Ethical considerations in Madison’s live booking landscape

Live Nation, FPC, and Ticketmaster’s insistence on working with problematic figures presents moral quandaries.

When Marilyn Manson’s upcoming August show at the Sylvee was announced in the first week of June, it ignited some discussion among Tone Madison‘s authors and editors. Most noted their dismay at the booking, which seemed in keeping with Live Nation Entertainment‘s most cynical, profit-first traits. Most of Madison’s music community seemed to greet the booking with a shrug, while the majority of the discourse fell to anonymous discussion board users making bad-faith arguments as an abject defense. (Of course, it was hard to weigh in once the venue disabled comments on the announcement posts.) One of the more common pushbacks to any criticism of the booking in public forums fell somewhere along the lines of “innocent until proven guilty,” which is a line frequently employed by people—often agitated fans prioritizing self-interest—who trip over themselves to prematurely shield alleged predators from consequences. 

Anyone with any sort of knowledge of how the justice system actually functions—especially in cases of sexual misconduct—will be quick to point out the myriad flaws inherent to the “innocent until proven guilty” defense, especially when it comes as a knee-jerk reaction. Verdicts aren’t infallible. Settlements happen all the time, and have historically favored the more powerful party—a point that has been driven home for decades. (Manson reached a settlement in one of the multiple rape lawsuits he has faced  in September 2023.) Mistrials, court corruption, and bias can all come into play at any moment. Sexual misconduct cases are famously difficult to prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” for so, so many reasons, and are often fraught with other contextual factors that further muddy those cases. That’s why so many lawyers have been hesitant to take on those cases. That’s also a major reason for why the statistical breakdowns are so damning.

Taking that context into account, when the party accused is a highly-recognizable entertainer, it often forces venues into deciding whether they want to prioritize ethical or financial considerations. If the allegations being leveled against someone—in this case, Manson—appear to be both consistent and credible, there is a choice to be made. The Sylvee—a venue that is owned and operated by Madison-based promoter Frank Productions/FPC Live, which in 2018 became a subsidiary of Live Nation Entertainment—has clearly made its choice with Manson. And Frank Productions has muted the pushback, to the best of its abilities. Maybe the company was concerned that breaking a contractual deal with Manson would result in an additional legal battle. Or maybe Frank Productions and Live Nation were less invested in the optics of platforming an alleged serial predator and more invested in how much they could profit off of the public’s continued interest in that alleged predator.

This isn’t new territory for Madison venues, even outside the confines of Live Nation Entertainment. When downtown comedy club Comedy On State booked Louis C.K. for a run of shows in 2021, a large contingent of Madisonians responded with outrage and disgust. Those shows sold out and the venue went on a torrential blocking spree on its Twitter account, targeting anyone who was confident enough in their moral convictions to speak out against the booking on social media. Not many who made their distaste known were spared of the venue’s reactive wrath. In fact, the club blocked so many people that it became a literal badge of honor. 

Comedy On State made itself a stop on the comeback trail for a famous, high-draw comic who admitted to exploiting power imbalances in the interest of sexual gratification. C.K. expressed light, half-hearted penitence after the fact, and recalibrated his once-admired stand-up act with pitiful reactionary pandering. Many in Madison took umbrage with the club’s choice, and they had the right to voice those concerns. The majority of the concerns were rooted in the interest of Madison’s communal health and safety, as well as a firm disinterest in rewarding an admitted sexual predator.

The club’s decision likely came down to both fiscal opportunity and indifference to C.K.’s behavior, or maybe the consensus in some corners that C.K. had done enough to atone. As is too often the case in Madison—at seemingly any level of business or social practices—Comedy On State didn’t navigate the situation with much tact or grace, and one could argue that its critics didn’t either. Madison has its share of difficulties with conflict in cultural spaces. But people who had no patience or desire to hear from a sexual predator didn’t owe the club the benefit of the doubt, either. Giving C.K. a celebrated local platform is a choice, and it matters that we talk about that choice. Not that the club’s owners ever came out and explained their reasoning for booking the show and going ahead with it. An Isthmus headline at the time asked, “What was Comedy On State thinking?” Probably that it would all blow over soon enough, leaving behind no real change and no lasting mark on the club’s reputation.

Manson and C.K.’s bookings both raise peripheral questions about rehabilitation and reintroduction. One of the most difficult to answer is: What does a person need to do to earn a second chance, and when? Can someone transgress badly enough to forfeit their right to a second chance at public involvement in a visible role of leadership or influence? (I would argue yes, but this isn’t for me alone to decide.) Should they be deprived of that level of implicit and/or explicit power in the wake of exploiting their original platform for harmful ends? Should there be spaces they are permanently barred from attending? There seem to be varying schools of thought on how to pursue the practice of establishing a safe, healthy community. Siphoning off people who have endangered that community by porting them to another community doesn’t seem like the most productive thing in the world, and stands contrary to the ideals of cultivating communal health and safety. But keeping them around or forcing them into a near-solitary confinement of disinvolvement doesn’t necessarily seem productive or beneficial either. At what point is punishment more likely to extend damage?

Rehabilitation efforts seem like a good groundwork to build from, but they need more definition. I don’t really have the answers and hope that someday there will be sensible guidelines for how to navigate the many incredibly fraught and frequently painful issues inherent to those cases. But I do know one thing: as a person who has a history of booking live events (albeit at a much smaller scale), I would not have entertained booking either Manson or C.K., out of an obligation to my own moral principles. And out of a concern for the well-being of the staff, audience, and residents of the venue and city where the event was located. I have turned down platforming bands for similar reasons at events that likely would have seen a financial benefit from their involvement. Several of my own bands have turned down offers to appear with bands whose lineups incorporated people with a history of harmful behavior for these reasons as well.

The decision to book those types of events should not be driven by profit opportunity, audience demand, or anything outside the bounds of ethical judgments that prioritize communal health. There comes a time when the statistics, history, and context tied to a performers’ past behavior, alleged or confirmed, point to a likely outcome. Occasionally there is an outright admission or confession that solidifies that outcome. And when venues don’t hold those behaviors in check or meaningfully examine their severity, they implicitly communicate that those issues don’t matter, paving the way for repeat occurrences. Madison venues making decisions from a moral standpoint and pursuing earnest attempts at atonement for unfortunate business decisions regarding booked talent aren’t without precedent.

Which begs the question: why do we continue to reward performers and public figures who haven’t put in any evident work to atone, course-correct, or hold themselves accountable? While there should be a route to some form or productive rehabilitation, there should also be meaningful consequences. Allowing harmful behavior—and people—to slide by unchecked while the shit gets sorted out isn’t an answer. It’s a disservice. So, no. I would not have booked either of those events, even with an admittedly fuzzy idea of the position in which Comedy On State and the Sylvee were operating from when they reached those respective agreements. And I sure as shit would not have booked Tucker fucking Carlson, the infamous alt-right “political commentator” who is set to appear at a Ticketmaster-ticketed event at Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee—a city that has become one of the most prominent punching bags for republicans—on September 16. The event is strategically positioned between what promises to be a horrifically mismanaged RNC and the presidential election.

When the event was initially announced, it came by way of an FPC Live Facebook events page, touting infamous conspiracy theorist Alex Jones as the opener. The event page was quickly deleted with no fanfare or explanation. Shortly after the event resurfaced without FPC Live’s name attached in any capacity, and Jones was dropped from the opening slot. This was right around the time the deranged conspiracy theorist was ordered to liquidate his assets to pay $1.5 billion in damages to the relatives of the Sandy Hook shooting victims in a high-profile defamation case. FPC Live has not re-published the event. But I managed to grab a screenshot in the exceedingly brief time it was live. At the time it was published, the only comment it had received was a rightfully disparaging one, which is not included in the image. 

Ticketmaster has not responded to any outlet asking for comment on the event. Tone Madison also reached out for further clarification from FPC Live and Live Nation Entertainment about the extent of their involvement. Those messages received no response. (Further complicating the picture of their potential involvement is that Live Nation has pulled the plug on a Carlson event at least once in the past year, though that seemed to come down to a Michigan venue’s booking policies.) But Ticketmaster still feeds into Live Nation as a subsidiary, and Live Nation still has a controlling stake in Frank Productions (FPC Live). Live Nation also has Tucker Carlson’s tour dates, times, and ticket links published on its website. Apart from FPC Live being the one to initially launch the Fiserv event announcement, the event being ticketed by Ticketmaster, and Carlson’s page on Live Nation’s site, none of those company’s insignias and branding are visible on any promotional materials for the event. Manson’s 2024 tour poster, on the other hand, features Live Nation’s emblem very clearly as the last piece of text and imagery in the design. Maybe FPC Live did pull their involvement from the event. It’s presently impossible to tell.

The three most prominent insignias on all press materials for the Carlson tour are the following: the Tucker Carlson Network, a bitcoin site called swan.com, and Sambrosa, a site that sells a night allergy syrup that is excruciatingly difficult to find any reviews on, for its supposed position as a marketplace leader (at least apart from the ones they publish themselves). Like most anything attached to Carlson, all three companies ignite that fight-or-flight internal scream that ascends in volume as it repeats “this is a grift” until people’s eyes roll white and they pass out while bleeding from the nose.

At this point, I don’t need to get into the contemptible bile that Carlson has made his bread and butter. He is a vile person. Any promoter or venue who makes a decision to work with or platform Carlson knows full well what he brings to the table, and how potentially destructive it is to an array of marginalized voices. To book someone like Carlson is to disregard the safety of vulnerable people in favor of a business opportunity. 

Speaking of business opportunities, these same promoters and venues are happy to make money from the very people Carlson targets when he demonizes queer and trans people and promotes the “great replacement” theory. FPC Live’s Madison venues, including the Majestic and the Sylvee host queer nightlife events. The company is currently building a new venue in Milwaukee, where it will no doubt market events to the most racially and ethnically diverse part of the state. During the summer 2020 uprisings against racism and police violence, the Sylvee adorned its marquee with the names of Black people killed by police. You can find a lot about values and community in the online presences of Frank Productions and its venues. An inclusive, progressive veneer is good for business in Madison. If Carlson had his way, a lot of the audience for Live Nation’s offerings would be dead or deported.

It is jarring, confounding, and severely disheartening to see venues and promoters prioritize self-interest over real concern for the well-being of our communities. Members of Madison’s arts and culture community need to push back more emphatically, and come up with strategies that go beyond errant tweets and short, pithy messages. 

We as a community have to do exponentially better in holding major players accountable. A start would be conveying the gravity of booking alleged predators to the people in charge of making those decisions, or those who stand idly by while they happen. Everything will be an uphill battle, especially in cases where market demand guarantees these shows profit, despite a litany of unseen ramifications, up to and including the normalization of abhorrent behavior and ideals that would disproportionately harm the people who would most benefit from thoughtful protection.

When entertainment industry players show us they’re more interested in enriching themselves than being good community members, we have no choice but to believe them and act accordingly. If FPC Live won’t consistently stand up for those people, but will for themselves, how much is its presence actually worth?