Robert Kraft says he is putting millions behind humanitarian relief as the controversy surrounding Macklemore’s removal from Ed Sheeran’s Loop Tour continues to grow.
The latest development came after Macklemore announced a $1 million donation connected to his earnings from the tour and publicly challenged Kraft to match it. The rapper said his net tour earnings would go to six organizations supporting Palestinians, including Palestine Children’s Relief Fund, HEAL Palestine, Gaza Soup Kitchen, Medical Aid for Palestinians, UNRWA USA National Committee, and Anera. The Macklemore Palestine donation quickly became another chapter in a dispute that started onstage.
Macklemore directly called on Kraft to contribute as well. In his statement, he wrote, “I invite Robert Kraft to match my donation.” He also said, “Whatever we disagree about, perhaps we can agree on this: Palestinian lives are worth protecting.”
Kraft responded by saying a larger commitment was already being discussed before Macklemore issued the public challenge. Kraft said Sheeran had previously asked him to match a $2 million humanitarian donation for people affected by the crisis. Kraft opened his statement by saying, “I have dedicated much of my life to building bridges between all people.” He added, “I believe deeply that all lives are worth protecting.”
That distinction matters. Kraft did not describe his $2 million commitment as a direct response to Macklemore’s $1 million challenge. Instead, he said Sheeran had approached him first. The result, however, is that both men are now publicly attaching significant donations to humanitarian assistance while remaining sharply divided over the events that pushed Macklemore off the tour.
The dispute began after Macklemore opened for Sheeran at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey. The rapper made pro-Palestinian remarks during the September 4 concert and said “Free Palestine” from the stage. Macklemore has publicly advocated for Palestinians for years and released the protest song “Hind’s Hall” in 2024. Reuters reported that the Israeli American Council later backed a petition calling for his removal from the tour.
The situation escalated when venues objected to Macklemore remaining on the lineup. Sheeran said upcoming venues informed his team that shows could be pulled if Macklemore continued as an opener. Concert promoter Messina Touring Group similarly said venues would not allow concerts to proceed with Macklemore on the bill, creating the possibility of cancellations affecting large numbers of ticket holders. Sheeran maintained that the final decision belonged to the promoter and venues, not him.
Kraft, whose Kraft Group owns Gillette Stadium, publicly confirmed that he did not want Macklemore performing there. In a statement reported by People, Kraft cited what he characterized as Macklemore’s broader record of “antisemitic rhetoric and imagery” and said Gillette Stadium did not want its events used as a platform for hate speech. Macklemore has rejected the idea that his advocacy for Palestinians amounts to hostility toward Jewish people.
Understanding why those two words became such a flashpoint requires separating the concert dispute from the much older Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
According to the United Nations history of the Question of Palestine, the modern dispute developed through competing Jewish and Palestinian Arab national movements during the British Mandate period. In 1947, the United Nations proposed dividing the territory into separate Arab and Jewish states, with Jerusalem under an international arrangement. Israel declared independence in 1948; war followed, and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes, an event Palestinians call the Nakba.
The conflict changed again in 1967 when Israel captured the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. According to Reuters, the unresolved issues that have dominated later negotiations include Palestinian statehood, Israeli security, borders, Israeli settlements in occupied territory, control of Jerusalem and the future of Palestinian refugees. The International Court of Justice said in a 2024 advisory opinion that Israeli settlement and annexation policies in occupied Palestinian territory violate international law. Israel has disputed international legal conclusions concerning parts of the conflict and maintains security and historical claims regarding contested territory.
The current era of fighting was dramatically intensified by Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, which killed about 1,200 people according to Israeli figures and included the taking of hostages. Reuters reports that Israel responded with a major military campaign in Gaza. The broader conflict, however, did not begin on October 7. It sits inside decades of unresolved disputes over land, sovereignty, security, displacement and Palestinian self-determination.
That history helps explain why “Free Palestine” does not carry one universally accepted meaning. The Anti Defamation League says many people use the slogan as a call for Palestinian rights or for an independent Palestinian state existing alongside Israel and do not intend it as support for violence. The organization also says the phrase has sometimes been directed at Jewish people and institutions in threatening or violent contexts, which contributes to why some Jewish listeners hear it differently.
Supporters of the phrase commonly understand it as a demand for Palestinian freedom, equality, an end to occupation or Palestinian statehood. Critics sometimes interpret it as denying Israel’s right to exist, particularly when it appears alongside the longer and separately disputed slogan about Palestine stretching “from the river to the sea.” As reporting by The Washington Post has documented, advocates and critics have long disagreed over whether such language describes liberation within one state, two states, or the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. Context and the speaker’s stated meaning therefore matter.
In Macklemore’s case, he has explicitly described his message as one of Palestinian freedom rather than an attack on Jewish people. He told Jewish listeners that criticism of Israel was not criticism of them and said, “My message is for peace.”
Kraft’s position is different. His public statements indicate that his objection was not simply to someone advocating for Palestinians, but to what he viewed as the totality of Macklemore’s rhetoric, imagery, and presentation. Sheeran, meanwhile, said the venues and promoter ultimately made the decision that removed Macklemore from the remaining dates. That distinction is why describing Macklemore as being removed solely for uttering two words misses part of the dispute, even though “Free Palestine” became its most visible symbol.
The controversy has now moved beyond who gets a stadium stage. Macklemore has put $1 million behind Palestinian humanitarian organizations; Kraft says he is matching Sheeran’s separate $2 million humanitarian commitment, and a fight that started over what could be said during an opening set has become another example of how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to reshape conversations far beyond the region itself.
