BBC issues statement about Kneecap's Glastonbury performance
The BBC has issued a statement about rap trio Kneecap 's performance at Glastonbury, saying it would not broadcast it live but would 'look to make an on-demand version available' on iPlayer.
Kneecap's Saturday performance at the festival comes amid significant criticism from politicians.
Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, also known as Mo Chara, faces a charge under the Terrorism Act for allegedly waving a Hezbollah flag at a London concert in November.
The Belfast-based band has drawn criticism for its explicit lyrics, political statements, and alleged shouts of support for Hamas and Hezbollah, though members deny supporting these groups.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer earlier said it would not be appropriate for Glastonbury to provide a platform for the band, while festival organiser Emily Eavis maintained that everyone is welcome.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Notting Hill Carnival belongs in the streets, now more than ever
The largest street festival in Europe, Notting Hill Carnival, is in crisis. A celebration of Caribbean culture, the Carnival sees around two million people descend on the streets of Notting Hill every year during the August Bank Holiday weekend. But this year, due to a funding crisis and worries over its size, there are fears over whether it will take place at all. London's mayor, Sadiq Khan, has shared concerns raised by the Metropolitan Police about crushing at the event, saying that video footage of some of the crowds has 'frightened' him. He also drew comparisons to the potential for another Hillsborough disaster: no little matter for the lifelong Liverpool supporter. Notting Hill Carnival means a lot to me, as a second-generation Caribbean growing up in the UK. Originally held indoors at St Pancras Hall, it was established by Trinidadian activist Claudia Jones in 1959 as a response to the previous year's race riots. She created it to celebrate Caribbean culture and foster unity between Black and white people. A few years ago, when I appeared on an episode of Radio 4's 'Making History' and we were asked to nominate a person who should be featured on their plinth in London, I chose this woman. The outdoor festival, as we now know it, celebrates its 60th anniversary next year. I remember the loud music of Carnival, getting sticks of sugar cane to gnaw on, and the beautiful smell of Caribbean food permeating the air. I was transfixed by the colourful costumes, but most of all by the sight of Black and white people celebrating and dancing together. As a family, we would travel down to London to see my uncle Gus Philip, who was one half of Charlie Phillips' iconic 1967 photograph, Notting Hill Couple – showing a Black man and a white woman was symbolic because it was just this kind of image that fuelled the anger behind the riots. One of the ideas that has been floated about Carnival's future is moving it to Hyde Park and becoming a ticketed event. I find this suggestion offensive – Carnival is a street party based in the Caribbean tradition. As part of a safety report, Met Police reps have said no frontline officer looks forward to working the event due to the possibility of crushing, and the small criminal element that takes advantage of the large crowds to 'cause carnage'. Like so many public events, Carnival has been marred by violence, but this is particularly exaggerated in coverage. It's the only festival where any statement from the police begins with the number of crimes committed. This feels like a continuation of the criminalisation of the Caribbean community that created tension with the police in the first place. No one speaks about Glastonbury, Leeds or Reading in that way. It's an open street festival. Anything that happens near the Carnival or in the general area is attributed to it, and that's simply not accurate. Yet, however nostalgic one feels about it, and however much I hate the more racist commentary, the safety concerns raised do bother me. I can't help but think of the two little boys who are now growing up without their mother, Rebecca Ikumelo, after she was killed in a crush at Brixton Academy in 2023. Security guard Gaby Hutchinson also lost her life that night. Their families have put these deaths down to greed and are calling for the prosecution of those responsible. Hutchinson's family are taking legal action. This is the crux for me: if a disaster were to happen at Carnival, and any other people were left grieving for their family members, they wouldn't accept being told that safety concerns had been overlooked due to their race. But I don't want the environment to be changed, not least because the reasons for Carnival's very existence are still so present. Last year, we saw race riots across the UK, which were very similar to the ones that gave rise to Notting Hill Carnival in the first place. Carnival is about rebellion, celebration and reclamation of space. It belongs in the streets.
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Earth doesn't recognise national boundaries – we must collaborate for Net Zero
Almost sixty years ago, in 1966, I arrived at St John's College, Cambridge, on a scholarship from BP to study physics. This would turn out to be a golden period for the oil and gas industry. Two new frontiers – the North Sea and Alaska – were on the cusp of opening up, and the industry's reputation as a source of innovation, diplomacy and prosperity was strong. How times change – both in obvious and less obvious ways. The North Sea peaked long ago, with Britain sadly ever more reliant on energy imports. A fuller understanding of climate change has laid bare the duality of hydrocarbons, with most energy companies far too late in taking action. The focus in most developed countries is now on how to produce more and more energy from zero-carbon sources. This is all part of what is commonly meant by the 'energy transition', which is essential if we are to save humanity from the uncontrollable and destructive impact of climate change on health, food supplies and migration. But a less obvious energy transition has been taking place, right in front of our eyes. In 1966, the UK consumed more energy than it does today, despite decades during which both the economy and the population have grown. And the UK now no longer consumes any coal to speak of. If someone had told me this as an undergraduate, I would have scarcely believed them. Some of this change is down to deindustrialisation, but much of it can be attributed to steady gains in energy efficiency. The direction of travel is the same in the US, Canada and the EU. This should give cause for great optimism. The energy transition is a serious challenge which will take years to complete, but it is underway, and it is inextricably linked to energy security. The idea that energy security can be based solely on oil and gas is wrong and dangerous. So too is the view that we can achieve an overnight transition simply by setting net zero targets. Countries need a diversity of sources of energy so that when one source is attacked or interrupted, the supply can be made up by another. UK supplies are much more secure when they are domestic and do not rely on long-distance supply chains. Those such as renewable sources and nuclear fission also happen to be carbon-free. To make progress in the energy transition, we need serious and realistic plans, driven forward by a sense of common purpose and supported by the necessary resources. Plans will vary from country to country, but if they are to succeed, they should have four things in common. The first is to start by working out what will be needed in 25 years. It is clear to me that we will need carbon-free flexible electricity from renewables and nuclear power, both fission and perhaps fusion. At present, electricity accounts for about 20 per cent of global total energy demand; by 2050, it could be closer to 50 per cent. We will continue to need liquid fuels to power heavy transportation such as ships, trucks and long-haul flights, but may be able to create them – and other materials – by transforming waste, wood and crops using enzymes created by AI. And we could use the inevitable super-intelligence of AI to become more efficient everywhere. This future of low-carbon and mostly domestic secure energy is very possible if we commit now to the right level of consistent R&D investment in areas of highest potential. But, of course, we cannot afford to wait, so we must deploy the technologies already available and capable of continuous improvement. This is the second pillar of any successful approach. Electricity from wind and solar is already competitive with the lowest-cost hydrocarbon alternative. What is needed is better long-duration storage and the infrastructure to bring supplies to market. The efficiency of energy use can be dramatically improved by deploying more advanced software and strengthening economic incentives. New nuclear power, including the exciting potential of small modular reactors, can be deployed. Greater deployment of EVs reduced oil demand, but because we are still using oil and gas as 70 per cent of the UK's energy and will continue to do so long into the future, we must use them cleanly. Eliminating methane emissions is feasible and commercially viable. Capturing carbon and storing it is possible, but it needs further deployment and improvement before it is economically feasible to do so. Third, it is important to remember that no one country can achieve all these goals on their own. Competition is a good thing, but in a time of tight budgets, it is better to work in collaboration with other willing partners. The Earth's climate does not recognise national boundaries. We cannot wait for everyone to join in or allow ourselves to be forced to work at the pace of the slowest. Those who are able must act. For governments, that means putting in place internationally coordinated regulations and incentives, and directing funds to the necessary research. There is a strong case in the UK for creating a central national direction of the science and engineering required for the necessary breakthroughs, because efforts are currently too fragmented. It is also essential that we get a grip on a malfunctioning electricity market in which prices are too high, for which green energy is wrongly blamed, undermining efforts to secure public support for the energy transition. But it should be obvious that governments cannot do everything. That is why the contribution of the private sector is so important, and is the fourth pillar of any successful approach. Companies can bring the organisational capacity and international reach to take discoveries from the laboratory to the market. They cannot run away from the issue because they are part of society, serving its needs. But their success must also be nurtured, supported and celebrated. History shows that the private sector is the engine of human progress. We forget this at our peril. There is much that can be done, and no reason to despair. A major transformation of the way we live and work will take time. Industrial revolutions are complex processes replacing established embedded systems with something new and better. But in this case, the necessary changes will only come if we have a clear plan and a visible path to a world which is truly Beyond Petroleum.
The National
24 minutes ago
- The National
Glastonbury Festival 'appalled' by Bob Vylan's Israeli military chants
The festival organisers' comments come after police said they are assessing videos from the band's performance on Saturday, along with Irish trio Kneecap's set. Rapper Bobby Vylan, one half of the rap punk duo Bob Vylan, led crowds on the festival's West Holts Stage in chants of 'death, death to the IDF' along with 'free, free Palestine'. Responding to comments made by Bob Vylan on Saturday, Glastonbury Festival released a statement in a post on Instagram. READ MORE: Kneecap responds to 'legend' who streamed their Glastonbury set after BBC blackout It read: 'With almost 4000 performances at Glastonbury 2025, there will inevitably be artists and speakers appearing on our stages whose views we do not share, and a performer's presence here should never be seen as a tacit endorsement of their opinions and beliefs. 'However, we are appalled by the statements made from the West Holts stage by Bob Vylan yesterday. 'Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.'
