“They always say actions speak louder than words. So why do we seem to be getting more caught up in one act at Glastonbury’s words, rather than the atrocious actions of the Israeli state? “
Music has always been more than entertainment. In its best form it’s a way to expose injustice and give a voice to those which are ignored. From the punk scene to reggae, and now contemporary politically charged acts, artists have long used their platforms to demand change.
In Britain, this tradition of solidarity isn’t ever met with understanding by the media. Rather, it’s met with hostility and sensationalism. News titles and their waves of wealthy backers rarely respond to these artists with nuance. Instead, they seek to distort their messages and provoke outrage, turning protest into scandal. Bob Vylan’s recent Glastonbury performance is just the latest example of this cycle.
Bob Vylan at Glastonbury: A Case Study
Bob Vylan isn’t an artist that I’m a huge fan of. Sure, I enjoy some of the group’s collaborations like “New England” with Kid Kapichi and “One More Day Won’t Hurt” with Soft Play. Nor do I agree with everything they say or do, particularly the group’s recent actions at Slam Dunk Festival were far from commendable.
Yet, what I do have no issue with is their right to stand up for what they believe in. I’m not here to defend their every action, but Bob Vylan are another recent example of how the media and government is getting so much wrong at the moment. Shamefully so.
Bob Vylan has never hidden what they’re about, and anyone paying attention should know that. Any music journalist or part of the production team at the BBC didn’t need to take long to do their homework.
At Glastonbury, their set was everything you’d expect from the group; raw and direct in the calling out of injustice at home and abroad. This of course included a controversial criticism of the IDF which predictably provoked backlash.
Almost instantaneously it seemed politicians and media outlets were lining up to condemn the band and frame their words in a way which clearly blew things out of proportion.
A moment that stood out to me was seeing Lisa Nandy stand at the dispatch box as soon as possible to call out Bob Vylan’s comments as anti-Semitism. It was disappointing to see the Culture Secretary, who has been nothing but clueless since she took the position, talking about something she yet again has next to no real idea about.
Personally, I don’t believe the comments were anti-Semitic. Extreme, yes, but the IDF is not a Jewish organisation, it is a part of the Israeli state. That is what Bob Vylan had issue with, and I think it’s fairly clear to see why.
That’s the leap much of the coverage refused to question. Instead of grappling with the message about violence and oppression of innocent Palestinians, the media focused on vilifying the messenger.
The Media’s Habit of Painting Critics as Enemies
It’s an all too familiar script. Protesting and standing up for the oppressed is stripped of its meaning and repackaged as a threat. By personalising outrage around the artist, the public is distracted from the substance of what they’re saying. This is an all to familiar tactic from the likes of The Telegraph, The Sun, and the Daily Fail.
Britain has a long tradition of meeting criticism with defensiveness, especially in the media. Acknowledging our history, whether it be colonial violence, class conflict, or ongoing inequality, is often treated as a personal attack rather than a necessary reckoning.
I’m patriotic. I love my country. But that doesn’t mean denying its faults. Our past includes both pride, yes, but also a lot of shame which we have to accept.
Recognising these truths doesn’t erase what’s good and ignoring them doesn’t make the problems go away. True patriotism demands honesty not selective amnesia.
Yet today, the British public is increasingly tribal, and our media knows how to exploit that. Outrage sells papers and drives clicks. Nuance, on the other hand, rarely pays. The big outlets don’t just reflect division, they profit from it.
When it comes to the debate on Israel and Palestine, it’s not treated as a humanitarian issue. It’s instead fuelled as yet another game of political side taking.
They always say actions speak louder than words. So why do we seem to be getting more caught up in one act at Glastonbury’s words, rather than the atrocious actions of the Israeli state?
A Pattern of Misrepresenting Protest
What happened to Bob Vylan isn’t new. Take Kneecap, the Irish rap group whose music confronts colonial legacies and state violence with unapologetic directness. The English media often greets them with hostility, and frames their honesty as dangerous rather than necessary.
Go back further to the punk explosion of the 1970s: bands like The Clash and the Sex Pistols critiqued economic inequality and class divides in stark terms. The media reaction was panic and condemnation, branding punk a threat to social order instead of listening to what drove its anger.
This dynamic isn’t confined to music and is similarly represented in other forms of protest. The 1984-85 miners’ strike was frequently reported as violent extremism, and ignored the legitimate grievances of communities abandoned by government policy and the role of police in escalating conflict.
Across decades, the same pattern repeats. Protest is sensationalised whilst its root causes are dismissed, and public fear is stoked to preserve the status quo.
Recently, over 100 BBC journalists publicly accused their employer of censoring coverage of the war in Gaza and downplaying Palestinian suffering as well as avoiding context that might upset powerful interests. It was good to see individuals stand up against the BBC’s betrayal of basic journalistic standards.
The Cost of Sensationalism
When protest is flattened into scandal, we lose the chance to confront hard truths about history, identity, and inequality. The media’s preference for outrage over understanding deepens social divisions. It’s easier to retreat into comfortable tribal certainties than to have the necessary and difficult conversations.
This leaves the public uninformed, polarised, and suspicious of the very voices trying to spark change. The message is lost, replaced by a simplistic statements of you’re either with us or against us.
Don’t Get Caught Up in the Storm
If journalism’s role is to hold power to account and inform the public, it must do better. That means investigating the roots of protest instead of playing division for profit.
Artists like Bob Vylan remind us why this matters. Their anger and honesty challenge us to see what we’d rather ignore. Instead of dismissing them as troublemakers, and blasting out accusations , we should ask why their messages make us uncomfortable, and what it would mean to address the injustices they highlight.
If we don’t call out the media for its clear agendas, the cycle will only continue and the script will remain the same: ignore the message, attack the messenger, sell the scandal…
Ben's Blog 
Leave a comment