June 24, 2026

Clive Davis, Hitmaking Titan of the Music Industry, Dies at 94

  

 

 

 

Clive Davis, the music executive who rose from a midlevel legal position at Columbia Records to become one of the industry’s most powerful and longest-reigning dons, guiding the careers of Whitney Houston, Aretha Franklin, Barry Manilow and dozens of other stars, died on Monday at his home in Manhattan. He was 94.

His family confirmed the death. Mr. Davis had recently been hospitalized with respiratory problems.

One of the few nonperformers in music to become a household name, Mr. Davis maintained a visible role as a starmaker for half a century. In the late 1960s he propelled a reluctant Columbia headlong into the rock era with acts like Janis Joplin and Blood, Sweat & Tears. He also encouraged the jazz trumpeter Miles Davis to connect with the Woodstock generation.

Later, at the Arista and J labels, he championed R&B-leaning pop divas like Ms. Houston, Alicia Keys and Jennifer Hudson; seized on the commercial potential for hip-hop; and orchestrated major career revivals for Carlos Santana and Rod Stewart, with albums selling in the millions.

ImageTwo men sit as one of them holds a pen and signs documents.
Mr. Davis, right, with Johnny Cash, who signed a contract with Columbia Records.Credit...Colin Escott, via Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

For the public that saw him on television or in magazines, Mr. Davis was a mellow, dandyish eminence, seldom pictured in anything but a brightly accessorized suit. He spoke with an accent that hinted at European refinement, although his middle-class Brooklyn origins shone through when he referred, with affection, to “Arether.”

In the music industry, Mr. Davis, whose last position was chief creative officer of Sony Music Entertainment, was known as a relentless pursuer of hits, and as a symbol of continuity whose career survived numerous setbacks and corporate leadership sweeps.

Sometimes Mr. Davis even turned up in the lyrics of his artists’ songs. In Aerosmith’s 1979 track “No Surprize,” Steven Tyler sang about being greenlighted by the Columbia boss at an early gig at Max’s Kansas City in Manhattan: “And then old Clive Davis said he’s surely gonna make us a star.”

Many of the industry’s A-list executives cultivated their leadership skills through years as producers or talent wranglers. When Mr. Davis started in the Columbia legal department in 1960, at age 28, he had no relevant background; he later described himself as a garden-variety striver who was most proud of getting full scholarships to New York University and Harvard Law School.

“I knew nothing about music,” he said in a 2017 documentary, “Clive Davis: The Soundtrack of Our Lives.”

Mr. Davis worked to develop his business instincts — and his ear — by studying the Billboard charts and analyzing what made a song a hit. He came to believe in the power of what he called contemporary music: the unabashedly commercial pop that results when a record executive plays matchmaker in the studio, connecting the right singers with the right material.

Image
A man in a white suit stands onstage speaking into a microphone as a woman in black calmly spreads her arms next to him.
Mr. Davis with Whitney Houston in 1984. For her first album, released in 1985, Mr. Davis and his lieutenants hunted for producers and songs for nearly two years. Credit...via Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

That process could take a while. For Ms. Houston’s first album, Mr. Davis and his lieutenants hunted for producers and songs for nearly two years. When “Whitney Houston” was finally released, in 1985, it had three No. 1 singles — “Saving All My Love for You,” “How Will I Know” and “Greatest Love of All” — and became one of the most successful debut albums in history, selling more than 25 million copies around the world, according to Sony.

“What I learned from Clive is that the only thing that matters at the end of the day when you’re making a record is the three and a half minutes of magic,” Jimmy Iovine, the producer and record executive, told The Los Angeles Times in 1996. “Everyone says they keep the music first, but from my experience, Clive is one of the few who truly practices this.”

Mr. Davis’s longevity in the music world — embodied by his glamorous annual Grammy Awards parties, which he hosted starting in 1976 — made him an institution in the business. Well past the point when most of his contemporaries had retired, Mr. Davis continued to hunt for talent. He could also draw headlines, as when he revealed, at age 80, that he was bisexual and had been in serious relationships with men in addition to his two marriages to women.

“What is patently clear,” he wrote in a memoir, “The Soundtrack of My Life” (2013), “is that openness in all areas of life is an important component of happiness and success.”

Clive Jay Davis was born in Brooklyn on April 4, 1932, and grew up in the Crown Heights neighborhood. His father, Herman, was an electrician and traveling tie salesman. His mother, Florence (Brooks) Davis, had family connections to the Russeks department store in Manhattan; despite their modest circumstances, she carried herself with a “regal air,” Mr. Davis later recalled.

They named their son after Clive Brook, the suave English movie star who played opposite Marlene Dietrich in the 1932 film “Shanghai Express.”

“Believe me, there were not many kids named Clive in Crown Heights,” Mr. Davis said in his memoir, written with Anthony DeCurtis.

In the book, he described a youth of rigorous schoolwork and passion for the Brooklyn Dodgers but no special attachment to music. He graduated from Erasmus Hall High School in Brooklyn and attended N.Y.U., where he was president of his freshman class, on a scholarship.

While he was in college, his parents died within 11 months of each other, and he went to live with his sister, Seena, in Queens. In his book, he described the loss of his parents as a devastating blow: “It made me feel that anything, however cherished and secure, might be taken away from me at any time.”

He threw himself into his studies and, after completing his bachelor’s degree in 1953, gained another scholarship, to Harvard Law School. Within a few years of graduating in 1956, he was a moderately paid associate at a white-shoe firm in New York, but the job bored him. When a position for an in-house lawyer opened at Columbia — then a division of CBS, one of the firm’s clients — he eagerly took it.

Early on, Mr. Davis demonstrated a shrewdness in negotiation. He helped defeat a federal antitrust suit over Columbia’s mail-order record club and handled delicate contract talks with young stars like Bob Dylan and Barbra Streisand.

Image
A man cradles a phone receiver against his shoulder with his legs crossed while he reviews documents on his lap.
Mr. Davis in an undated photo. “I knew nothing about music,” he later recalled about his start in the industry.Credit...via Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

Rising quickly through Columbia’s corporate ranks, Mr. Davis became president in 1967 and began to reshape the label to compete in changing times.

Under his predecessor, Goddard Lieberson, a trained composer and an inspiration for Mr. Davis’s debonair style, Columbia had dominated the market for Broadway cast albums and built an extraordinary roster of jazz, classical and traditional pop acts.

Yet the label had made only minimal steps toward rock. Mitch Miller, the powerful head of artists and repertoire, had dismissed rock in the 1950s as juvenile garbage. “It’s not music,” he once said. “It’s a disease.”

As rock came to dominate pop culture, that stance became a liability.

Mr. Davis’s epiphany in both music and business came at the Monterey International Pop Festival in June 1967, where the lineup included Jimi Hendrix, the Who and the Grateful Dead. Mr. Davis was particularly smitten with Ms. Joplin and her band, Big Brother and the Holding Company. The affectionate antics of the flower-child generation charmed him, but the mass commercial potential of rock made an even stronger impression.

Image
A woman seems to hang from the neck of a balding man as he embraces her.
Mr. Davis with Janis Joplin in 1968. He had an epiphany at the Monterey International Pop Festival in June 1967, at which Joplin was one of the featured performers.Credit...Elliott Landy/Redferns, via Getty Images

“I felt my spine tingle and my arms vibrate,” he recalled in the 2017 documentary. “I realized this was going to be the future. I could feel it in my bones.”

In the years after Monterey, he brought Big Brother, Billy Joel, Bruce Springsteen, Neil Diamond, Santana, Chicago, Laura Nyro, Aerosmith and many others to the label.

To shake up Columbia’s button-down corporate culture, he had his salesmen read Rolling Stone magazine — an act of “heresy” at the label of “My Fair Lady” and the piano virtuoso Vladimir Horowitz, a former colleague, Dick Asher, later recalled, according to Fredric Dannen’s book “Hit Men: Power Brokers and Fast Money Inside the Music Business” (1990).

Within a few years, Columbia’s profits skyrocketed, validating his approach.

But Mr. Davis’s fast-moving career had a painful setback on May 29, 1973, when Columbia fired him and filed a lawsuit accusing him of using $94,000 in company funds (about $700,000 today) to pay for personal expenses, including apartment renovations and the bar mitzvah of one his sons. Mr. Davis said an underling had forged invoices without his knowledge.

His dismissal from Columbia came as federal authorities announced a string of arrests as part of an investigation into payola and drugs in the music industry, and for months Mr. Davis’s name was attached to sensational news reports of “drugola.” He and his lawyers said then — and Mr. Davis contended ever since — that he had been made a scapegoat to protect CBS and its all-important broadcast licenses.

Mr. Davis was never charged with payola but, in 1975, he was indicted on six counts of filing false income tax reports. He pleaded guilty to one count — failing to pay taxes on $8,800 in vacation expenses (about $55,000 today) — and paid a $10,000 fine. At his sentencing hearing, the judge scolded the news media for smearing his name.

By then, Mr. Davis was already rebounding.

In 1974, he took over the foundering Bell label and renamed it Arista, after the New York branches of the National Honor Society, of which Mr. Davis had been a proud member as a high school student. He quickly scored a No. 1 hit with “Mandy,” by one of the few Bell acts that he kept on the label: Mr. Manilow.

Arista built a diverse roster in the 1970s, including Patti Smith, the Kinks, Lou Reed, Gil Scott-Heron and Melissa Manchester, and Mr. Davis developed a specialty of reviving the careers of faded female vocalists. The first was Dionne Warwick, in 1979, with “I’ll Never Love This Way Again,” which became her first Top Five solo single in a decade. Then came Ms. Franklin, whose 1985 album, “Who’s Zoomin’ Who?,” became her first million-seller.

Image
A woman sits at a piano and sings with her eyes closed while a man props his head up with his hand and listens.
Mr. Davis with Aretha Franklin in 1981. Her 1985 album for his Arista label, “Who’s Zoomin’ Who?,” became her first million-seller.Credit...Roger Ressmeyer/CORBIS -- VCG, via Getty Images

Mr. Davis found even greater success with Ms. Houston, Ms. Warwick’s cousin, who signed with Arista in 1983, when she was 19, and remained associated with Mr. Davis throughout her career. (She died on Feb. 11, 2012, at the Beverly Hilton in Beverly Hills, Calif., hours before Mr. Davis’s pre-Grammys gala was to begin a few floors below.)

He promoted his acts lavishly and involved himself in the creative process. Artists and producers under his watch frequently found themselves directed back to the studio for the umpteenth new mix or vocal tweak.

Very often, his participation proved worthwhile. When Ms. Houston recorded “I Will Always Love You” for the soundtrack to her 1992 film “The Bodyguard,” she sang the first 40 seconds or so a cappella, at the suggestion of Kevin Costner, her co-star.

When Mr. Davis heard the track, he insisted on keeping it that way, over the objections of the song’s producer, David Foster, and others at the record company, who feared that such a long, bare introduction would hurt the song’s chances at radio.

Mr. Davis prevailed, and “I Will Always Love You” held the No. 1 spot for 14 weeks.

His single-mindedness, and his habit for self-promotion, made Mr. Davis a lightning rod in the industry. In response to a New York Times review of Mr. Davis’s book that said he had “discovered” various artists, Rubén Blades, the Panamanian musician and political figure, wrote, “Record executives do not discover artists: they stumble upon them.”

In some cases, Mr. Davis clashed with his talent. In 1969, Tony Bennett gave in to his pressure to record more contemporary songs. The resulting album, “Tony Sings the Great Hits of Today!” — which included a melodramatic, partly spoken version of the Beatles’ “Eleanor Rigby” — was widely mocked, and Mr. Bennett later said the experience had made him vomit.

Image
Two men stand onstage in a black-and-white photo, one speaking into a microphone.
Mr. Davis standing next to Barry Manilow in 1978. The two had tensions during the 1970s, as Mr. Manilow wanted to be seen primarily as a songwriter.Credit...Bobby Bank/WireImage, via Getty Images

In his 2013 book, Mr. Davis described a growing tension during the 1970s with Mr. Manilow, who saw himself primarily as a songwriter but whose biggest numbers — even “I Write the Songs,” a No. 1 hit in 1976 — were mostly written by other people. Mr. Davis said he told Mr. Manilow, “If you were Irving Berlin, we would know it by now!”

After Ms. Houston’s death, Mr. Davis came under criticism when Arista insiders said that the label, under Mr. Davis’s direction, had pushed her to adopt an image that would appeal to white audiences. In recording her albums, “anything that was too Black-sounding was sent back to the studio,” one former executive said in a 2017 documentary, “Whitney: Can I Be Me.”

Episodes like those were few in a career filled with long-lasting relationships with artists and commercial instincts that, decade after decade, remained uncannily intact. In the 1980s and ’90s, Mr. Davis made lucrative joint-venture deals for Arista with young impresarios like L.A. Reid and Sean Combs, who were at the cutting edge of Black pop, and Mr. Davis plotted successful career turnarounds for some of his old stars.

Santana’s 1999 comeback album, “Supernatural,” with guest spots by Dave Matthews, Eric Clapton, Rob Thomas of Matchbox Twenty and others, sold more than 12 million copies and won nine Grammy Awards.

Among the stars Mr. Davis nurtured later in his career was Ms. Keys, whose debut album, “Songs in A Minor,” was released in 2001 on Mr. Davis’s next label, J, which he started after a battle with BMG Entertainment, then Arista’s parent company.

Image
Four people in evening clothes stand in a row and smile.
From left, at a J Records party in 2002, Luther Vandross, Alicia Keys, Mr. Davis and Melissa Etheridge. Mr. Davis started the label after a battle with BMG Entertainment, then Arista’s parent company.Credit...L. Cohen/WireImage, via Getty Images

At the end of 1999, as Arista was celebrating a record sales year, BMG executives tried to force Mr. Davis into retirement. Artists rallied loudly to his defense — “If Clive leaves, I leave,” Ms. Franklin told The Los Angeles Times — and a chastened BMG agreed to finance a new label, J, with $150 million. Mr. Davis would own 50 percent.

J got its name from Mr. Davis’s middle initial, which he shares with his three sons, Fred, Mitchell and Doug. They survive him, along with a daughter, Lauren Davis; eight grandchildren; two great-grandchildren; and his partner, Greg Schriefer. Mr. Davis’s marriages to Helen Cohen and Janet Adelberg ended in divorce.

In 2000, Mr. Davis was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame as a nonperformer and, in his later years, he began to tend to his legacy. In 2002, he donated $5 million to endow the Clive Davis Department of Recorded Music, an undergraduate program at N.Y.U.’s Tisch School of the Arts that prepares students for careers in the music industry; in 2011, he gave another $5 million, and the program was renamed the Clive Davis Institute.

His Grammy parties remained highlights of each awards season, attended by music stars and boldface names from business and politics. (Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House, and Tim Cook, the former chief executive of Apple, were frequent guests.)

Mr. Davis at his annual Grammys weekend party in, clockwise from top left, 1991, 2000, 1989 and 2005.Credit...Photographs by Lester Cohen/Getty Images, Larry Busacca/Getty Images and Frank Micelotta/ Getty Images

At the most recent party, on Jan. 31, Mr. Davis was introduced by a video message from former President Barack Obama, who said, “Most people don’t realize how much the music they love was shaped by one man.”

In 2017, just before the documentary about him was released, Mr. Davis, then 85, said in an interview with The New York Times that he was still hunting for hits for his artists.

“I still love it,” he said. “Whether it’s doing those albums, or doing my Grammy party every year, it’s a great feeling. I got into this totally by luck, and it’s just wonderfully fulfilling.”

Image
A black-and-white photo of a middle-aged, balding man siting on a conference table next to a record and smiling.
Mr. Davis in 1973. The producer Jimmy Iovine said, “Everyone says they keep the music first, but from my experience, Clive is one of the few who truly practices this.”Credit...David Gahr/Getty Images
 
THE NEW YORK TIMES 

 

June 23, 2026

Brazil are fixated on Neymar and Endrick – but it’s Matheus Cunha who looks like their saviour

 

 

 The waves got bigger and bigger, waves of criticism crashing against Carlo Ancelotti. Detractors said Brazil did not have a settled line-up and lacked identity. They pulled apart his choices against Morocco; Roger Ibanez at right-back, Igor Thiago up front. Why, Carlo? Why? Then his substitutions at MetLife came under scrutiny. Ancelotti made five of them. But Endrick, he didn’t get on. Why, Carlo? Why? The waves continued. Raphinha looked lost Brazil’s opening match, an underwhelming 1-1 draw. Did he not need more detailed tactical instruction? What value, if any, have you brought to the national team, Carlo? An eyebrow arched. The waves swept over him. They did not take him under.

Pressure? “I mean it’s actually a privilege,” he said. If there’s anyone who can handle choppy waters, it’s ‘Anselocci’. Over the last week at the New York Red Bulls training facility in Morris Township, New Jersey, the 67-year-old Italian watched the waves and came to a realisation. He needed a surfer. Matheus Cunha was one of two changes Ancelotti made against Haiti. He decided to replace Igor Thiago, the Brentford striker, who will rue the chance he missed early on against Morocco when Vinicius Jr stood up a cross for him, which he glanced agonisingly wide.

Whether it’ll be Thiago’s last chance remains to be seen. It is a long tournament and, as Ancelotti said last week, you don’t judge a team or this group of players on their first game at the World Cup. As the waves battered him, he called for patience. Spain lost to Switzerland in 2010. Argentina suffered a shock defeat to Saudi Arabia in 2022. Both recovered to win the tournament.

Cunha scores his second goal against HaitiKevin C. Cox/Getty Images

At Lincoln Financial Field on Friday, Cunha pulled on Brazil’s navy No 9 jersey. Overlooked at the last World Cup in Qatar, when he didn’t make the final squad, this was his moment. Ancelotti likes Cunha for the same reason Manchester United do. “We can talk about his technical abilities and he can play in three different positions,” United’s CEO Omar Berrada said. “He’s a playmaking attacking midfielder; he can score goals, he can make assists. I think he’s going to lift people off their seats. He’s got a bit of a swagger about him that people are going to really like.” What the marketing execs behind Brazil’s branding call Jogo Bonito.

Except, how many people were calling for Cunha’s introduction to the team?

The media were hardly campaigning for his involvement. Brazilians wanted to know about Neymar instead. When will he be back? Is he fit again? No, he isn’t. Neymar didn’t travel to Philadelphia with the squad. “He will remain in New Jersey to make the most of the final stage of his recovery, making use of the excellent facilities at The Ridge hotel and the Columbia Park training centre,” a statement from the CBF read. So the clamour shifted from Neymar to Endrick.

First, after the Morocco game. Then, before the Haiti game. Isn’t it time for Endrick, Carlo? Come on, please. “Endrick is very talented, an extraordinary talent,” Ancelotti said. “And of course Brazil will benefit from his quality at this World Cup but also in the next World Cup. Endrick is patient. He’s in no rush.” But Brazil is.

Real Madrid paid nearly €50million for the teenager in 2024. He was involved in 15 goals whilst on loan at Lyon in the second half of last season. He’s the next craque, a player who matches the idea of what Brazil thinks a national team player should be. Ancelotti seemed to bow to public pressure to include Neymar in his squad. Would he do the same with Endrick and name him in the starting XI? “It’s hard when you’re in competition with your friends,” Cunha said. “But we see it as a positive thing. When the team is picked, it might be good for one, bad for another.” The one Ancelotti selected was good for Cunha and good for Brazil.

 
Granted, Haiti rank 87th in the world. Granted, Honduras were 3-0 up against them at half-time in the autumn of last year too. But Brazil did look a little more like Brazil.

Bruno Guimaraes and Lucas Paqueta played guileful defence-splitting passes. Casemiro tried balls over the top. Raphinha had a lovely goal disallowed for offside. He then pulled up injured and we were reminded of the talent Brazil have on the bench, as Rayan came on. But the night belonged to Cunha. He came short and linked the play. He won the ball back and launched attacks. He connected with Vini Jr in a 4-2-4 that has its merits against a team of Haiti’s calibre.

Cunha was able to deploy his surfing celebration twice during Friday’s game in PhiladelphiaMauro PIMENTEL / AFP via Getty Images

Waves of attacks were launched and Cunha scored twice on his World Cup debut. He followed up a parried shot and got lucky as a clearance ricocheted off him into the net. As for his second, Paqueta won the ball back, Vini Jr slipped him through and Cunha dispatched an emphatic near-post finish.  He celebrated both as if paddling out to catch a wave, tube riding the critics. “I try to surf when I go to Brazil,” Cunha explained. “I go to a little village around my city. They taught me how to start surfing and now I’m considered a surfer guy.”

He has kept it up in England. “I go to Bristol, but it’s so cold, the water. I need to improve my level.” Cunha lifted Brazil’s at this World Cup.

Asked if the 27-year-old will start against Scotland in Miami, Ancelotti limited himself to say: “He may.” Neymar could be back by then and, in the meantime, Endrick remains an obsession. “I hope that he becomes one of the great Brazilian players,” Cunha magnanimously said. “He has already given the people a lot of joy, playing for Palmeiras and, at other moments, for Brazil. His quality is clear. We’re always messing around with him. He’s very humble, always asking for advice.”

Twice during the game at the Lincoln Financial Field, the Brazil fans unfurled a fluttering banner celebrating five icons of five World Cup-winning teams; Didi, Garrincha, Pele, Romario and Ronaldo. Afterwards, in the stadium’s underbelly, Kaka, Rivaldo and Bebeto mingled with fans. Waves of nostalgia remain powerful when it comes to Brazil.

Surfing them has proven too tough for too many of this generation and the last. Take Fred and Richarlison. But maybe not Cunha.

THE NEW YORK TIMES 

 

Cristiano Ronaldo social media storm reveals the dystopian backdrop to this World Cup

 

 

 

 

NICK MILLER 

It started with a fairly standard post-match interview.

After Portugal’s 1-1 draw with DR Congo in their opening game of the World Cup, midfielder Joao Neves was asked about Cristiano Ronaldo who, you may have noticed, tends to dominate the debate around their fixtures.

A journalist asked Neves: “This Portugal team is very collective. It’s also Cristiano Ronaldo’s last World Cup. How do you manage all that — having such a big star but also a strong team with numerous other big players at this World Cup?”

And he responded: “We know what Cristiano Ronaldo has done for our national team and for the world of football. But at this moment I feel that for him, and for everyone, he’s one of us, one more guy trying to help. He’s no different to the rest of us and he will contribute like we all will.”

So far, so unremarkable. Maybe, if Neves was speaking at a time other than about 20 minutes after a disappointing result in a World Cup, his head all over the place and confronted with a scrum of microphone-waving journalist, he might have worded his answer slightly differently, given how people tend to react to anything involving Ronaldo.

But the intention was pretty clear: Neves was saying that this is a team sport, Ronaldo is part of the team and they will figure all of this out together, as a team.

Enter the modern world. The interview was clipped up and did the rounds on the internet, giving the impression that Neves had said that Ronaldo was an ‘ordinary’ player. Stripped of context and nuance, that was a red rag to some tediously familiar bulls.

As anyone conversant with social media will tell you, this is where things get sticky. Because there is a certain element of the online community that cannot countenance anything approaching criticism of Ronaldo.

As such, when a fairly standard post-match carousel of photos appeared on Neves’s Instagram account, it was flooded with comments from Ronaldo’s fanboys. They appeared on Bruno Fernandes and Vitinha’s accounts too. We won’t recount them all here but the general theme was that Ronaldo should be given his due respect, and that they should pass him the ball more.

Things then took a further turn for the dystopian, when Madalena Aragao, a Portuguese actress and Neves’s partner, posted a picture of herself and Neves, which was also targeted by the same sort of people. She was then forced to limit replies to her posts, but that didn’t stop a fake quote attributed to her appearing on some other accounts, which urged those Ronaldo fans to “tell your GOAT to retire”.

Regrettably, that quote was briefly taken as real by Georgina Rodriguez, Ronaldo’s partner. She posted a screenshot of it with the caption: ‘Wow! Look at how the future generations are brought up!’ Luckily, she appeared to realise fairly quickly that it was fake, and deleted her post.

It’s quite difficult not to turn into a grumpy old man about all of this, to decry the corrosive influence of social media and hark back to the good old days before the internet, when players spent their times between games playing board games and unhinged fans’ access to them was more limited.

Ronaldo talks with Joao Neves after his goal against DR CongoLeslie Plaza Johnson/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

This appears not to be the fault of anyone in the Portugal camp. A misinterpretation/misrepresentation of a quote and a fake social media post have combined to create a situation that, at best, will be a distraction they don’t need. The official line will be that they don’t let this stuff permeate the group, but these things have a way of finding their way through even the fiercest deflector shields.

As if Portugal didn’t have enough to be concerned about at this World Cup, having started the tournament in disappointing fashion with questions about the balance of their side, both internally and externally. You hope that they are broadly insulated from it. You hope that the companies they employ to manage their social media do their jobs and keep the worst away from them.

Neves gave a standard answer in an interview, and in reaction to an incorrect interpretation of it, he has been subject to abuse. Aragao suffered an all-too-familiar situation, also subject to abuse for existing as a woman on the internet.

Rodriguez too, who was fooled briefly by a fake internet post, which it’s difficult to criticise her too harshly for, given we don’t know what’s real either: we have no idea how many of those accounts are actually real people, whether they’re real comments representing real sentiment.

You also have to have some sympathy for Ronaldo, whatever your opinions of him are. He invites warranted criticism with some of his actions, but here he has done nothing and has still ended up in the middle of something unnecessary, a needless problem he now has to deal with.

Welcome to the 2026 World Cup, dystopian edition.

THE NEW YORK TIMES

June 21, 2026

‘Crony Capitalism on Steroids’: 3 Writers on the World Cup’s First Week

 




Vanessa BarbaraSean JacobsNate SilverJohn Guida and



The World Cup has already seen America’s thumping victory in its opener, a thriller involving Iran and a hat trick from Lionel Messi. In a written online conversation, the Times Opinion editors John Guida and Tim Schneider hosted Vanessa Barbara, the editor of the literary website A Hortaliça; Sean Jacobs, the author of the newsletter Eleven Named People; and Nate Silver, who writes the newsletter Silver Bulletin, to discuss the glorious (and not-so-glorious) soccer on display, the politics shaping the tournament and, of course, who’s going to win it all.



John Guida: We’ve already seen a lot of great action and glorious fun. What is your favorite moment of the tournament so far?

Nate Silver: I’ll start with the obvious one: Messi’s third goal against Algeria, completing the hat trick. Not just because of what it meant historically for the sport — tying the lifetime World Cup goals record — but more selfishly, because the model I designed liked Argentina a lot, whereas betting odds regarded it as more in Tier 1B, despite its constant success on the international stage (winning the 2022 World Cup and the 2024 Copa América).

Vanessa Barbara: I’d like to talk about Vozinha, Cape Verde’s goalkeeper, who has become a celebrity in Brazil. He had just 50,000 followers on Instagram before the match against Spain, when he made several amazing saves that guaranteed a 0-0 draw. A campaign from the digital sports channel CazéTV encouraged Brazilians to follow him. Now he has skyrocketed to over 13 million followers. He got the nickname Vozinha (“Little Grandma” in Portuguese) because he was raised by his grandparents.

Sean Jacobs: It’s between Messi’s hat trick and Cape Verde’s dogged defense against Spain to draw 0-0. Cape Verde’s squad is made up mostly of players outside the top five leagues — the biggest European domestic leagues — including an Irish Cape Verdean who was recruited via LinkedIn. It was a team effort, but the goalkeeper, Vozinha, whom Vanessa mentioned, was a standout. The last goalkeeper who performed such heroics was Tim Howard for the United States against Belgium in the 2014 World Cup.

Tim Schneider: And he was in tears at the final whistle. Wonderful stuff. Is there anything that has especially surprised you in the first week of the competition?

Jacobs: Off the field, I am amazed at FIFA’s persistence with its dynamic ticketing policy, where the price is not fixed but is based on fluctuating demand, mostly upward, skewing who we see in the stands. (By contrast, Brazil and South Africa had tickets set aside for poorer fans.) On the field, despite some heroics and small countries scoring their first goals ever in a World Cup, the results line up with the rankings. That said, some of the African countries — Morocco, Egypt and Ivory Coast — are playing with confidence and swagger.

Silver: Several themes: First, how good the (U.S.) Americans were. Second, how totally OK it’s been to expand the tournament to 48 teams. Almost all of the matches have been eminently entertaining. It’s fun to have underdogs like Cape Verde. I’ve already become an advocate for expanding to 64 teams.

But third and maybe most important, how open and attacking the play has been, with 3.1 goals per game through everyone’s first match. Anything over 3 would be a threshold not reached since the 1958 tournament. Some of that is because scores balloon upward with lopsided matchups, like Germany 7-1 against Curacao. But there are lots of subtle things. Allowing more substitutions lets better-rested striking talent come on in the second half. And I think the format of this World Cup, in which three points (meaning just one win or three draws) is probably good enough to get you into the knockout stage, is encouraging some teams to go for it. We might see the play tighten up a bit from here, though.

Barbara: I was also very surprised by the American team, as well as by the high scores (Sweden 5-1 over Tunisia, Norway 4-1 against Iraq, England 4-2 versus Croatia). And I really, really refuse to talk about Brazil right now.

Guida: OK, so we will not talk about Brazil right now. America is not President Trump, and the United States is not the only host country, but in America, the Trump administration has certainly helped shape the conditions. A Somali referee was barred, the Iranian team has been refused to stay overnight, and travel bans have limited fans from certain countries from attending. So we see traces of the president’s hand. Has it been more or less visible than you expected when the tournament started?

Barbara: It’s very visible from here. For Latin American fans raised on the community-driven passion of soccer, the U.S. approach to the tournament feels like an exercise in political hostility and commercial sanitization, not a cultural celebration. It kind of sends a message to the global south: We want your soccer, but we don’t want your people.

Jacobs: Yes and no. The thing with the World Cup is that once the competition starts, the football on the field takes over. This is part of the World Cup’s seduction. But the continuous treatment of Iran is scandalous — that the team is permitted entry into the United States only a day before each match. Second, we could see in the France-Senegal match that the partial travel ban on Senegalese fans affected their support in the stadium. And though the official American broadcaster, Fox, is not a state broadcaster, its hydration break, which is basically an ad break, lines up well with Trumpism. The Spanish-speaking channels do not cut away for the water break.

Silver: I’d say less so. But I’ve been through this before. Every time, there is criticism of FIFA and everything else in the days leading up to the tournament, and the vibes feel off. Then the tournament starts, and that melts away.

Keep in mind that the previous two tournaments were played in Russia and Qatar. The history of global soccer, in some sense, is a history of the world’s political problems, from South Africa being suspended for many years because of apartheid to Russia now being essentially banned from UEFA. The sport has continued to thrive despite all of that, which feels like an optimistic metaphor in some ways.

Schneider: Summoning some optimism of the will, then, which countries would you say could really do with a lift at this tournament?

Barbara: Haiti. First, Trump said that Haitian immigrants ate dogs and cats in Springfield, Ohio, which was confirmation that they occupied a special place in his hierarchy of contempt. Then Trump’s administration moved to revoke Temporary Protected Status for Haitian nationals, a decision under review by the Supreme Court. And there’s the travel ban. When Brazil takes the field against Haiti in Philadelphia on Friday, there will be very few Haitian fans in the stands; they have been barred from entering the country.

Jacobs: Starting with the hosts: the United States. Because while the game is very popular with millennials and Gen Z, the U.S. side struggles in World Cup competition, and Americans don’t identify with the national team like fans elsewhere do. If it reaches the semifinals, it would do a lot for the game here. Same with Canada. Mexico has consistently made the round of 16, and its domestic game, the backbone of the national team, is in the doldrums, so same there.

Outside of that, Brazil. Because the team is a sentimental favorite of the global south but also, from what I’ve heard from Brazilian friends, because Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s electoral chances would get a boost from a title.

Silver: The stat I keep coming back to is that only three teams outside Europe and South America have ever reached the World Cup semifinals: the United States in the first edition, in 1930; South Korea at home in 2002; and Morocco in the last tournament, in 2022. So I find myself broadly rooting for the rest of the world, from the United States, Mexico and Canada to Ivory Coast and Japan. The African teams, in particular, have player talent that’s pretty equal to that of Europe and South America, in terms of how it’s valued in club football. To break up the duopoly and have a tripolar world of Europe, the Americas more broadly and Africa and the Middle East would make for a better sport.

Guida: You are all thinking expansively about the tournament and the countries involved and how appealing it is to have such a broad mix. It mirrors, to an extent, a lot of the discourse about a post-American world and the potential of a new global order. Do you see evidence of it at the World Cup?

Barbara: I’m a pessimist. Framed as an exercise in decentralization, the expansion to 48 teams is, in reality, a blueprint for centralizing power and wealth behind a veneer of inclusion. The steep cost of tickets and strict visa regimes lead to a very select audience, effectively filtering who is allowed in.

Jacobs: No. This is supposed to be a joint bid, but the United States got the bulk of the games and determined how the tournament is run. Usually, FIFA takes over the stadiums and the areas around them, or the governments cooperate on security and relax immigration rules before and during the World Cup. Very little of that happened here. Even mighty FIFA, which normally expels a soccer federation if the state interferes in football matters, bends to Trump.

Silver: It’s funny how the rise and fall of soccer strength often mirrors political trends. France has been much better than Germany in recent years, and that aligns with a period when I’d argue that France is regaining status as the de facto capital of Europe, at Germany’s expense. Our PELE ratings are calculated all the way back to 1872 and use gross domestic product as a predictor of team success: If it grows, the football results usually follow. Though the United States and China, which didn’t even come close to qualifying, have been noteworthy exceptions.

Schneider: Some pessimism of the intellect there! Perhaps in the same vein, what does this unusually close fusion of FIFA and the Trump administration suggest for the future? Would it be too much to see in it a new kind of state-capitalist globalization?

Barbara: The bromance between Gianni Infantino, FIFA’s president, and Trump is a case study in modern transactional governance. Infantino’s ease in dealing with autocrats and populist leaders points to a particular model for what lies ahead. Principles such as human rights, institutional transparency and cultural authenticity are pushed aside in favor of revenue generation and high-production broadcasts.

Jacobs: FIFA has a history of cozying up to authoritarians and strongmen, like Mussolini in 1934 and Argentina’s military junta in 1978. So no surprise there. But this is indicative of the new age associated with American capitalism, its mix of corruption and strong-arm tactics. Increasingly — the next World Cup aside — FIFA will surely favor hosts where there is little accountability, to pull off what is basically a high-stakes heist. After all, no country has ever benefited economically from hosting a major sports event like the World Cup. This is our future.

Silver: You mean the winner of the FIFA Peace Prize? As much as I wouldn’t want to overdo the parallels, FIFA and Trump are examples of crony capitalism on steroids. And they each get away with it by having inherited a product that’s too good to fail. Soccer is the world’s sport, and club leagues are generating spectacular revenue.

Guida: Let’s ease our way back from politics to the game. The political scientist and sports fan Matt Glassman wrote that though soccer is “indisputably the greatest spectator sport in the world,” it is “objectively not that great of a game.” He added: “The underlying issue is that the correct strategy is really passive and risk averse, which makes long stretches of the game pretty dull. And the ball goes out of bounds a ton, which is also dull.” Thoughts?

Barbara: The Italian coach Arrigo Sacchi described soccer as “the most important of the least important things in life.” I don’t think soccer is too boring, but my 7-year-old daughter begs to differ. She watched three minutes of Brazil versus Morocco and said, “I thought this would be more interesting.” Then she went out to punch holes in bottle caps and turn them into spinning tops. There’s a cultural side to that; we Latin Americans are used to transforming soccer matches into parties, with the television on in the background and people taking turns paying attention to the play.

Jacobs: I disagree. I grew up in South Africa, no football powerhouse, so for me, the 0-0 draw between Spain and Cape Verde was football at its highest expression. The tactical defense of Cape Verde in holding off a team of some of the world’s best players gave me pure joy. By contrast, the back-and-forth between Iran and New Zealand or between Japan and the Netherlands felt endless — in a good way. Watching England versus Croatia fighting like two punch-drunk boxers until England wore Croatia down, in a bar with no air-conditioning on Bedford Avenue in Brooklyn — that’s football.

Silver: Let’s keep in mind that action in the N.F.L. is extremely discontinuous. Baseball had grown slow and plodding before the pitch clock. I like that World Cup matches fit within roughly a two-hour window, which very much has led me to do some binge watching.

But this tournament has featured a notably more attacking mind-set than past ones. Around three goals per game, rather than roughly 2.5, matters a lot. You really notice the speed out there. You have to time your bathroom breaks carefully because some of the counterattacks have been very potent, like the Democratic Republic of Congo against Portugal.

Schneider: We can all agree that football — sorry, soccer — is the best game in the world. Speaking of best things and switching gears a little: What team uniform has most caught your eye?

Barbara: Definitely Haiti’s original jersey. It had a great design honoring their revolution, but FIFA banned the imagery for being political. It’s a shame the team had to change it.

Jacobs: My son Leo loves Senegal’s home shirt. It depicts the minibus taxis (cars rapides) of the capital, Dakar, in the background. I also like Ecuador’s navy blue away jersey.

Silver: I’d have to say, by far, Norway, with the flag on the front and the funky Viking-style lettering on the back. And Erling Haaland wearing his name as Braut Haaland to honor his mother.

Guida: Haaland had his share of goals in Norway’s opener. What has been your favorite goal of the tournament?

Barbara: Messi’s second goal in the match against Algeria. I can’t explain exactly why. I wish I had his composure when he gets a pass in the penalty area and gently curls a shot into the corner. He’s turning 39 next week. Can I insert a heart emoji here?

Jacobs: I couldn’t choose among these three: Messi’s first goal against Algeria, Gio Reyna with the outside of his boot against Panama and Hwang In-beom’s ankle breaker for South Korea against the Czech Republic.

Silver: Probably Kylian Mbappé’s spectacular strike from 30 yards to put France ahead 3-1 against Senegal after a few moments of danger. In the first half, France looked a little bit Spain- or Portugal-like in its inability to put things together. It’s actually not uncommon for teams to be tight in their first match. It’s not like these are N.B.A. teams that have already played 82 games together by the time you get to the championship. Whatever halftime adjustments France made proved auspicious.

Schneider: To finish, we have to ask: Who is going to win the thing?

Barbara: My bet is Argentina or France. But the World Cup is essentially a surprise. That’s why I need to point out that while Nate developed a model to run 100,000 World Cup simulations, he’d still end up losing to my 10-year-old niece, Isadora, if he joined our family betting pool.

Jacobs: France. It won in 2018 and was in the final in 2022. A few members of the team play together at Paris Saint-Germain, the European club champion, including the world’s best, Ousmane Dembélé. And Mbappé turns up at the World Cup. Argentina is my second choice because of Messi.

Silver: At the start of the tournament, our model had Argentina and Spain as the top tier and France and England as 1B. Now that’s compressed just a bit. But this is ultimately a team sport. Argentina’s talent is very good, and it doesn’t necessarily start or end with Messi. It has consistently had the best international results over the past cycle. And it plays with an assurance that I think even the other top-flight teams lack.

THE NEW YORK TIMES