The undercover geopolitics of the Met Gala

As the philosophers at NSYNC once noted, “it’s gonna be May”.

And that can only mean one thing: netizens take a break from being an expert in critical minerals, AI, Venezuela, oil, and Hormuz to briefly weigh in on fashion at the Met Gala.

By way of quick refresher, it’s a charity event to raise funds for America’s premier art institution, the Metropolitan Museum of Art (aka the Met).

Hosted by Vogue, the Gala backs the Met’s one self-funded bit: the Costume Department. That’s why fashion icon Eleanor Lambert kickstarted the first Met Gala way back in 1948.

Fast forward three-quarters of a century to Monday night, and the sheer concentration of exclusivity, star power, and trust funds makes it one of the year’s most hyped events.

So let’s dive into the geopolitics of Monday’s 2026 Met Gala, starting with… 

1. The Bezos backlash 

This year’s big controversy was the cameo by the billionaire Bezos couple, who forked out $10M as the night’s lead sponsors. It all triggered demonstrations, with some folks even hiding fake urine bottles throughout the museum in a nod to longstanding allegations that Amazon workers get pressured to pee in bottles rather than take bathroom breaks. 

Why the backlash? We see it as anger over…

• Alleged image-laundering for a Trump-aligned oligarch
• The clash of blowing $10M at the Met while replacing workers with robots
• Broader post-Epstein unease around the rich and powerful, and
• Discomfort over Bezos jamming his fingers into so many pies (rockets, data centres, streaming, satellites, grocery stores, legacy newspapers, and now… fashion?). 

Whatever the source, the anger points to two big issues: first, it suggests the ultra-wealthy are no longer aspirational figures, but out-of-touch elites: half of Americans now say they believe billionaires are threatening democracy, and 68% say they want a strong leader to take their country back from the rich and powerful.

Siri: show us the perfect conditions for a populist revolt?

The second and related reason actually has to do with… 

2. The ‘Tech Gala’ 

You know who else showed up? Fellow tech royals like Meta’s Zuck, Snapchat’s Spiegel, and Google’s Brin (who rocked a pre-revolutionary Iran pin to support a free Iran).

The Zuck seemed best at sensing the hostile mood above, given he skipped the red carpet altogether — we like to think he spent the time retweeting dunks on Bezos instead.

But our point? Maybe these moguls turned up because it seemed fun, but the reality of their vast PR teams — plus Zuck also sitting front row at Milan Fashion Week — suggests there’s probably also some strategy afoot: being fashionable can mean being relevant, and relevance is easily converted into social capital, something Big Tech desperately needs.

Or to put it another way, maybe it’s about rebranding as culturally relevant rather than remote overlords, to blunt growing unease around their raw wealth and power. Or maybe it’s about countering fears of the virtual with examples of tech titans being present?

Either way, the backlash shows how easily (if not inevitably at this point) it can all backfire.

And it’s not just the tech CEOs. It’s also…

3. The sponsors

That museum isn’t gonna curate itself. It costs money. And it turns out seven of the last 11 Met Galas have been co-sponsored by at least one Big Tech player, including Instagram, Yahoo, Apple, and TikTok. Clearly, the ROI is high.

But whereas the CEOs themselves might want to soften their own image, that adjacent corporate branding looks like an attempt to familiarise everyone with the idea of these platforms continuing their roles as cultural gatekeepers.

But lest you think it’s just our tech overlords paying attention to the Met Gala…

4. The countries

There’s a long history here, whether it’s the 2006 Met dedicated to the UK (more James Bond than Vicky Pollard), the 2015 iteration exploring China’s fashion impact (sponsored by “several Chinese donors”), or even the Vatican’s big 2017 collab.

This year the theme was ‘Costume Art’, but to the extent it featured any particular nation abroad, it might’ve been India: designers like Malhotra and Johar, industrialists like Birla and Ambani (Isha), and even Jaipur royals were all there showcasing India’s cultural heft.

So all that to say… we’re clearly not the only ones twigging to how cultural outputs like fashion can offer influential sources of soft power.  

Anyways, we’ll get back to our regular scheduled program tomorrow, but “are you not entertained?”

Intrigue’s Take

In an age of populist revolt, it’s interesting to see elites doubling down on the opulence — that’s either a savvy attempt to steer the wave, or a tone-deaf flex that just swells it.

Either way, it’s a reminder that we’re all (whether as nations, corporations, or individuals) now competing in the same arena for narrative control.

So maybe the lesson here is you can’t buy friends any more than you can buy class.

Or maybe the lesson is if the year’s theme celebrates the human body as a canvas, perhaps don’t sign on as sponsor if you’re busy automating the human body away?

Sound even smarter:

• Zohran Mamdani became the first NYC mayor to skip the Met since 2002.