There’s been a swathe of arts events, festivals, and gatherings being scrutinised in recent days over their links to dubious corporations. Among these, Fossil Free Books has faced an onslaught of anger and general backlash from mainstream journalists and even some from the literary community itself, after investment firm Baillie Gifford pulled its funds from several major festivals.

Read: Baillie Gifford ends festival sponsorships over investments backlash

Strangely, Baillie Gifford has left the scene fairly unscathed, while the grassroots activist group seems to have provoked the ire of the establishment. Many have been left scratching their heads trying to figure out why they’re being targeted, while some notable voices have stepped up to defend FFB. It begs the question within the literary community whether some corporations are “more equal than others,” despite their dealings.

Having worked in mainstream media for more than a decade, I’m hardly surprised by the reaction. Apart from the fact that both the publishing and news industries are struggling with diversity, it’s still very much a wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing situation – trying to prove they have risen above their elitist status. While far-right trolls love to dole out the usual “the media is overrun by the left” stance, the bottom line is that neither arena is representative of the working class or the Global South.

Media response and corporate accountability

UK media tends to be fairly centre-right, especially in comparison to the likes of Norway. Press Gazette’s editor-in-chief Dominic Ponsford writes that right-leaning newspapers still hold the advantage in print news, while it sways slightly right online as well. In 2016, YouGov reported that the British press was more right-wing than those in Europe.

So, why are we discussing all this left and right-wing media nonsense? Well, much of the vitriol against FFB seems to stem from these sources. However, even some left-leaning newspapers have joined the chorus, because, at the end of the day, the establishment does not represent the working-class masses.

Read: Fossil Free Books urges Baillie Gifford to divest from fuels and certain investments

That said, it’s crucial to acknowledge that these festivals must survive and secure long-term funding. Over the past 16 years, arts funding in the UK has been drastically cut, leaving only a fraction of the previous resources. This is why FFB called on Baillie Gifford to divest from fossil fuels and their alleged ties to Israeli settlement investments instead of ceasing their festival sponsorships. Instead, they chose to cut their losses and leave, as corporations looking to avoid bad PR typically do.

As a result, people are pointing their fingers at FFB, stating that they should have anticipated this outcome. However, it’s bizarre that no one seems to be questioning why it’s acceptable to accept sponsorship from corporations that can behave as they wish, using these festivals as marketing opportunities to bolster their own image. This is not a philanthropic, altruistic endeavour. If it were, they would have sat down and had a conversation with FFB. In 2022, the investment firm was forced to divest from its Russian equity by Scottish Parliamentary Pension Scheme trustees amid the war in Ukraine. Unfortunately, there’s no such case for Gaza.

And it’s not just Baillie Gifford. Barclays also pulled their investment from a number of music festivals after artists began boycotting the events.

Sponsors under the microscope

Barclaycard, the official payment partner for the Download Festival, was accused by activists of boosting its investments in arms companies trading with Israel amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Consequently, the thrash metal band Pest Control, along with hardcore punk groups Scowl, Speed, and Zulu, announced their decision not to perform at the three-day event in Leicestershire, UK.

“We cannot sacrifice the principles held by this band and by the scene we come from and represent, just for personal gain,” Leeds-based Pest Control wrote on Instagram. “We will not take part in an event whose sponsor profits from facilitating a genocide.”

Singer CMAT withdrew from the Latitude Festival in Suffolk, where Barclays is a headline sponsor, stating, “I will not allow my precious work, my music… to get into bed with violence.” At the Great Escape Festival in Brighton this past May, over 100 artists also pulled out due to the bank’s involvement.

In response, Barclays clarified that it does not directly invest in companies but provides financial services to various businesses, including those in the defense sector. The bank specified that these companies “supply defence products to NATO and other allies including Ukraine.” They added, “Barclays does not directly invest in these companies,” and that “decisions on the implementation of arms embargoes to other nations” should be made by governments.

Defence and criticism of Fossil Free Books

Naomi Klein, the Women’s Prize for Non-Fiction winner, criticised Baillie Gifford this week, calling them “thin-skinned” for putting literary festivals at risk, supporting her choice to back FFB.

Klein also affirmed that the campaign was well-founded, stating it was based on a “tried and tested strategy to put pressure on governments” and clarifying that the goal was not for festivals to lose their funding.

“It’s obviously uncomfortable, and it’s unfortunate, I don’t know anybody who’s involved in this campaign who was happy that literary festivals are suffering for funding,” she told City A.M. “The goal was to get Baillie Gifford to divest; it was not to get the festivals to lose their sponsors.”

She continued, stating that for Baillie Gifford, the saga should serve as a lesson for large corporations that engage with the arts primarily for public relations benefits.

“Well, guess what, writers have opinions, writers do research. And, you know, I think it’s quite scandalous that they [Baillie Gifford] are so thin-skinned that they are putting these festivals in jeopardy, if indeed that’s what’s happening,” she said. “And I think people should pull their money from Baillie Gifford because it’s a terrible thing to do to the arts. I don’t think they should be angry at activists who are trying to save lives and use whatever levers they can find, understanding that they’re imperfect.”

Read: Naomi Klein among writers boycotting PEN World Voices Festival over Gaza

Fossil Free Books organiser Emma Reynolds told the Guardian earlier this month that focusing on Baillie Gifford was about “strategy” not “moral purity”.

Baillie Gifford has consistently defended its stance, stating that only two per cent of its managed assets are invested in fossil fuels, which they say is below the industry average. It also said in a statement: “Baillie Gifford is also a minor shareholder in multinational companies that have been identified as having problematic operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, namely Airbnb, Booking Holdings and Cemex. In all three cases, these operations are small in the context of their overall business.”

I’m baffled that anyone could defend even a miniscule percentage of these operations, but apparently, it is small enough for some writers to consider it reasonable. Author Richard Osman and Guardian columnist Marina Hyde discussed the events on their popular podcast, “The Rest Is Entertainment.” While Osman was sympathetic to FFB’s cause, Hyde stated: “Art and politics are not the same, and if you insist that all art must be politicised… then what you are wishing for is a contraction of human experience, a contraction of human possibility, because you are saying these things essentially semantically map onto each other.

“This is nonsense. Art can exist just for its own sake. The pleasure of these things, just for their own sake, must be allowed to exist.” It’s disturbing to think that Hyde finds there are no overlaps between art and politics, given that at least fourteen Palestinian poets and writers in Gaza have been killed by Israeli forces. On top of this, so much important literature (think Sinclair Lewis, Ray Bradbury, and George Orwell) stems from the troubles of the world.

Separating politics from the arts

On December 6, Dr. Refaat Alareer, a poet, author, and literature professor known for his activism, was tragically killed in a targeted airstrike by Israel, which also claimed the lives of his brother, his sister, and four of her children. Dr. Alareer had been a faculty member at the Islamic University of Gaza since 2007, teaching literature and creative writing. And in a separate incident this week, Arundhati Roy now faces prosecution concerning her writings about Kashmir from over ten years ago.

Read: Refaat Alareer: books by Palestinian author killed in Gaza

“Travelers” author Helon Habila told Electric Lit: “I think the best, and the most relevant writing, is always an act of protest. A refusal to keep quiet in the face of whatever seeks to dehumanize us—be it power, or oppression, or even simple lack of taste.” The Caine Prize winner is no stranger to the horrors of conflict; his friends and one of his cousins were imprisoned for many years without trial, disappearing into the lower depths of Nigeria’s prison system.

What we have seen is that many in the Global South and the working-class population face significant tribulations that the establishment seems to largely ignore, yet they love to idolise their stories when the time is ripe for award season. As “Girl, Woman, Other” author Bernardine Evaristo notes that all books exist within a culture dominated by power hierarchies, and all fiction addresses power dynamics because they are central to the conflicts that propel narratives, hence writers have a duty as observers to spotlight the problems with the status quo.

Hence this seemingly disproportionate fury directed at FFB, despite their campaign’s alignment with ethical investment and environmental advocacy, showcases a troubling dichotomy in the acceptance of corporate sponsorship. It certainly shows the hierarchical nature of the UK’s publishing industry, which on one hand fights against Big Tech over AI, while simultaneously ignoring the plight of Palestinian writers who are being killed.

Sponsorship should not come at the cost of compromising ethical values or ignoring the broader implications of corporate actions. The arts is a powerful medium of expression and social critique, however, literary professionals must stay vigilant, consistently questioning and challenging the origins of their funding, while recognising their privileged status compared to less visible writers.

Further reading on Fossil Free Books:

• ‘Marina Hyde’s “The Rest is Entertainment” Comments on Fossil Free Books and Baillie Gifford Completely Miss the Point’ – Russell Warfield, Byline Times
• In Defence of Fossil Free Books – Guy Gunaratne, Tribune Magazine
• Who are Fossil Free Books? – Jessica Gaitán Johannesson and Andrés N. Ordorica, Bella Caledonia
• I pulled out of Hay Festival over its links to Baillie Gifford. And it worked – Noreen Masud, OpenDemocracy
• It’s Indie Bookshop Week And We’re Reflecting On Community, Festivals And Fossil Free Books – Mairi, Lighthouse