For a little context on how effective the 'critics' have been: Every Irish act has pulled out over the last week or two; twelve acts in total.
Kneecap were the first to cancel their show, I think, and put it like this on social media:
> "That the organisers of SXSW have taken the decision to mix the arts with the military and weapons companies is unforgivable, that they have done so as we witness a genocide facilitated by the US military and its contractors is depraved."
The loss of earnings to these artists is significant, before anyone tries to claim they're doing this for attention or clout.
Some will surely claim that this is because the Irish are so 'anti-semitic'. Having lived here for decades, I can promise you that there is fuck-all anti Jewish sentiment across the country. What we dislike is settler colonialist land-grabs and ethnic cleansing.
Given the historical parallels between the troubles and the current gaza conflict, It's not exactly surprising specifically Irish musicians decided to boycott.
No, but a lot of money was left on the table. That's always a little surprising.
What's surprising to me is that SXSW thought getting sponsorship from companies whose products have killed over 30,000 Palestinians in a matter of months was a smart and cool thing to do.
To then have the additional hubris of trying to legally intimidate critics with farcical threats is actually a little surprising too. Like, dig up, dipshits.
In these kind of events it's not uncommon that those who actually run the show and those who handle the money side of things are usually very different groups, with very little communication between them. Pitchfork Music Festival had a similar incident a few years ago.
Reminder to those who might think to justify Israel's enthic cleansing campaign by citing the actions of Hamas: The last election in Gaza was in 2006, 18 years ago. They did not receive a majority of votes then, and the majority of Palestinians in Gaza today were too young or not even born to have voted in 2006. Collective punishment of the Gazan people for the actions of Hamas is simply reprehensible.
Hamas won't release them, and the IDF wouldn't stop even if they did. Neither party has any advantage at stopping the conflict right now. The current state of affairs has much bearing to the initial terroristic attack as the killing of Archduke Franz Ferdinand had with the entirety of WWI.
Zionists love to smear the resistance as "rapists" while the IDF itself has a track record of raping Palestinian hostages.[0] Since Israel's brutal settler colonialism is indefensible their primary strategy is to concentrate on making up absurd atrocity propaganda like "40 beheaded babies" and "mass rape" all of which are baseless lies which have been debunked.[1][2]
Israel forbids doctors from speaking to UN group[3], why would they behave in such manner when they claim to be speaking the truth?
Yes. It's called revenge and it's ugly. Do I need to remind you what happened in the US when the killing of Osama Bin Laden was announced? Or the Israeli tradition of bringing out lawn chairs to witness retaliatory bombings of Gaza even prior to Oct 7th? Or are those different because the violence and death they celebrated was carried out by soldiers not terrorists?
> Then they brought back hostages for more rape and torture. Even infants.
They took hostages, yes. Most likely because they thought Israel would do what most civilised countries would do and a) not risk killing the hostages by bombing them and b) negotiate as they had done in the past by offering the release of Palestinian prisoners.
For what we do know from the hostages that were released, they were generally treated relatively well and provided with medical assistance and the same level of food and shelter as their captors. Which makes sense if you intend to release them because if you can't keep them alive, you can't use them for bargaining.
> Even infants.
Is your displeasure with taking infants as hostages? We can debate the morals of taking infants with you when taking hostages versus leaving them to die of exposure but this is hardly a good occasion if there ever was one. Because if the suffering or risk of death to infants is what troubles you, I have bad news about the victims of the IDF bombings - and not just those following Oct 7.
> Hamas can end this right now by giving up it's hostages and surrendering.
Israel has bombed Gaza for months, sent ground troops, killed tens of thousands of people, at least half of which are children. The IDF has made no indication that it knows the location of the hostages and the bombings can at best be described as indiscriminate. Israel has cut off food, water and fuel into Gaza, Israeli protestors have prevented supply trucks from entering into Gaza and the IDF has shot and injured over a hundred unarmed Gazans trying to access a supply truck (aka The Flour Massacre). They even messed up by accidentally killing unarmed hostages with a white flag because they mistook them for Palestinians (or more charitably: Hamas terrorists pretending to be unarmed civilians to lure them into a trap or something).
Regardless of whether Hamas is as irredeemably evil as you think it is, what makes you think the hostages are still alive? Israel clearly has no interest in negotiating and Gazans are resorting to eating animal feed to avoid starvation. If they brought the hostages back for "rape and torture", they'd be long dead by now. If they kept them fed and cared for like the released hostages say, there's still a high likelihood the remaining hostages are dead by now.
Assuming the hostages were where the Hamas terrorists were hiding and the IDF targeted Hamas hideouts and bases rather than going for indiscriminate killings of Palestinians, what makes you think the hostages survived the IDF attacks?
You can either have an IDF that is indiscriminate killing civilians as collective punishment and accepting an extremely high collateral damage per strategic target and likely killed multiple hostages at this point as a consequence, or you can have an IDF that is deliberately accepting the death of hostages by bombing known Hamas bases (which just happen to be in every single building in Gaza City apparently) or you can have an IDF that knows exactly where the hostages are but despite having flattened Gaza city and sent in ground troops either can't or doesn't want to rescue them.
> Hamas can end this right now by giving up it's hostages and surrendering.
Now that we've established that they very likely quite literally can't, let's also look at what you are actually saying.
Hamas can end "this". I assume by "this" you mean the continuing bombings of Gaza by the IDF, the killings of Gazans by the IDF and the denial of food, w...
Israel does a lot worthy of condemnation, much of which is not justified by Hamas's actions.
However it is important to recognise the support Hamas recieves from the civilian Palestinian population. Hamas isn't supported by the majority of Gazan citizens, however their actions on Oct 7 are.
> Seventy-two percent of respondents said they believed the Hamas decision to launch the cross-border rampage in southern Israel was "correct" given its outcome so far, while 22% said it was "incorrect". The remainder were undecided or gave no answer.
> Fifty-two percent of Gazans and 85% of West Bank respondents - or 72% of Palestinian respondents overall - voiced satisfaction with the role of Hamas in the war. Only 11% of Palestinian voiced satisfaction with PA President Mahmoud Abbas.
Of course some of this can likely be explained by fear of reprisal when speaking against Hamas, however the desire to perpetuate war against the Israeli people is commonplace in Palestine.
>However it is important to recognise the support Hamas recieves from the civilian Palestinian population. Hamas isn't supported by the majority of Gazan citizens, however their actions on Oct 7 are.
"2023 marks deadliest year on record for children in the occupied West Bank" - Save the Children, published: 18 SEPTEMBER 2023.
>Of course some of this can likely be explained by fear of reprisal when speaking against Hamas, however the desire to perpetuate war against the Israeli people is commonplace in Palestine.
Which is completely understandable and justified, it is the natural desire & reaction to 75+ years of brutal settler colonialism with apartheid and ethnic-cleansing.
The desire to continue attacks that intentionally maximise civilian casualties as part of a war you are doomed to lose is not.
If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months.
The symmetric attacks that justify the next are doomed to continue forever until both sides can hold back.
Hamas will never be that partner in peace for Israel.
Egypt and Jordan both managed to fight with Israel and come to a lasting peace, and I feel like insisting that Palestinians are incapable of the same robs them of any agency.
I of course give Israel the same accountability. The settlements are unjustifiable. The response to Oct 7 needs a huge amount of investigation in order ensure all has been done to minimise civilian casualties.
The same way Palestine needs to stop firing rockets for a lasting peace to be possible, Israel will likely need to take a couple terrorist attacks on the chin once a feasible partner for peace in Palestine has been found.
>If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months.
That's a blatant lie and you know it. Since Israel can murder 14K+ children and still receive support as we are witnessing, your proposed strategy most certainly will not yield the claimed results.
>Hamas will never be that partner in peace for Israel.
So why did Israel finance and support Hamas? That's because Israel had never any real interest in peace, it's a settler colonial project which wants all of the land with ideally no Palestinians in it, for which there is more than enough evidence.
>Egypt and Jordan both managed to fight with Israel and come to a lasting peace, and I feel like insisting that Palestinians are incapable of the same robs them of any agency.
The framing of this is just outright laughable. Israel holds all of the power and thus bears the prime responsibility.
>I of course give Israel the same accountability. The settlements are unjustifiable. The response to Oct 7 needs a huge amount of investigation in order ensure all has been done to minimise civilian casualties.
I'm not even going to entertain this utter dishonesty for a second. They've murdered 14K+ children, you can keep roleplaying as hard as you want but anyone who has seen a fraction of the evidence knows that there is plenty of genocidal intent documented by south africa's ICJ documents and they acted upon that.
>The same way Palestine needs to stop firing rockets for a lasting peace to be possible, Israel will likely need to take a couple terrorist attacks on the chin once a feasible partner for peace in Palestine has been found.
You are confusing cause & effect, but you already know that. The rockets are being fired because Israel has brutally oppressed, murdered and ethnically cleansed Palestinians for 75+ years with near impunity. Give me a break with your soft zionist BS manipulation.
But what effect does firing rockets - or, for that matter, massacring a thousand civilians in their homes - actually has on the outcome of this conflict?
It's one thing to justify something as military necessity, but it's hard to see any in Hamas' actions. It certainly doesn't get them any closer to getting what they want. But it does cost them support that they would otherwise have. Furthermore, realistically, the best that Palestinians can hope for is some form of two-state solutions - "from the river to the sea" is not going to happen. But it's that much harder to argue for a Palestinian state if Hamas are the ones running it, given the kind of governance they have demonstrated internally, and the kind of brutality we've seen on Oct 7.
>But what effect does firing rockets - or, for that matter, massacring a thousand civilians in their homes - actually has on the outcome of this conflict?
Why do you feel the need to lie about what happened if you're convinced about what you are saying? They did certainly not massacre a thousand civilians in "their homes"(stolen land & homes of Palestinians living next to their concentration camps). IDF soliders are not civilians, reservists who are armed and ready to fight are not civilians, settlers who engage in belligerent occupation are not civilians. If you subtract all of these legitimate military targets including those who were killed by the IDF itself, you have the clear evidence that a bunch of resistance fighters have an infinitely better ratio than the Israel which is on trial for having committed genocide.
>It's one thing to justify something as military necessity, but it's hard to see any in Hamas' actions.
You say that unironically about khamas, but don't apply the same criticism of Israel, who engaged in barbarism and the kind of evil that makes hamas look like angels in comparison. What "military necessity" was there for israel to murder 14k children and starve them to death?
> It certainly doesn't get them any closer to getting what they want.
The world has now woken up to Israel's evil and most people recognize it for what it is, a genocidal apartheid ethno-state hellbent on destroying the natives by any means. Zionists have lost control of the narrative, so I'd say that does indeed get the resistance somewhat closer to getting what they want.
>Furthermore, realistically, the best that Palestinians can hope for is some form of two-state solutions - "from the river to the sea" is not going to happen.
Speculative, dismissed. Israel is a paper tiger, so I'd say there is a very realistic chance of "from the river to the sea" happening.
>But it's that much harder to argue for a Palestinian state if Hamas are the ones running it, given the kind of governance they have demonstrated internally, and the kind of brutality we've seen on Oct 7.
So let me get this straight: After a single day of inflicting on the brutal settler colonialists a fraction of the pain which Israel has been inflicting on Palestinians for 75+ years, you claim "it's hard to argue for a Palestinians state" but you see no problem in granting that to Israel!?
You are NOT a serious person.
> If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months.
Public opinion polling shows that the lionshare of support for Israel in America, where it matters most, comes from Evangelical Christians. They support Israel because they believe it is necessary to reincarnate their Messiah. Their support is unconditional, not rational, so what you propose is nonsense.
It will continue until the boomers (and to a considerably lesser extent, gen-x) die. Then Israel will have lost their support base in America and meaningful change might be possible. Until then, it is important to keep the pressure on to make sure younger generations don't fall down this same radical path.
> Reminder to those who might think to justify Israel's enthic cleansing campaign by citing the actions of Hamas.
The proportion of civilians -and more specifically children- killed should be enough to discredit any justification of the current cleansing in progress. All the rest is just brain rot, leaning towards open support of genocide.
Unfortunately, it appears as if we have learnt nothing in the last 80+ years, and "it's complicated" is a great excuse to tolerate such actions, as it has been in the past.
So the whole argument/protest is based on SXSW having “ ties to weapons manufacturers supplying Israel” but they don’t provide a single source or evidence for it?
"He cited the involvement of Raytheon and BAE Systems, two of the companies involved in this year’s SXSW festival.
“These defense contractors make the weapons that the IDF uses to bomb Gaza. The IDF has now killed at least one in every 75 inhabitants of Gaza, [and] I refuse to be complicit in that,” Williams said. “I don’t believe that a music festival should include profiteers of war – I believe that art is a tool to create a better world and has no place alongside warmongers.”
Well luckily we live in 2024 where finding any amount of information is literally a few clicks away and there’s more than enough media coverage to stay informed. Someone that might be interested in finding more can… look it up.
I don’t think it’s reasonable that every single post needs to reference what’s going on with sources to make their point. We’re all adults, we all have access to the internet and news outlets.
It would be nice if we could design a legal system (heck, any system!) that couldn't be abused by those with lots of money and lawyers to silence those with less money & lawyers, regardless of validity or legality of a claim.
33 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 87.9 ms ] threadKneecap were the first to cancel their show, I think, and put it like this on social media:
> "That the organisers of SXSW have taken the decision to mix the arts with the military and weapons companies is unforgivable, that they have done so as we witness a genocide facilitated by the US military and its contractors is depraved."
The loss of earnings to these artists is significant, before anyone tries to claim they're doing this for attention or clout.
Some will surely claim that this is because the Irish are so 'anti-semitic'. Having lived here for decades, I can promise you that there is fuck-all anti Jewish sentiment across the country. What we dislike is settler colonialist land-grabs and ethnic cleansing.
What's surprising to me is that SXSW thought getting sponsorship from companies whose products have killed over 30,000 Palestinians in a matter of months was a smart and cool thing to do.
To then have the additional hubris of trying to legally intimidate critics with farcical threats is actually a little surprising too. Like, dig up, dipshits.
Time to donate to the EFF again.
[0] UN experts condemn credible reports of executions, sexual assault by Israeli soldiers - https://thehill.com/policy/international/4477340-un-experts-...
[1] UN Report CAN'T Prove 10/7 Mass Sex Assault Claims - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in8u_VXi3gA
[2] Local Israelis DEBUNK NYT Sexual Assault Allegation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKgHaK-CoYs
[3] Israel forbids doctors from speaking to UN group - https://www.timesofisrael.com/government-forbids-doctors-fro...
> dancing in celebration
Yes. It's called revenge and it's ugly. Do I need to remind you what happened in the US when the killing of Osama Bin Laden was announced? Or the Israeli tradition of bringing out lawn chairs to witness retaliatory bombings of Gaza even prior to Oct 7th? Or are those different because the violence and death they celebrated was carried out by soldiers not terrorists?
> Then they brought back hostages for more rape and torture. Even infants.
They took hostages, yes. Most likely because they thought Israel would do what most civilised countries would do and a) not risk killing the hostages by bombing them and b) negotiate as they had done in the past by offering the release of Palestinian prisoners.
For what we do know from the hostages that were released, they were generally treated relatively well and provided with medical assistance and the same level of food and shelter as their captors. Which makes sense if you intend to release them because if you can't keep them alive, you can't use them for bargaining.
> Even infants.
Is your displeasure with taking infants as hostages? We can debate the morals of taking infants with you when taking hostages versus leaving them to die of exposure but this is hardly a good occasion if there ever was one. Because if the suffering or risk of death to infants is what troubles you, I have bad news about the victims of the IDF bombings - and not just those following Oct 7.
> Hamas can end this right now by giving up it's hostages and surrendering.
Israel has bombed Gaza for months, sent ground troops, killed tens of thousands of people, at least half of which are children. The IDF has made no indication that it knows the location of the hostages and the bombings can at best be described as indiscriminate. Israel has cut off food, water and fuel into Gaza, Israeli protestors have prevented supply trucks from entering into Gaza and the IDF has shot and injured over a hundred unarmed Gazans trying to access a supply truck (aka The Flour Massacre). They even messed up by accidentally killing unarmed hostages with a white flag because they mistook them for Palestinians (or more charitably: Hamas terrorists pretending to be unarmed civilians to lure them into a trap or something).
Regardless of whether Hamas is as irredeemably evil as you think it is, what makes you think the hostages are still alive? Israel clearly has no interest in negotiating and Gazans are resorting to eating animal feed to avoid starvation. If they brought the hostages back for "rape and torture", they'd be long dead by now. If they kept them fed and cared for like the released hostages say, there's still a high likelihood the remaining hostages are dead by now.
Assuming the hostages were where the Hamas terrorists were hiding and the IDF targeted Hamas hideouts and bases rather than going for indiscriminate killings of Palestinians, what makes you think the hostages survived the IDF attacks?
You can either have an IDF that is indiscriminate killing civilians as collective punishment and accepting an extremely high collateral damage per strategic target and likely killed multiple hostages at this point as a consequence, or you can have an IDF that is deliberately accepting the death of hostages by bombing known Hamas bases (which just happen to be in every single building in Gaza City apparently) or you can have an IDF that knows exactly where the hostages are but despite having flattened Gaza city and sent in ground troops either can't or doesn't want to rescue them.
> Hamas can end this right now by giving up it's hostages and surrendering.
Now that we've established that they very likely quite literally can't, let's also look at what you are actually saying.
Hamas can end "this". I assume by "this" you mean the continuing bombings of Gaza by the IDF, the killings of Gazans by the IDF and the denial of food, w...
However it is important to recognise the support Hamas recieves from the civilian Palestinian population. Hamas isn't supported by the majority of Gazan citizens, however their actions on Oct 7 are.
> Seventy-two percent of respondents said they believed the Hamas decision to launch the cross-border rampage in southern Israel was "correct" given its outcome so far, while 22% said it was "incorrect". The remainder were undecided or gave no answer.
> Fifty-two percent of Gazans and 85% of West Bank respondents - or 72% of Palestinian respondents overall - voiced satisfaction with the role of Hamas in the war. Only 11% of Palestinian voiced satisfaction with PA President Mahmoud Abbas.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/poll-shows-palesti...
Of course some of this can likely be explained by fear of reprisal when speaking against Hamas, however the desire to perpetuate war against the Israeli people is commonplace in Palestine.
"2023 marks deadliest year on record for children in the occupied West Bank" - Save the Children, published: 18 SEPTEMBER 2023.
>Of course some of this can likely be explained by fear of reprisal when speaking against Hamas, however the desire to perpetuate war against the Israeli people is commonplace in Palestine.
Which is completely understandable and justified, it is the natural desire & reaction to 75+ years of brutal settler colonialism with apartheid and ethnic-cleansing.
The desire to continue attacks that intentionally maximise civilian casualties as part of a war you are doomed to lose is not.
If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months.
The symmetric attacks that justify the next are doomed to continue forever until both sides can hold back.
Hamas will never be that partner in peace for Israel.
Egypt and Jordan both managed to fight with Israel and come to a lasting peace, and I feel like insisting that Palestinians are incapable of the same robs them of any agency.
I of course give Israel the same accountability. The settlements are unjustifiable. The response to Oct 7 needs a huge amount of investigation in order ensure all has been done to minimise civilian casualties.
The same way Palestine needs to stop firing rockets for a lasting peace to be possible, Israel will likely need to take a couple terrorist attacks on the chin once a feasible partner for peace in Palestine has been found.
That's a blatant lie and you know it. Since Israel can murder 14K+ children and still receive support as we are witnessing, your proposed strategy most certainly will not yield the claimed results.
>Hamas will never be that partner in peace for Israel.
So why did Israel finance and support Hamas? That's because Israel had never any real interest in peace, it's a settler colonial project which wants all of the land with ideally no Palestinians in it, for which there is more than enough evidence.
>Egypt and Jordan both managed to fight with Israel and come to a lasting peace, and I feel like insisting that Palestinians are incapable of the same robs them of any agency.
The framing of this is just outright laughable. Israel holds all of the power and thus bears the prime responsibility.
>I of course give Israel the same accountability. The settlements are unjustifiable. The response to Oct 7 needs a huge amount of investigation in order ensure all has been done to minimise civilian casualties.
I'm not even going to entertain this utter dishonesty for a second. They've murdered 14K+ children, you can keep roleplaying as hard as you want but anyone who has seen a fraction of the evidence knows that there is plenty of genocidal intent documented by south africa's ICJ documents and they acted upon that.
>The same way Palestine needs to stop firing rockets for a lasting peace to be possible, Israel will likely need to take a couple terrorist attacks on the chin once a feasible partner for peace in Palestine has been found.
You are confusing cause & effect, but you already know that. The rockets are being fired because Israel has brutally oppressed, murdered and ethnically cleansed Palestinians for 75+ years with near impunity. Give me a break with your soft zionist BS manipulation.
It's one thing to justify something as military necessity, but it's hard to see any in Hamas' actions. It certainly doesn't get them any closer to getting what they want. But it does cost them support that they would otherwise have. Furthermore, realistically, the best that Palestinians can hope for is some form of two-state solutions - "from the river to the sea" is not going to happen. But it's that much harder to argue for a Palestinian state if Hamas are the ones running it, given the kind of governance they have demonstrated internally, and the kind of brutality we've seen on Oct 7.
Why do you feel the need to lie about what happened if you're convinced about what you are saying? They did certainly not massacre a thousand civilians in "their homes"(stolen land & homes of Palestinians living next to their concentration camps). IDF soliders are not civilians, reservists who are armed and ready to fight are not civilians, settlers who engage in belligerent occupation are not civilians. If you subtract all of these legitimate military targets including those who were killed by the IDF itself, you have the clear evidence that a bunch of resistance fighters have an infinitely better ratio than the Israel which is on trial for having committed genocide.
>It's one thing to justify something as military necessity, but it's hard to see any in Hamas' actions.
You say that unironically about khamas, but don't apply the same criticism of Israel, who engaged in barbarism and the kind of evil that makes hamas look like angels in comparison. What "military necessity" was there for israel to murder 14k children and starve them to death?
> It certainly doesn't get them any closer to getting what they want.
The world has now woken up to Israel's evil and most people recognize it for what it is, a genocidal apartheid ethno-state hellbent on destroying the natives by any means. Zionists have lost control of the narrative, so I'd say that does indeed get the resistance somewhat closer to getting what they want.
>Furthermore, realistically, the best that Palestinians can hope for is some form of two-state solutions - "from the river to the sea" is not going to happen.
Speculative, dismissed. Israel is a paper tiger, so I'd say there is a very realistic chance of "from the river to the sea" happening.
>But it's that much harder to argue for a Palestinian state if Hamas are the ones running it, given the kind of governance they have demonstrated internally, and the kind of brutality we've seen on Oct 7.
So let me get this straight: After a single day of inflicting on the brutal settler colonialists a fraction of the pain which Israel has been inflicting on Palestinians for 75+ years, you claim "it's hard to argue for a Palestinians state" but you see no problem in granting that to Israel!? You are NOT a serious person.
Public opinion polling shows that the lionshare of support for Israel in America, where it matters most, comes from Evangelical Christians. They support Israel because they believe it is necessary to reincarnate their Messiah. Their support is unconditional, not rational, so what you propose is nonsense.
As we've seen in Ukraine, thankfully conservative thought currently does not dominate the US's foreign policy.
Based on polling, Gazans don't support Hamas overall, just their actions on Oct 7.
I would never justify forgoing elections in favor of relying on polling, as polling is only indicative of broad sentiment and not precise enough.
The proportion of civilians -and more specifically children- killed should be enough to discredit any justification of the current cleansing in progress. All the rest is just brain rot, leaning towards open support of genocide.
Unfortunately, it appears as if we have learnt nothing in the last 80+ years, and "it's complicated" is a great excuse to tolerate such actions, as it has been in the past.
“These defense contractors make the weapons that the IDF uses to bomb Gaza. The IDF has now killed at least one in every 75 inhabitants of Gaza, [and] I refuse to be complicit in that,” Williams said. “I don’t believe that a music festival should include profiteers of war – I believe that art is a tool to create a better world and has no place alongside warmongers.”
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2024/mar/06/sxsw-musicians...
The first results for “sxsw Palestine”:
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/3/13/artists-and-spe...
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/13/us/sxsw-army-sponsorship-...
https://www.vulture.com/article/sxsw-palestine-defense-indus...
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/texas/news/dozens-of-artists-boy...
https://pitchfork.com/news/sxsw-addresses-us-army-sponsorshi...
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2459328/more-than-80-participan...
https://amp.theguardian.com/music/2024/mar/06/sxsw-musicians...
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/03/13/us/sxsw-military-sponsors...
I don’t think it’s reasonable that every single post needs to reference what’s going on with sources to make their point. We’re all adults, we all have access to the internet and news outlets.