The organization team behind the Siberian Wind festival, scheduled in Novosibirsk for August 11–13, faced public pressure that led to a change in the festival lineup. At the request of a community group, the Fathers Council of the Novosibirsk Region, the poster was updated to remove the group Splin from the list of performers. The revised poster no longer features the band’s image or name, and Splin is not listed among the invited artists on the festival’s official website.
In a public statement, Sergei Mayorov, who heads the Fathers Council, described the decision to grant Splin a platform as unacceptable under current conditions. He framed the move as a matter of state and citizen interests, arguing that allowing the band to present its views and receive compensation would be incompatible with prevailing circumstances. This stance reflects a broader concern among some organizations about how performances may or may not align with social and political expectations during sensitive times.
The controversy surrounding Splin’s participation had already sparked debate earlier in the year. Activists from the organization Officers of Russia publicly urged the Prosecutor General’s Office to examine remarks by the band’s frontman regarding compliance with laws linked to the ongoing special military operation. The dispute intensified after Splin performed the song No Exit at the Chernozem rock festival in Voronezh, a track that was interpreted by critics as supportive of colleagues who had recently left the country. Critics argued that the song suggested disloyalty to national norms, while supporters viewed it as a form of artistic expression amid complex political realities.
History shows that the festival’s organizers have faced additional pressure from activist groups who have challenged lineup decisions in the past. In some instances, this pressure has led to the cancellation or postponement of performances by other local acts. The latest changes to the Siberian Wind program illustrate the delicate balance event organizers must strike between artistic programming and public sentiment in a region with tightly watched cultural and political concerns.
Observers note that such developments highlight the broader debate about the role of art in public life during periods of heightened tension. Proponents of artistic freedom argue that music and performance are essential forms of expression that should not be suppressed or constrained by political considerations alone. Opponents contend that public events can become platforms for wider messaging and that organizers carry a responsibility to consider how performances may be interpreted by audiences both locally and beyond. The situation in Novosibirsk exemplifies how these tensions can shape festival calendars and the visibility of artists with controversial or polarizing viewpoints.
Ultimately, organizers emphasize that festival programming aims to reflect a diverse range of voices while honoring community norms. The decision to adjust the poster and lineup is framed as part of a broader effort to maintain harmony between artistic expression and social expectations. As the event approaches, stakeholders—from festival attendees to local cultural councils—will continue to watch how performers like Splin are represented in promotional materials and on the festival site. The evolving narrative serves as a reminder of the ongoing conversation about art, informality, and the responsibilities that accompany public platforms. [citation]