From what I remember, Bowie in 2000 agreed to only televise a couple of songs, but the BBC quickly realised they were witnessing an important piece of music history and carried on filming anyway, even though the full footage never got broadcast until many years later.
They made the right call in my opinion, and I wish they'd done the same for Leonard Cohen in 2008.
Yes, makes sense.
Not sure it makes sense for BBC to dig their heels in though.
GFL would go back and say "look, if we can't get around this, then he's not going to play, so we (and by extension you) have no headliner booked and have to come up with a sub-optimal headliner".
Do the BBC really need to retain rights to croaky old Neil Young's 2nd Glastonbury performance for international distribution 5 years after the fact? I think they'd prefer to take the hit and give up those rights than just not have him play. They'll still have the live and 30-day footage available....
If something was actually signed with an exception from the norm, then Young would just tell GFL to take it up with BBC as that's GFL's problem, not his.
Perhaps instead of continuing with negotiations, Young has just said "f**k it, I'm out", rather than playing chicken and seeing if BBC will cave.
Definitely! I say this as a fan of both. I was planning to go to Neil Young on my own. If Pulp play my entire friend group would be there with me. They know the big Pulp hits and it would be a great singalong.
Saw them in Sheffield a few years back and it was a proper party atmosphere. I think they could do it.
amazing headline.
The timing of this all is great too. Cause now its sounding like the festival is in damage control so this info comes out today.
and can we get a split figure on capacity? Cause its 210k allowed on site, not tickets sold.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.