Ladies and gentlemen, neutrality is an art practised and perfected by some self-absorbed people. They make their centrist stand sound like innocence. But peel away the outer layer, and the shallowness can reveal something else: it is just them keeping themselves safe, because taking a stand costs you money, power and makes you accountable — especially when you are on the side of those suffering.
“All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.” Shakespeare probably wasn't thinking about Instagram, red carpets or viral clips when he wrote it. But he may have accidentally described our current celebrity culture rather well.
So, this week, the music world woke up to something they probably did not expect - an Ed Sheeran tour that did not go well.
For Macklemore, this tour was not just about singing. He had a clear message to deliver loudly: ‘Free Palestine.’
The split between Ed Sheeran, the neutralist, and Macklemore, the anti-occupationist, has divided the internet vertically.
On one side were those who argued that Macklemore had every right to express his political views, including his support for Palestine and his criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank. The Israeli-American Council had also called for his removal from the tour, accusing him of antisemitic rhetoric, an allegation Macklemore has rejected.
Others, meanwhile, didn't want to hear political messages at a concert. They had paid for music. Maybe they simply didn't want to spoil their party mood by being reminded about the suffering of Palestinians and those around the world like them.
Macklemore has been openly pro-Palestinian for years. In 2024, he released ‘Hind’s Hall’, a protest song supporting pro-Palestinian demonstrators and referring to five-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab, who was killed in Gaza.
And here, the celebrity debate becomes something more complicated. It is no longer about a ‘Free Palestine’ statement. It is about whether a celebrity’s political voice should follow them into professional spaces, and where the line between an artist’s right to speak and an organiser’s right to decide whom they put on a stage actually lies.
People liked Ed Sheeran's ‘Shape of You’, ‘Perfect’... But not his desire to stay out of the controversy. Sheeran has said that removing Macklemore from the US leg of the tour was the promoter’s decision, not his personal call. He said venues on upcoming tour dates had indicated they would pull their shows if Macklemore remained on the tour.
And then came the numbers. Sheeran lost more than 200,000 Instagram followers, according to Social Blade data, while Macklemore's account gained more than 1.6 million followers. At one point, Macklemore gained more than 750,000 followers within 24 hours.
Sheeran's neutrality may have been intended to keep the peace. Instead, Macklemore's pro-Palestinian stand suddenly found a much larger audience.
Perhaps that is the new problem with being a celebrity. Sometimes, even silence gets a microphone.
Before Macklemore’s Instagram posts went viral, the internet woke up to something totally surprising for some.
After opting out of any moral responsibility over the controversial ‘Great Jeans’ advertisement campaign, Sydney Sweeney seems to have developed a liking for the taste of controversy and has now come up with another ad campaign.
This time, it was a Novig sports prediction campaign. Sweeney appeared nude, covering herself with sports equipment, including footballs, basketballs, a tennis racket, and a hockey stick.
Sydney didn't do (wear) anything other than cover her modesty with sports equipment. But the internet was not that sporty about the whole affair.
Among the loudest voices were feminists and women in sports, who argued that the advertisement touched a nerve — particularly around the way women’s bodies, beauty and sexuality are packaged and sold. The advertisement was criticised by female athletes, including British sprinter Amy Hunt and Australian swimmer Ariarne Titmus, who argued that it sexualised women’s sport.
But instead of directly addressing the criticism, the Hollywood icon appeared to answer it visually, posting images of athletes who had posed nude for ESPN’s ‘Body Issue’. Her posts included images of athletes such as Serena Williams, Megan Rapinoe, and Sue Bird.
The art of being neutral is not as innocent as it seems, or the audience will not buy the silence, reading it as an art of choosing peace. The advertisement was interpreted, criticised, and debated, and her ‘safe response’ became yet another story added to the controversy.
Bollywood knows something about this too…
In 2021, when farmers, particularly from Punjab and other parts of northern India, were protesting against the farm laws, Rihanna expressed solidarity with the protesters. Suddenly, the question was not only about what celebrities thought. It was also about who was saying nothing.
After Rihanna's intervention, several Indian celebrities did speak up, posting messages and using hashtags such as #IndiaTogether and #IndiaAgainstPropaganda. Some backed the Union Government's position, while others expressed support for the farmers.
The same question about celebrity silence had appeared during the 2020 JNU and CAA protests, when the public also watched Bollywood closely for signs of support, opposition, or neutrality.
The silence of these popular figures turned deafening during the recent Gen Z protest at Jantar Mantar. When Prakash Raj, Shabana Azmi, Naseeruddin Shah, Ratna Pathak Shah, Zeenat Aman, Swara Bhasker, Kunal Kamra, Imran Khan, Sonakshi Sinha, and Hrithik Roshan supported the movement from the beginning, the big names of Bollywood opted out. But seems like the silence cost Diljit Dosanjh more than the Khans and Kapoors, with his "I'm an artist, bro" comment.
The phrase became a meme after he used it during an Instagram live while distancing himself from the student protests. Instead of allowing the phrase to remain a stick with which the internet could beat him, Diljit turned it into a project, releasing a playlist titled I'm an Artist Bro, which included ‘Devil’.
The music video was filled with protest imagery - young protesters, placards, police and clashes. The timing was enough for the internet to connect the dots.
In his desperation to turn the tide in his favour and reclaim his neutral past, Diljit had, perhaps, found another way of saying something without actually saying it.
But the netizens also had their answer ready:
“You're an artist, bro!”
Then, there was a case that turned Malayalam cinema upside down.
After the actress assault case and the Hema Committee report that followed, the controversies surrounding the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) opened what felt like a revolutionary chapter in Mollywood.
The Hema Committee report, released in 2024, documented accounts of sexual harassment, exploitation and other forms of discrimination and inequality in the Malayalam film industry.
The #MeToo movement had already begun to spread; people from the film industry, especially women, raised their voices.
In the saga of these issues, the carefully chosen words of front-line actors, including Mohanlal, then the president of AMMA, became impossible to ignore. The entire AMMA executive committee, including Mohanlal, resigned in August 2024 amid the fallout from the Hema Committee report and renewed allegations within the industry.
There is a privilege in keeping silent. Often it is associated with not getting into ‘unnecessary chaos’. Choosing not to speak can be classified as privacy, professionalism, peace, or protecting one's aura. But the audience may give it another name.
But that’s fine; silence is an option too.
Just that today, it has some meanings etched into it, too.