Michelle Ullestad was one of the artists on stage during this year’s light festival. Between the songs she performed, she spoke to the audience. During this, she said something that surprised several people.
– I’m going to share a secret with you, she began telling the audience on Saturday.
The secret is that the Generation Party was present at Festplassen to gather support signatures so that they can stand for the parliamentary elections next year.
– If you see them, sign. There are no obligations. You’re not selling your house or anything like that, Ullestad encouraged.
Thinks she missed the mark
Erik Hanøy is a radio reporter, speaker, former sports commentator, and columnist for BT. He believes Ullestad missed the right time and place.
– It’s an abuse of stage time. The intention is good. We have a democracy and everyone should voice their opinion, but this was not the right setting.
Hanøy was watching the live broadcast of the Light Festival when he heard Ullestad’s speech to the people of Bergen who showed up in the rain.
– Showing up at a light festival and then starting to agitate and encourage people to sign a political campaign is misplaced in that setting.
– The artist is very talented, but you shouldn’t abuse the time you have in the spotlight.
– Should have interrupted
– If you’re at a christening, you don’t give the same speech as at a bachelor party. If I had been the organizer, I would have had a talk with her and asked what she was doing, and added:
– I work a lot as a host. I would have interrupted her quite quickly.
Former BT journalist Krister Hoaas criticizes Ullestad for using the stage for party-political recruitment.
– It shows a complete lack of tact and tone, Hoaas tells BA.
– It doesn’t matter if it’s to collect signatures for the Generation Party or for any other party.
– Not a political event
Bergens Tidende editor Trond Olav Skrunes believes politics does not have a place at the Light Festival.
– This is a BT event. We don’t want the Light Festival to be a place for political messages.
Skrunes says the stunt was not cleared with them beforehand.
– We were not aware that she had this secret.
BT has not spoken with Ullestad about the speech since the Light Festival.
– On Saturday, we wanted to carry out the event. We haven’t done anything over the weekend, but we will have a discussion about this.
Collected signatures
Skrunes says that their starting point is that the Light Festival is a family event.
– If we had been asked whether she wanted to promote a political message, we would have said no.
During the event, Gyda Oddekalv gathered signatures for her party.
– Festplassen is a public place, and we should not impose restrictions on it.
Skrunes points out that no other parties were present in the same way as the Generation Party.
– This shows that they miss the mark regarding what type of event this is. People bring their children and families to the Light Festival; it’s not the right place for political agitation. It should be a setting where politics is set aside.
Would not interrupt
Hanøy’s suggestion to interrupt Ullestad is not something Skrunes agrees with.
– To interrupt and create more attention, I don’t believe would have been a much better solution. What happened, happened.
The BT editor believes those who performed should understand and respect that this was an open family event, regardless of political views.
– I don’t think we should make this a bigger issue than it was. The Light Festival turned out to be a great event this year as well. Despite the weather, thousands of people showed up for a festive and nice afternoon in our city.
– Wanted to help her
– I thought it was a great opportunity to spread a message of light and love, and to use my voice, says the artist herself.
Ullestad is not a member of the Generation Party.
– I didn’t think it was necessary to say in advance. I had no crazy plans to talk about the signatures either.
– I have been following Gyda for a long time and wanted to contribute. I want to help her follow her dreams, just as many have helped me follow mine.
– Cheering for Gyda
– I like to see women doing cool things. I cheer for Gyda.
Regarding the BT editor’s statements, Ullestad says:
– I think that’s completely fair. I understand that they want that vision for the Light Festival.
Regarding the criticism from Hanøy and Hoaas, she responds:
– Sometimes the timing and place are not perfect. When is the next time I will get the opportunity to speak in front of 20,000 people from Bergen?
Ullestad is not worried that the stunt will affect her future performance opportunities.
– I want to work with people who want to work with all of me. If it costs me a gig or a sponsorship deal, then so be it.
BA has not been able to get a comment from Gyda Oddekalv on this matter.
What impact did Michelle Ullestad’s actions at the Light Festival have on public perception of artistic expression in political contexts?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Expert Erik Hanøy
Time.news Editor: Welcome, Erik! Today, we’re diving into an intriguing incident that occurred at this year’s Light Festival, where artist Michelle Ullestad surprised attendees by encouraging them to sign a petition for the Generation Party’s parliamentary election campaign. What’s your overall reaction to her actions?
Erik Hanøy: Thanks for having me! My initial reaction was one of disappointment. While I completely agree with the sentiment that everyone should be able to voice their opinions in a democratic society, the Light Festival was not the appropriate setting for that. It’s a celebration—and introducing a political agenda amidst the festivities feels misplaced.
Time.news Editor: Many people seem to share your thoughts, especially the organizers. Trond Olav Skrunes, the editor of Bergens Tidende, expressed that the festival is a family-friendly event where politics should take a backseat. Do you think Ullestad’s message could have alienated some attendees?
Erik Hanøy: Absolutely. If you consider the atmosphere at the Light Festival—the sights, sounds, and overall vibe—it’s all about community and joy. When an artist diverts from that to push a political message, it risks alienating attendees who came seeking a lighthearted experience. Not everyone is there to engage in political discourse, especially with their families in tow.
Time.news Editor: You mentioned in your critique that if you were the event’s host, you would have interrupted her speech. Some, like Skrunes, believe that doing so would have drawn more attention to the situation, which might not have been ideal. Do you stand by your statement?
Erik Hanøy: In hindsight, I see both sides. While interrupting could have escalated the situation, I still believe in maintaining the integrity and intent of the event. A simple, graceful redirection could have reestablished the focus on the festival, allowing everyone to enjoy it as intended. There are ways to address these moments without causing further disturbance.
Time.news Editor: Critics have also commented on the lack of tact in Ullestad’s actions. Do you think artists who have influence and recognition in such settings have a responsibility to consider the context in which they speak?
Erik Hanøy: Definitely. Artists have a platform, and while expressing personal beliefs is valid, they must also consider their audience and the context. Each setting carries its own expectations, and a light festival isn’t the time or place for political campaigning. There are plenty of venues better suited for such discussions—like town hall meetings or political rallies.
Time.news Editor: This raises an interesting point about the intersection of art and political expression. How can artists effectively balance their personal beliefs with the role they play in public events?
Erik Hanøy: It’s a delicate balance. Artists can certainly advocate for causes they believe in, but they should choose appropriate moments and venues for those messages. They should strive to ensure their chosen platform aligns with their intent. Engaging with the audience authentically in a way that respects the event’s nature is crucial.
Time.news Editor: As a final thought, what do you believe could be the outcome of this incident—both for Ullestad and for future events in Bergen?
Erik Hanøy: I think this incident serves as a learning moment for all involved. Ullestad might face some backlash, but it will also encourage artists and organizers to communicate better about the purpose of events. Future gatherings might see clearer guidelines regarding political expressions. It underscores the importance of dialogue around the context of public appearances—something we should all be more mindful of moving forward.
Time.news Editor: Thank you, Erik, for your insights on this matter. It’s certainly a fascinating reflection on how art, community, and politics intersect within public spaces. We look forward to seeing how these conversations evolve.