The energy surrounding major live events is absolutely electric, and Taylor Swift’s upcoming Eras Tour dates in Milan on July 13 and 14 are no exception, building anticipation for months as excitement becomes palpable. But alongside the soaring emotions, key issues about how fans interact with these massive cultural moments and each other have surfaced, touching on concert etiquette in our digital age.
One major point of contention revolves around the practice of queuing, specifically, the long lines that form outside venues sometimes days or even weeks in advance. The desire to secure a favorable spot close to the stage is immense for highly anticipated shows. We’ve seen this phenomenon before, notably with Harry Styles, where grassroots fan organizations even formed to help manage the queue, keeping track of spots and allowing for necessary breaks. It’s a testament to the dedication of fans, enduring long waits under the sun, all for that chance to be closer to their idol. For the upcoming Taylor Swift dates, the question isn’t whether lines will happen, but rather how extreme they might become.
Social media has amplified these discussions, sometimes in unexpected ways. Graphics promoting lining up weeks in advance for the Swift concert began circulating, immediately igniting a heated debate online. Questions flew: Was this safe? Was it wise? What about people with jobs? The debate quickly escalated, becoming intertwined with fandom wars and anti-fandom sentiment. Some online commentators, reacting strongly to the perceived extremism of lining up for so long, were criticized for acting like “boomers,” ready to lash out at young fans without applying critical thinking. The reality, as pointed out within these discussions, is that those circulating graphics were likely fake – a textbook example of “rage bait” or trolling, easily debunked by anyone with a bit of common sense and a look at their implausible suggestions. It seems our eagerness to criticize can sometimes override our critical thinking, perhaps fueled, it’s suggested, by existing dislikes for certain artists.
But the etiquette discussion extends far beyond just queuing. Another significant area of friction has been the rules and regulations governing what attendees can bring into the venue. For the San Siro dates, the official regulations published by the event organizer caused considerable anger among fans. Initially, the list of prohibited items was extensive and, to many, excessively restrictive. Items listed included anything obscuring the face (save for medical/religious items), clothing that obstructs views, handcuffs, animals (unless service animals), chains, studded jewelry, various personal transport devices like bicycles and skateboards, glass, hard plastic, or metal containers, umbrellas, strollers, stadium horns, briefcases, bags larger than a clutch or non-transparent bags, any weapons, flammable materials, spray products (sunscreen, pepper spray, insecticides, paint), balloons, frisbees, projectiles, musical instruments, laser pointers, sticks, poles, batons, alcoholic beverages, food, illegal substances, flyers, banners, signs, political billboards, professional cameras, camcorders, GoPros, power banks, drones, lights, selfie sticks, laptops, and tablets. Video or audio recordings were limited to personal cell phones, and even water bottles were restricted to one clear plastic bottle, no larger than 50cl. This stringent list led to outcry, with fans comparing the rules for a Taylor Swift concert to those for football matches at San Siro, suggesting the former were excessively harsh.
Fans voiced frustration about dead phones, carrying pepper spray for safety, and overpriced venue food and water, highlighting risks to well-being and drawing somber parallels to a tragic incident in Brazil, leading to updated rules for San Siro that now permit certain backpacks, power banks, and food, demonstrating that fan feedback can influence policy.
Beyond official rules, a broader conversation about concert etiquette has been raging since the pandemic, with many feeling that post-isolation, some people have forgotten basic public behavior, especially in crowded settings, fueled by recent alarming incidents like fans throwing ashes on stage at Pink, Bebe Rexha being hit by a thrown phone, and Cardi B reacting to being splashed.
The alarming trend of throwing objects at performers has become a major point of debate; while seemingly obvious that it’s unacceptable, artists like Taylor Swift have directly asked fans to stop due to safety concerns, and others like Harry Styles and Billie Eilish have been physically harmed, leading many to believe this behavior is disrespectful, regardless of intent.
The etiquette discussions aren’t limited to interactions with the artist; they also concern how fans interact with each other. Behaviors that can negatively impact the experience of those around you are frequent topics of online debate. Shrieking excessively, for instance, has become a point of contention. A viral TikTok from a Taylor Swift show in Sydney highlighted this, with a concertgoer complaining about a fan “screeching” through the songs, making it difficult to hear Taylor herself. The video sparked a mixed reaction online; some defended the enthusiastic fan, arguing that screaming along, especially during iconic songs like ‘All Too Well’, is part of the experience. Others agreed that excessive noise from fellow attendees can indeed ruin the show for others who paid to hear the artist. The debate boils down to a conflict between individual expression of excitement and the collective experience of the audience.
Another common complaint involves the overuse of phones during concerts. The sarcastic observation “Everyone just living in the moment, no phones in sight” is a frequent comment under concert videos online, highlighting the perceived issue of fans watching the entire show through their phone screens. Critics argue that constantly filming or holding up phones obstructs the view for people behind them and detracts from the shared, immersive experience of live music. Music outlets like Rolling Stone have weighed in, advising fans to “put your phone away and live in the moment,” suggesting that you paid for a live experience, not a recording session. This practice again pits individual desires (capturing the moment, sharing on social media) against the communal enjoyment of the event.
This debate about audience behavior isn’t new and extends beyond concerts, as evidenced by early 20th-century movie theaters, which saw intense discussions about appropriate conduct, from lighting to talking, and even segregation until 1964. A 1944 MGM short film, ‘Movie Pests,’ warned against disruptive behaviors, highlighting that societies have always debated public entertainment norms, which continue to evolve.
The recent theatrical runs of films based on major tours or musicals, like ‘Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour’ and ‘Wicked’, have brought the audience participation debate into the cinema space. During screenings of the Eras Tour movie, fans were filmed dancing and singing along, replicating the concert experience in the theater. This behavior, while celebrated by some as extending the ‘event’ feel, annoyed other moviegoers who expected a traditional quiet viewing experience. A viral video showed one woman at a ‘Wicked’ screening confronting others, stating she was there to hear the actors sing, “not you.” The debate became so prominent that even stars weighed in, with ‘Wicked’ star Cynthia Erivo saying singing along is “wonderful” and ‘Moana 2’ star Dwayne Johnson suggesting people who paid should be able to sing. This, too, met backlash online, with critics arguing they also paid and didn’t want to hear amateur singing. Movie chains like Alamo Drafthouse, known for strict no-talking/texting policies to ensure an immersive experience, represent one end of the spectrum, believing respect for the film and fellow viewers is paramount. However, some theaters and distributors have leaned into the participatory aspect, offering special sing-along screenings for films like ‘Wicked’ and recognizing that for films tied to fan culture, the audience might specifically want to engage collectively. Michael Barstow of ACX Cinemas saw the dancing and singing at the Swift movie screenings not as a problem but as part of the experience people paid for, suggesting venues should “lean into and embrace” it rather than being “the fun police.” This mirrors the concert debate: balancing the desire for collective, expressive fan engagement with the need for mutual respect and ensuring everyone can enjoy the event they paid for. The core tension remains: who gets to define the ‘right’ way to experience these shared cultural moments?
The spectrum of debates, from practical queuing and venue rules to subjective issues like noise levels and filming, reveals how passionate fans are and how varied their expectations can be, suggesting that as pop culture events grow, conversations around etiquette will continue to evolve, reflecting our changing ways of experiencing entertainment and interacting in shared spaces.
Let’s delve deeper into the ongoing conversation surrounding concert etiquette, moving beyond general uproar to examine specific, debated aspects of fan behavior like the use of fan signs and the practice of bringing very young children to loud live music events, both raising fundamental questions about individual expression versus collective experience and safety.
Fan signs, those handmade or printed messages held aloft by concertgoers, have long been a staple of the live music experience. For many, they’re a creative outlet, a way to connect directly with an artist, share a joke, or simply declare their devotion. They range from heartfelt messages to witty puns, personal anecdotes, or calls for interaction with the performer. However, they are also a frequent source of annoyance and debate among attendees, raising the ire of those whose views they obstruct. The simple act of holding up a piece of cardboard can unexpectedly ignite tensions in the crowd.
Music journalist Marc Hirsh famously dubbed fan signs “pure evil” and “the worst development” of the 2000s, arguing they are selfish, cause arm fatigue, and block the view of others who paid for the privilege of watching the performance, crystallizing the frustration of those whose sightlines are obstructed by these signs.
Despite harsh criticism, many fans and artists see signs positively, believing they can enhance the concert experience by adding humor and connection, especially when “done with taste and respect and not just for social media clout,” potentially making “other concertgoers and the artists laugh.”
The crucial qualifier of “taste and respect” is subjective, but signs become inappropriate when they make an artist genuinely uncomfortable, as Reneé Rapp noted on Instagram, stating that while some signs are funny, others make her feel “a little weird about it recently” and “like a piece of meat,” emphasizing the need for fans to consider the impact of their messages.
