On the long list of people from Donald Trump’s inner circle who are personally benefiting from his second-term agenda, Richard Grenell might be flying under your radar.
Grenell — the former U.S. ambassador to Germany and staunch MAGA ally whom Trump named his “special missions envoy” in the current administration — has become one of Trump’s liaisons to the entertainment world, as the administration works to flex its power over the industry. As the president was mounting his takeover of the Kennedy Center, Trump named Grenell as its president.
More recently, Grenell was named to the board of Live Nation, the live performance company that’s facing a Justice Department lawsuit over alleged monopolistic practices, as well as an investigation into the company’s pandemic-era refund policies (Live Nation has denied wrongdoing in both cases).
Now, you might ask, “Doesn’t this seem a little … conspicuous?” And sure, a company hiring one of the president’s advisers to a lucrative board position while that company fights federal scrutiny of its business practices sounds like the kind of scenario one might sooner expect to see under a kleptocracy like Russia’s. (There’s a great book, by the way, on these types of arrangements: Bill Browder’s “Red Notice,” which I highly recommend.)
Live Nation said in a news release that the move “will help support Live Nation’s mission to bring more live music to the world, while also advocating for industry reforms that protect both fans and artists.”
For the record, CNN reported that Grenell “has numerous Hollywood connections, but he doesn’t bring extensive entertainment industry experience to the board.” And multiple music industry executives slammed the move in comments to The Hollywood Reporter, framing it as an “obvious” attempt by Live Nation to curry favor with the Trump administration. The arrangement seems similar to Meta placing UFC president and Trump ally Dana White on its board.
It remains to be seen whether Grenell’s presence on Live Nation’s board actually brings “industry reforms that protect both fans and artists,” as the company claims, or if, rather, this is precisely what critics believe: the latest example of a company doing favors for the president or his allies to get on his good side.
