felt bad about 2023.

[NorthernSoul52]

5 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

 

Except, again, she didn't say it.

Fair enough. Believe he words were "she could totally headline" when asked about her being billed on the top line with the three headliners.

 

It is more inference on our part, and of course she isn't going to go and suggest that she couldn't - especially given she is on that top-line for billing.

[CaledonianGonzo]

9 minutes ago, fraybentos1 said:

Tabloids? This is the BBC article:

 

Glastonbury Festival organiser Emily Eavis has said she has recently been offered a "really big American artist" who she hopes will headline next year.

 

She didn't reveal their identity, but told BBC podcast Sidetracked she is aiming to book two female headliners.

 

 

Ok maybe she was talking about Dua and Madonna but if you are saying you're getting flack for having 0 female headliners in 2023 then for 2024 say you're aiming for 2 female headliners, you're kinda backing yourself into a corner. 

 

Which is exactly how it played out cause she booked SZA to do it to a tiny crowd. She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost cause she felt bad about 2023.

 

Except after Madge d@bbed down they tried to get Stevie Wonder in, so obviously the 'two women headliners' thing wasn't something they felt the need to stick to especially closely.

Edited 2 hours ago by CaledonianGonzo

[incident]

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

Ok maybe she was talking about Dua and Madonna but if you are saying you're getting flack for having 0 female headliners in 2023 then for 2024 say you're aiming for 2 female headliners, you're kinda backing yourself into a corner. 

 

Which is exactly how it played out cause she booked SZA to do it to a tiny crowd. She clearly was trying to make the 2 female headliners happen at almost any cost cause she felt bad about 2023.

 

That logic falls apart completely if you believe (and I do) that SZA was drafted in as a last minute replacement for Stevie Wonder, and was already booked / under contract because she was due to headline the Other Stage.

 

None of us know whether they tried to bring in someone from outside or not once they lost Stevie, and it would have been better if they had done so, but from the admittedly poor set of "bump up" options they had SZA was (easily) the most credible choice regardless of gender.

[CaledonianGonzo]

12 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Fair enough. Believe he words were "she could totally headline" when asked about her being billed on the top line with the three headliners.

 

It is more inference on our part, and of course she isn't going to go and suggest that she couldn't - especially given she is on that top-line for billing.

 

If we'revtrying to represent Emily Eavis fairly, there's a big difference between "she could headline" and "she is headlining".

[fraybentos1]

18 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

 

Except, again, she didn't say it.

She did say about Lizzo 'she could totally headline' but the headline slot had already been promised to someone else which was total BS cause we know they were scrambling to get GnR late on

[NorthernSoul52]

Just now, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

If we'revtrying to represent Emily Eavis fairly, there's a big difference between "she could headline" and "she is headlining".

Indeed.

[incident]

14 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Fair enough. Believe he words were "she could totally headline" when asked about her being billed on the top line with the three headliners.

 

It is more inference on our part, and of course she isn't going to go and suggest that she couldn't - especially given she is on that top-line for billing.

 

If we're reading things in to who's on the top line of the poster, then a couple festivals prior to that, Janet Jackson was on the top line. And nobody other than Janet Jackson ever thought, implied, or claimed she was a headliner.

[fraybentos1]

13 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

Except after Madge d@bbed down they tried to get Stevie Wonder in, so obviously the 'two women headliners' thing wasn't something they felt the need to stick to especially closely.

 

12 minutes ago, incident said:

 

That logic falls apart completely if you believe (and I do) that SZA was drafted in as a last minute replacement for Stevie Wonder, and was already booked / under contract because she was due to headline the Other Stage.

 

None of us know whether they tried to bring in someone from outside or not once they lost Stevie, and it would have been better if they had done so, but from the admittedly poor set of "bump up" options they had SZA was (easily) the most credible choice regardless of gender.

The fact they settled on SZA who played to a tiny crowd suggests they really wanted a woman. The Stevie stuff, who knows?

 

Also why wasn't Lana or Lizzo bumped up in 2023 then? Both more credible than SZA the following year. imo it's because they had in their heads 2 female headliners 

[NorthernSoul52]

1 minute ago, incident said:

 

If we're reading things in to who's on the top line of the poster, then a couple festivals prior to that, Janet Jackson was on the top line. And nobody other than Janet Jackson ever thought, implied, or claimed she was a headliner.

But there wasn't any question posed that year, you can comparatively argue. (Devil's advocate here.)

 

Whereas EE, while likely posed with the question rather than going out of her way to suggest, did pretty much infer Lizzo was on the top-line because "she could totally headline".

 

We could do with a full transcript of these chats sometimes.

[NorthernSoul52]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

Also why wasn't Lana or Lizzo bumped up in 2023 then? Both more credible than SZA the following year. imo it's because they had in their heads 2 female headliners 

 

Well, with LDR, probably because she's a bit of a headcase. But the answer might simply be that GNR were available, and by ticket-shifting and cross-generational metrics, there won't have been many bigger pulls, irrespective of their live capabilities.

[incident]

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

The fact they settled on SZA who played to a tiny crowd suggests they really wanted a woman. The Stevie stuff, who knows?

 

No, of course it doesn't. It suggests they were scrambling and wanted someone who was available - and given they reportedly had about a week to find someone, they chose the biggest available bump up and I doubt they even had time to worry about how people might judge it against an offhand comment on a podcast months previously. Maybe if they had more time to look for a replacement the result would have been different - Who knows? None of us here can really say with any confidence.

 

Just now, fraybentos1 said:

Also why wasn't Lana or Lizzo bumped up in 2023 then? Both more credible than SZA the following year. imo it's because they had in their heads 2 female headliners 

 

Because in 2023 they didn't lose a headliner about a week before the announcement, and so had no need to bump someone up at the last minute?

[CaledonianGonzo]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

 

The fact they settled on SZA who played to a tiny crowd suggests they really wanted a woman. The Stevie stuff, who knows?

 

As Incident says, of any of the other acts on the roster to move up to fill a gap in the headliners she was the obvious choice.  She was also headlining BST and Primavera, so its not like the G were the only festival who thought she was in the headlining pool.  And that's before you look at her numbers and general cachet.

 

We're there optics involved?  Maybe.  But they weren't the only factor.

 

That it didn't work out is a shame, but I think the chess move had a sound basis