People are calling Justin Bieber’s Coachella performance lazy. And on the surface, I understand why.
If you are being paid at the highest level, standing on one of the biggest stages in pop culture, and people have paid absurd amounts of money to be there, then yes, they expect labor, movement and spectacle. They expect a performance that looks like it cost something to make and something to execute. They expect to feel that the artist earned the stage.
So when Justin Bieber sits down, lies on the floor, scrolls casually on YouTube, and gives the audience something that feels more like a livestream than a live show, of course people are going to call it lazy.
But I think that reading misses what he was actually doing.
Justin Bieber was not really performing for the people in the desert. He was performing for the people at home, in bed, on their phones, on their laptops, second-screen watching, half-hanging out, feeling like they were spending time with him rather than watching a traditional concert. That is why the performance felt intimate to some people and insulting to others. It was not built around spectacle. It was built around access.
And that is the real divide.
The people at Coachella thought they were paying for a live performance. What Justin Bieber gave them was a mediated experience. A performance designed to resonate through the logic of streaming, parasociality, and digital intimacy more than through the logic of the stage itself.
That is why so many people are misunderstanding it. They are judging it by the wrong framework.
This was not Beyoncé-style precision. It was not Chris Brown-level exertion. It was not Sabrina Carpenter or Katseye coming to prove they deserve every inch of the stage. It was not built around visible effort; the point was the feeling that you were with Justin Bieber — proximity. It felt casual, personal, unserious, almost like you were in his room with him while he played around in real time. When he said, “I love spending this time with you,” it was about quality time with Justin Bieber.
And whether people like that or not, that is still a performance language.
In fact, I would argue that this is exactly the brand Justin Bieber is trying to build now. He has shown discomfort with touring. He has had public issues, tension around management, and an obvious distance from the old machine of constant, high-exertion pop performance. He does not seem interested in being the old version of Justin Bieber anymore. Perhaps it exhausts him. Perhaps it is part of an exploitative system he is rumored to want nothing to do with. He does not seem interested in endlessly proving himself through grind, choreography, and relentless stadium labor, where managers and fixers force him to comply with standards he does not want to. He seems far more interested in becoming the kind of artist you watch from your bedroom, the kind of artist whose power is not in dominating the arena, but in collapsing the distance between himself and the audience.
That is why Coachella looked the way it did.
This was not a failed attempt at a traditional concert. It was a successful attempt at something else.
And that is also why the average Coachella audience was never going to fully understand it. Coachella is filled not just with fans, but with event-goers, status consumers, people paying for a premium live experience, people who want the performance to hit them physically. They want a show that justifies the journey, the ticket, the heat, the standing, the chaos, the spectacle. They want to feel that what they got in person could never be replicated at home.
And some of us hardcore fans will take the crumbs we get. That matters too. After the cancellation of his last tour, Justin Bieber has become a comparatively scarce live performer. He is not the kind of artist who is constantly on the road, visible, and giving fans the traditional rituals of pop-star access. I mean it took us 4 years to get a new album from him, finally. So for devoted fans, the standard shifts. What looks like crumbs to everyone else can feel like intimacy to the people who have been starved of access for years. What casual audiences call lazy, hardcore fans may experience as rare, personal, and emotionally significant simply because we do not get him often anymore. Scarcity changes the value of the experience.
But what happens when that is no longer true?
What is the point of going to a show if it is not actually built for you? What is the point of paying festival prices for a performance that is optimized for the people watching from bed?
That is the larger question here, and it is bigger than Justin Bieber.
We are moving deeper into an era where the real audience is often not in the room. The real audience is online, watching through clips, livestreams, reposts, reaction videos, memes, and fragments. Scalable, remote, and the people physically present are increasingly just part of the set.
That is why this moment also reminds me of Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl performance. That, too, felt like a performance built for the people at home. Not a live event, but a screen event. Not something to be witnessed in person, but something to be transmitted, interpreted, and consumed through media. That is the shift. The stage is no longer just a stage. It is a delivery system for the camera.
Justin Bieber understands that.
And that is why, to me, the Coachella set was not random laziness. It was a strategic alignment with the way culture now works. He gave a performance for the internet inside a space that still thinks of itself as a temple of live performance.
That is why it felt brilliant to some and offensive to others.
But there is another layer here, and this is where the politics come in.
Because not everyone gets to do less and still be called genius.
A white male artist can withdraw visible effort and still be read as intimate, vulnerable, evolved, experimental, ironic, self-aware, or ahead of the curve. He can make reduction look like sophistication. He can make detachment look like depth. He can make underperformance look intentional.
That freedom is not distributed equally.
Artists shaped by Black performance traditions are still expected to prove themselves physically. Beyoncé cannot walk on stage and give low-energy irony and be praised for vulnerability. Chris Brown cannot give a half-formed, drifting set and be congratulated for intimacy. Sabrina Carpenter and Katseye cannot simply decide that effort is beneath them and expect to be read as conceptually advanced. Women, especially, are expected to overdeliver. They are expected to rehearse harder, look better, move more, hit every beat, and make the labor disappear while somehow still letting everyone know how much work went into it.
So yes, this is a race conversation. But it is also a gender conversation.
Women are still expected to perform excellence through visible discipline. Black artists are still expected to earn legitimacy through labor. Meanwhile, a white male artist can do less and have that lessness interpreted as artistic evolution.
That is privilege.
And Justin Bieber’s career makes this especially interesting because he rose through deep proximity to Black aesthetics, Black sound, Black cool, and Black performance language. He built his cultural credibility in part through a style of performance rooted in traditions that were never allowed to be effortless. In this newer era, he seems to be rejecting that posture. Rather than trying to out-dance, outwork, or outprove anyone, he has shifted from performance as proof to presence as enough. He has paid his dues, but for many of his Black contemporaries, the bill is perpetually due.
Even in that shift, the influence is still there. Even in this so-called lazy performance, there are echoes of Black artistic inspiration. The set design, the theatrical framing, the sense of mood and visual ambition beneath the apparent casualness all feel deeply influenced by Kanye’s approach to staging. So even in the act of withdrawing effort, there is still an inheritance from Black artists. Even in his detachment, the architecture of the moment is not coming from nowhere.
That is part of what makes the whole thing so politically loaded.
Because what Justin Bieber is doing is not simply refusing labor. He is transforming labor into something less visible. He is leaning on brand, intimacy, aesthetics, mood, and preexisting celebrity capital. And only certain people can do that successfully. Only certain people can stand in anti-spectacle and still be framed as the event.
So was the performance lazy?
To the people standing there in the desert, maybe yes. Maybe it absolutely felt lazy. Maybe it felt like a bad deal. Maybe it felt like paying live-show prices for bedroom energy.
But was it genius?
Maybe, in its own way, yes. Because it understood where the real center of gravity has moved. It understood that modern performance is no longer only about commanding the room. It is about commanding the feed, building a relationship with the audience that feels personal even when it is scaled, and creating the sensation of closeness even inside mass culture.
After all, streamers are the biggest superstars in the world now. So in a way, Justin is not shrinking himself. He is hacking the system. He is repositioning himself inside a new celebrity order, where parasocial intimacy can be just as powerful as spectacle, and where commanding the feed can matter as much as commanding the stage. He is still elevating himself as a superstar — just through the mechanisms of digital access, emotional proximity, and internet-native performance.
That does not make it fair.
That does not erase the double standard.
That does not change the fact that other artists would never be granted the same grace for doing so little, or appearing to.
But it does mean that calling it lazy is too simple.
Justin Bieber did not just underperform. He performed for a different medium. He gave a bedroom-era performance on a festival stage. He gave internet intimacy where people expected physical spectacle. But he did it with the full machinery of premium production: ultra-HD cameras, cinematic close-ups, fireworks, festival-scale visuals, and an audience of tens of thousands of standing fans that turned streamer aesthetics into a new kind of mega-attention. That is the real shift: what used to belong to the bedroom, the laptop, the low-fi stream, is now being elevated onto one of the biggest stages in the world. It is the language of parasocial closeness meeting the pinnacle of public attention.
And the backlash says just as much about the audience as it does about him.
Because the real question is no longer just whether Justin Bieber gave enough.
The real question is whether live shows themselves are still being built for the people who show up at all.
Leave a Reply