Is Ed Sheeran for Everyone?

A big no-no we were taught in college while I was studying film was to avoid saying your project was “for everyone.” The reality is that you’re not “for everyone.” You can’t be. I’ve relearned this lesson myself over the years. Between Vocal, Medium, and Substack, I’d say only ninety people are subscribed to me, with fewer bothering to read my work. Of my self-published novellas, I’d say a similar number are fans. If I had to estimate, based on comments, reviews, and emails I’ve received, I would say approximately fifty people in the whole world have resonated strongly with anything I’ve made. I accept that. That is the reality of being a creative. I am in very good company.

It’s been nearly two decades since I first went to college (Jesus!), and that big no-no has practically been flipped. Where once marketing was concerned with the question “how should this be marketed,” it now appears as though all works, films, shows, books, games, and, as we’ll see, music, must answer a different kind of question; “SHOULD this be marketed?” Whether it’s rising costs, more competition, new tech, or changing tastes, there seems to be a consensus that you should strive to be for everyone; as inoffensive, digestible, and frictionless as possible. It explains IP driven movies, reboots and spin-offs, and Ed Sheeran.

I’ve never cared for Ed. Less out of malice or annoyance, and more out of passive disinterest. His rise in the 2010s coincided with the latter half of my studies, so on a few occasions I would have heard a song or two on night out at clubs or house parties. With his melodic pop songs that never stretched emotionally further than the kind of stumbling slow dance love song one expects at a wedding reception around midnight, how else can you describe Ed other than “alright.” With his earnest, almost cliché success story of a singer-songwriter being plucked from obscurity (by actor Jamie Foxx, strangely enough), his unthreatening ginger nerdy homeliness, and his extremely stripped performance (one singer, one guitar), he was the perfect performer for a new, more reserved age in entertainment.

For sixteen years, Ed’s success has benefited from an acceptable front of blandness. Again, he’s not bad; he’s clearly good at appealing to forty-one-year-old white women who think Harry Potter themed bedrooms count as a personality. But with eight studio albums, sixty-five singles, two-hundred-million record sales globally, it’s strange that nothing stands out, or gives us a taste of him. Love ballads have always existed, but usually they reflect something of the performer. Barry White was sultry. Elton John is operatic. Michael Jackson was tender. What is Ed? Harmless? Restrained? Diluted? It seems bizarre that with as successful a career as Ed’s that you can still manage to give nothing away that’s even mildly revealing.

Ed, at the great relief of marketers, has always maintained an apolitical stance, even to the point of not endorsing a vote during the 2016 Brexit referendum. He has described himself as “not Mr. Political.” He has spoken in support of music funding in schools, and has participated in fundraisers, but never to any fervent degree, remaining in the realm of acceptable (and, more importantly, PR friendly) causes. For a singer so synonymous with love, it’s amazing we don’t know what he cares about.

Close to two decades later, and the tide seems to be turning on this Golden Age (or dark age?) of marketing. IP films are losing big to smaller indies, TV is all but dead as we turn to TikTok for the next generation of diverse talent, and, in the musical arena, tastes have changed so much that non-anglophone acts (Korean, Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese, even Irish Gaeilge) are touring globally. Speaking of global tours, there’s the current issue with Ed’s latest tour.

By now, I needn’t go too far in depth into the matter. American rapper Macklemore spoke as an opening act for Ed’s global tour of the plight of Palestine and the Palestinian people suffering indiscriminate persecution by the neighbouring and encroaching state of Israel. He clarified that he did not wish to conflate all Jews with the actions of Israel. On that matter, neither do I.

Aren’t we cunts?

Ed, apparently, does not believe he is “complicit” either. Not complicit in what? Well, that’s a good question, because Macklemore was dropped from Ed’s tour after Ed was told to by stadium owner, billionaire, and Israel donor Robert Kraft. Let me stress: Robert Kraft didn’t just want Macklemore barred from performing at his stadiums; he demanded that Macklemore be dropped from the entire tour, regardless of where they performed. Ed described Macklemore as a friend, and, presumably, had been more than aware that he, unlike Ed, has performed socially conscious songs before, and has been openly supportive of Palestine before. Despite this, Ed still dropped Macklemore at the behest of a billionaire, silencing warranted criticism of Israel’s murder of Palestinians. While it officially, according to a public statement released by Ed(‘s PR team) had been the promotor’s decision to drop Macklemore, the fact the world’s most successful male solo act didn’t stand up for free speech, for the artistic tradition of speaking truth to power, and calling the bluff of a billionaire weaponizing their wealth to dictate public discourse seems very complicit to me.

Being “not Mr. Political” means agreeing with someone’s definition of “political”, a vague slur that has been used against everything from BLM, LGBT+ rights, universities, diversity, and even basic empathy. Performers like Bob Vylan, Kneecap, and now Macklemore, as well as countless others, have been silenced for becoming unmarketably principled. The problem with trying to be the middle road is that maybe, just maybe, some things are so unspeakably terrible that to not be vocally against them is to be complicit by ignoring them. The problem with being for everyone is that you’re for EVERYONE, including governments who have effectively criminalised protests, billionaires dictating what can and can’t be said, and theocrats killing in the name of a god who’s just as silent as you are, Ed.

Part of the reason why you shouldn’t say you’re for everyone is you’re basically admitting you don’t understand people. We’re fickle. We’re self-centred. We’re also transparent. We’re attracted to people who reflect ourselves. You’re not supposed to be for everyone; that’s how you know who you’re really meant for. It’s proof you stood for something you cared about, even when it cost you mass appeal.

Ed is going to be fine. His ego is hurt but thank God his wallet isn’t. His carefully curated imagine as everyone’s favourite serenader is now damaged. Ed is so polished and clean that it’s inhumanly sterile; a strange trait for an “artist” like him. Ed is discovering the limit to broad appeal; the only way to be for everyone is to stand for nothing.

#HI