Live Nation’s Trump-Allied Board Pick Draws Sharp Backlash

Live Nation Entertainment’s decision to add Richard Grenell — a longtime confidant of former President Donald Trump who now heads the Kennedy Center — to its board of directors is reverberating across the music and ticketing industries, with critics calling the move an unmistakable bid to curry favor with a White House that will soon oversee the company’s mammoth antitrust battle.

The concert giant announced Grenell’s election to its 11-member board on Tuesday, praising his “valuable perspective as Live Nation continues to contribute to a growing live-music industry around the globe,” board chair Randall Mays said in a statement. Grenell, 58, has little direct experience in touring or ticketing, but he has emerged as one of Trump’s most trusted political surrogates, serving as U.S. ambassador to Germany and, later, as a special envoy in the current administration. In February, Trump installed him as interim president of the Kennedy Center after a contested takeover of the federally chartered arts complex.

Critics see a “transactional” play

Industry reaction has been swift and scathing.

“It’s right in front of our eyes,” said Gary Witt, CEO of the Milwaukee-based Pabst Theater Group. “One group is trying to buy its way out of the DOJ and 40 state attorneys general pursuing them.” A second executive, speaking to The Hollywood Reporter on condition of anonymity, called the hire “the most thinly veiled attempt to influence a legal proceeding that I’ve ever seen.”

Roger Friedman, editor of Showbiz411, labeled Grenell “reviled” inside artistic circles and noted that dozens of performers have pulled out of Kennedy Center bookings since his arrival. “He’s now the only member of the Live Nation board without any show-biz cred,” Friedman wrote, arguing the appointment offers Live Nation “access to Trump” as it looks to ease its mounting legal headaches.

MSNBC columnist Ja’han Jones went further, likening the board move to “the kind of scenario one might sooner expect under a kleptocracy,” comparing it to Meta’s decision to seat UFC chief (and Trump ally) Dana White.

A legal cloud that keeps growing

Live Nation is battling on several fronts. In May 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general from across the country sued the company, alleging it leverages ownership of Ticketmaster and dominant promotion and venue arms to stifle competition and inflate prices. The government is seeking remedies that could include forcing Live Nation to divest Ticketmaster. The company’s bid this spring to narrow the case was rejected by a federal judge.

More recently, the DOJ confirmed it is weighing potential criminal charges over alleged collusion with rival promoter AEG tied to the companies’ pandemic-era refund policies — claims Live Nation “vigorously” denies.

Live Nation’s defense

Company executives have consistently rejected monopoly claims. Speaking last year, Dan Wall, executive vice president for corporate and regulatory affairs, argued that breaking up Live Nation “will not lower ticket prices” and that the DOJ suit “misleads the public into thinking otherwise.” Grenell, who did not respond to an interview request, has not publicly addressed how his political relationships might intersect with Live Nation’s legal strategy.

Artists and fans weigh options

The appointment has reinvigorated calls for musicians to exert pressure. Lefsetz urged major acts to withhold new deals with the promoter until Grenell is removed, arguing that “the entire business relies on the acts — without them it’s nothing.” Bruce Springsteen, whose recent on-stage criticism of Trump drew a presidential rebuke on Truth Social, was cited as an example of artists “speaking truth to power.”

Whether such action materializes remains to be seen. Industry veterans note that the company controls a majority of North America’s major amphitheaters and arenas, leaving many performers with limited alternatives.

What’s next

Grenell will attend his first board meeting in June, just weeks before the next key status conference in the government’s civil case. Policy observers are split on the practical impact. “You can argue Live Nation knows it’s in trouble and is increasingly desperate,” one antitrust scholar told The Hollywood Reporter. “But you can also say the case is finished now” if the White House loses interest.