A popular American singer voices strong condemnation over the inappropriate use of her music in a White House clip. Sabrina Carpenter, on Tuesday, publicly distanced herself from a video shared on social media by the White House, calling the montage that depicts immigration enforcement raids “evil and disgusting.” The clip pairs Carpenter’s 2024 track Juno with footage showing ICE agents in action, detaining people and placing handcuffs on individuals.
Carpenter addressed the post directly, writing: “This video is evil and disgusting. Do not ever involve me or my music to benefit your inhumane agenda.” In response, White House spokesperson Abigail Jetson offered a sharp retort, saying: “Here’s a short, blunt message for Sabrina Carpenter: we will not apologize for removing dangerous criminals from our country. Anyone who defends these alleged monsters must be either ignorant or slow.”
This isn’t the first time artists have spoken out when their music is used in political contexts. Other musicians have similarly protested presidential campaigns reclaiming their songs. For instance, Kenny Loggins, the singer and guitarist behind Danger Zone, recently asked for a presidential video that used his hit to be taken down. The clip depicted AI-generated imagery of the president as a fighter pilot releasing excrement on political rivals.
In 2024, several other high-profile artists criticized the use of their work in promotional materials. Celine Dion disapproved of her ballad My Heart Will Go On appearing in a campaign video, while Beyoncé objected to the use of Freedom in a similar context the same year.
These situations highlight ongoing tensions between political messaging and the artistic rights of musicians. They raise questions about consent, interpretation, and the appropriate boundaries for using music in political or governmental communications.
