I have no idea as to the merit of Jay Z, having never heard any of his stuff, but surely this is as offensive to him as it appears to Heppo, let alone the whole of (newspeak) R'n'b/rap artists, assuming that is his genre base. For months people have commented on the bubble of mega festivals having burst, with too many for the diminishing number of available touring "headliners". This blog has also had favourable comments about the decision to add Jay Z to the bill, agreeing that this is more likely to add than detract from sales. I think it is the boredom of (yawn) Glastonbury, the hassle of getting tickets, let alone the cost, to be overcrowded and ripped off to see ever more, ever less interesting "product". I would no sooner go again, than eat my own head, a decision I made in 1994. Whoever is on. And, yes, they have had many people on I would wish to see in the intervening years. Just not there.
There are stacks of black performers who could appeal to a Glastonbury audience, whatever the f that is. I am sure Jay Z would be in the list of a more up to date irregular, but, from my standpoint, hows about Stevie Wonder for starters. Prince would also shift a few, I suspect. Aretha Franklin, given a nice slow cruise ship ticket to conquer her fear of flying. Welcome at any stage, tho' I appreciate not headline material to the masses, could be any still standing Soul man from Stax/Motown vintages, any Reggae consequentials, plenty of African stars, jazzers, bluesmen, the list is long. And making me somewhat uncomfortable having to segregate my thoughts in this way....

It was "who could headline"?

Prince or a promise of Stevie Wonder playing his early 70s stuff would maybe tempt me to stand in a field for the day.

It wouldn't matter if there was a biblical deluge, the first strains of 'Sir Duke' would make everything OK.

Just book him... if people didn't know him before, no matter... they'd think he was the best damn singer they'd ever heard within a couple of songs.

It's your house on the line. Now who do you book?

Can't think of any act that would have been more perfect to headline Glastonbury than Bob Marley & The Wailers, though obviously that's not an option. (And isn't it odd that reggae hasn't thrown up a global superstar on his scale to fill the gap left by Bob Marley.)
You can't really generalise about Glastonbury-goers but I reckon if you did an i-pod randomiser at the turnstile you wouldn't see much black music showing up. Nothing new in this; weren't the hippies baffled by Otis Redding at Monterey?
As for being the promoter, house on the line, having to book a black act, apart from Stevie Wonder and Prince (already mentioned) I'd call Chuck Berry.

EDIT

Would sales of the Magazine fall if you put Jay Z on the cover ?
Isn't it all down to Demographics ?Are Jay Z's audience the type who will sit through an All Day Rock festival just to see their hero ? How about SLAYER at Cornbury ? SCOOTER at that Fairport one ?
Personally i think it's a strange but brave choice for Glastonbury. I love Jay Z personally but Don't really think an outdoor stage in a Farmers field is the best place to see or hear him.
A lot of Hip-Hop acts are not that good live and the power of Jay Z could get lost.
Acts who could headline; Stevie,Prince, Public Enemy.
Acts who would be incredible Headlining ;The Roots.Ben Harper and a billion more.
Agree with Retropath2,Aren't we all suffering from Festival Overdose?and Damn Expensive it all is too.

was that it was about the whole "experience" rather than the headline act. And aren't there a lot more festivals these days competing with Glastonbury: more relaxed, cheaper, less hullabaloo, more fun all round.

I'd stick with Jay Z. Glastonbury for all the rhetoric just didn't try to broaden the base. Its still a mainly white middle class indie/type affair. And nothing wrong with that in my book either.

However if you are broadening the base, and you want to bring in current RnB and Hip Hop you have to look at Jay Z, Snoop Dogg, Mary J. Blige and the daddy of them all Kanye West. And they WOULD put bums on seats, grass whatever.

That would be current and for the Paul McCartney slot, Janet Jackson and Prince are out there again. (just a commercial view).

And maybe The Specials if they get going like they promise.

Personally I would also try to bring in A Tribe Called Quest, NWA and Wu-Tang Clan for old times sake and I guarantee the base and the crowd would be broadened.

How about Jay Z doing The Black Album with a Live band ?.Think The Grey Album live.
Warning RT fans contains Rap

Rage Against the Machine are headliners at Reading, they have a black frontman and a black guitarist. They also have Bloc Party as second headliners on the Saturday who have a black lead singer and they also have Dizzee Rascal on the bill. Other than that its all white boys.

If Michael Jackson did a straightforward greatest hits set he'd take anywhere by storm. And do his public image a world of good. Yes he's odd, yes he's made bad decisions but ultimately he has never actually been found guilty of anything (has he?) and has made some fantastic music.

but I recall Public Enemy headlining the Saturday at Reading in 1992. And they were absolutely incredible - I still maintain that they blew Sunday night headliners Nirvana clear out of the grotty arena.

What was obvious was the cynicism in the crowd when they came on stage - a lot of people just weren't bothered. But they sucked people in. People were flocking to the stage to see them, and great big lanky crusties were all there happily joining in with the call and response business.

So, to sum up, saying that an 'indie' festival audience won't respond to a "black" artist is just the worst load of rubbish I've heard.

For your RnB tent, I'd get Raphael to reform Tony Toni Tone

Get in Q-Tip

and this is from the Jazz Cafe last year

Then you would have some party.

"alternative" rock fans are mostly either indifferent to rap/hip hop/modern R'nB or strongly dislike it. The one thing I would bet my house on is that if you were to conduct a survey at an REM show or an Arctic Monkeys show this would be proved emphatically. A skim through the Word randomiser threads would also throw up pretty much the same result, although Word readers are probably more informed, broad-minded and adventurous in their musical taste than the common Glastonbury herd. Most people my age that I know hate rap and hip hop. And so do their kids. (And I don't think they should be made to feel that they "ought" to like it, which I think there is an element of in this bizzare decision to make Jay Z the headline act.)
Going back to the original post I think putting "rap" instead of "commercial" is more to the point than "black". Lots of people who hate rap music do like other forms of black music.

Jason Carter-agree with what you say but Public Enemy and their highly political Stance and as much noise as possible tracks are much more likely to appeal to an "Indie" crowd than Jiggas Bling approach.
Public Enemy are a better spectacle because of the numbers of bodies on stage.Be hard for Jay if it's just him ,a backup MC and some dancers.It will be interesting to see what kind of show he puts on.
COMPARE

I don't think it's so much that it is a black act, it's more that they have only paid lip service to black music over the years and then all of a sudden they throw Jay-Z on as a headliner. what do they expect? If the rest of the bill was filled with a varied selection of other black acts it probably wouldn't hurt sales at all.

Could outkast be put on, do they do live or would it be 10 mins of Hey yeh and lots of call a response stuff that you get at a lot of rap shows I've seen. I think headlining is toughie anyway the arctics barely pulled it off last year, as you need at leat 8 or 9 songs that lots of varied people like and you need to put on a show for the people on the hill.

What with The Jacksons all moving to North Devon and probably in need of some rent vouchers at the moment, this could be on the cards, you know, Wouldn't use much petrol getting there, so minimal expenses and no hotel required either. It's a win-win, as they say.

tickets havent sold like hotcakes because the potential punters were not taken with Jay Z as a headliner and nothing to do with colour. Why is everything categorised in this easy and lazy way these days? For heavens sake let's get a grip on reality. The majority of people going to Glastonbury or thinking of going to Glastonbury are probably in the white 18-30 age group and are unlikely to own any Jay Z music. They were also probably not around when REM were making decent music too but have taken in the legend.Richard Lowe is largely nearer to the truth than anything else posted on this blog. The formula for Glastonbury has been set in stone for a while now - the promoters may want to go for a younger demographic or a different audience but putting up one token act as a whole change of direction is a dilution of what made it sell in the first place without a defining alternative route being put in place. And yes its bloody expensive. I had five days at SXSW in Austin that were probably not much more expensive on a daily rate basis including air fares and hotels (yes,hotels!!).
Which black artists would I put on? Blind Boys of Alabama, Ben Harper and Orchestra Baobab. Bit of sunshine and that could be a pretty exciting line up however I accept it may not sell all the tickets without a nice big white act to help it along!!!

...from all this overheating discussion, ST, but I presume you have the excellent Ben Harper AND the Blind Boys gospel collaboration. On one (actually 2)CD you have got the killer combo of old blind black men and God praising music (OK, one young-ish jack of all styles as well). What on this earth could be more unfashionable? Yet it is one of the best CDs I own. Uplifting and magnificent. To paraphrase the concept of the last verse of Marc Cohn/Walking in Memphis, it doesn't matter if you have a creed of any ilk or not, when it's playing and the Blind Boys sing, you're a christian and proud of it!
(Please note to all readers: this is not, repeat not a religious call to arms, merely a comment on the infectious exuberance that really good music can instil. I am likewise a rasta,a muslim and a jew, should the circumstances permit. I also like Into Your arms, by Nick Cave, possibly the most agnostic song i know)

reminds me of the NME in the 80s when they suddenly started covering all sorts of black music, implied that you were some kind of racist if you didn't like it, and sales plummeted.

Well the fact is that the readership of the NME wasn't interested then and the average Glastonbury ticket buyer isn't interested now.

Blaming the mud of the last few years is ridiculous.

Would love to see them together but the sheer size of Glastonbury doesnt appeal to me whoever is on. the great thing about SXSW was that you could get really close to the acts. Shelby Lynne put in an unbelievable performance made even more spine tingling by the fact she was about 4 yards away. Same with Martha Wainwright. I dont really want to go to gigs with a capacity beyond 1500-2000 anymore - I am making an exception for Springsteen this summer but thats about it. I have a theory that this is all about trends and we shouldn't get too hung up about it.For the last few years getting a Glastonbury ticket has been a bit of a status symbol. Now people are moving on to the next big thing.

I've always seen Glastonbury as a festival that pulls in the crowds for much more than just the acts across the various stages. Glastonbury has, after all, sold out over many years before the acts had been announced. Unlike this year, where the names were foisted upon prospective punters at some point in January. If the Eavis' had announced past headliners before selling the tickets, would it have sold out?

And now for a tangent:
There is no Lost Vagueness this year, a 'field' that has grown in both size and popularity over past years (celebrity associations may be a factor there). The death of Arabella Churchill may also have knocked the confidence of those who go for the circus and theatre fields. I'll admit that the 37,000 un-convinced punters are unlikely to all fall under these fields but it must at least contribute.

As for the whether excuse - it goes without saying that the tail end of a hurricane will zip through Somerset that weekend.

When I used to go (live in the uk) you knew the weather could turn but when it didn't it would be one of the most blissful weekends you could enjoy whatever your musical and entertainment preferences. Are people really staying away en masse in case it rains? I doubt it.

glastonbury had a winning formula that included multiple stages, world, pyramid, spoken word, other, cabaret, circus, new bands, dance (black? I dunno, Fatboy slim, 2manyDJ's?) you've really confused me with this "black" thing and i think thats because in the minds of most right-thinking happy go lucky bad toothed brits it really does not matter whether they are watching a black or white artist or music thats of discernible black or white origin as ghastly as those phrases are to even contemplate. They will be there if they like it! Let Jay-Z play and we will see how many are there. Anyway, back to my winning formula point. There is now a festival pretty much every weekend in the UK summer and winning formulas get copied: Latitude, end of the road and others have pitched a similar "vibe" to the punter and the festival market is getting saturated. Glastonbury is also a hassle to get tickets for, you cant go with your mates anymore (2 or now 4 tix per person) and we are heading for recession.

I dont understand how a "commercial" artist (whatever that is) would sell less tickets, equally I dont understand how a black artist would sell less. Its about whether people like it or not, surely? Not the colour.

Sorry for all the brackets

Agree

Eminem has sold 70 million records. Jay-Z has sold 33 million so you may well be right.

Disagree

I do not believe Eminem is more popular and likley to shift tickets because he is white! He just is more popular. Just as Prince is more popular than Ned's Atomic Dustbin. There are two other headliners that have lots of white people in them, how come they didn't take up the ticket selling slack? Simple, and I mean really simple, because they are not as popular as Artic Monkeys, Radiohead, Paul McCartney, Janet Jackson, Michael Jackson, Prince, White Stripes, Muse, The Who, The Chilli Peppers and so on and possibly so forth!

I don't honestly believe that it's down to Jay-Z that Glasto hasn't sold out this year. The weather has some bearing of course, but surely it's about time that Glasto had a glorious year weather-wise?

No, there are many reasons why it hasn't sold out. Not least of these is the paucity of decent acts on the bill. For years Glasto has relied on its reputation to sell out. The organisers or promoters believed that it would sell out whoever was on the bill. Take all the other main festivals - particularly Reading/Leeds, T In The Park, V, etc, and they've consistently had better bills because they've had to to attract the punters. Glasto was/is all about the vibe and didn't need to make as much of an effort in attracting the big names. However, with a glut of newer, more punter friendly festivals that are much more enjoyable and less crowded and frankly, much less hassle - Bestival, Latitude, Cropredy, the list is endless - punters are now voting with their feet and wallets and going elsewhere.

I doubt it will be Prince. He's getting €4million dollers to headline the Second Night Of The Coachella festival.

Would Glastonbury pay that much ?

Kanye West could easily do it.

Isn't it just a couple of years since people were buying all the tickets without even knowing who was playing? If people aren't going this year just because Jay-Z is playing, then they would hardly have seem to have caught the apparently legendary `spirit of Glastonbury'...

My friends and I have been to the last 4 Glastonburys.
We are not going this year because there were too many people on the site last year. This (and the weather) meant it took much longer to get from stage to stage or one side of the site to another.
They have completely spoiled it by adding the extra 40,000 on the capacity.
As someone above said, there is plenty of competing festivals which are cheaper, less crowded, easier to get to and have arguably better headline acts.

What frustrates me is the insistence that Glasto should be staged "as close as possible to the Summer Solstice". It means that the statistical likelihood of rain, and therefore mass discomfort and misery is far greater.

I was planning on finishing this with a facetious remark to the effect that "as well as clearly having a few pagan sensibilities, I happen to know that Michael Eavis has a solid background in Methodism. So why not move the weekend to be as close as possible to John Wesley's birthday?"

On further inspection, it transpires that Wesley was born on June 29th. D'oh!

I don't think one headline act alone will change the demographic make up of Glastonbury. That said I don't think a "rap" or "r&b" (couldn't we find a better description for this commercial tripe that has bollocks to do with "r&b"?) act is as likely to appeal to a "rock" audience as much as reggae, soul or other forms of black music. If there is an affect on ticket sales I suspect it has has more to do with taste than colour. I'd love to see some reggae on the bill but it really does need the sun to shine to work best! I'd vote for Misty In Roots (or several reggae bands)to headline over Jay Z any day.

Then there's that nasty little recession lurking round the corner...

which, although not strictly against the laws of physics, is a bit tricky, but Hendrix would pack 'em in.

On the other hand, and for all the skeptics out there, MC Dicky D PhD would get my vote...(gets good at approx 01:00)

...but it's usually not on the main stages.
Walking around the site there is lots of raggae, ska, dub blaring out from smaller stages and venues. So, I think there is an appetite for 'black' music at Glastonbury, maybe it's just not rap or the laughably titled R&B.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/emily-eavis-the-real-r...

OK, so I watched from the luxury of my armchair, but Jay-Z seemed pretty awful to me and totally out of place as a Glastonbury headliner. He was late, arrogant (introducing himself at one point as "Hi, I'm Jay-Z, and I'm pretty f*****g awesome"), and seemed to change the whole vibe of the event down near the front (I gather there were quite a few arrests, which is very un-Glastonbury-like)...and, more to the point, couldn't carry a note. His best moments were samples from other artists. Yes, he may have taken the piss out of Noel Gallagher by strumming 'Wonderwall', but I think that the Oasis leader was in the end proved right (and your own David Hepworth wrong) about headlining with hip-hop. And this has nothing do with racism! It's just that hip-hop (if it belongs anywhere) belongs in the streets and not in the Somerset countryside.

And keep Tim Westwood away from the event as well! I personally always get riled when the white, middle-class idiot from Radio 1 comes on thrusting his hands forward and speaking like some gangsta, in praise of his American buddies. His interview with Jay-Z that the BBC showed prior to the headlining slot was totally laughable.

Sorry, Michael and Emily, but you need to give the crowds what they want, not NYC street music.