Lorde Slams Meta’s Ray-Ban AI Glasses as Festival Tech Backlash Grows

Lorde used a Madrid festival set this week to deliver a blunt public rebuke of AI smart glasses, telling fans that the devices are “not sexy” and urging them not to buy them. Her comments landed as Meta faces renewed criticism over its Ray-Ban-branded wearables and reported plans for even more intrusive always-on glasses.

The pop star’s remarks, captured in videos shared online from the Real Cool Festival, turned a music performance into a pointed cultural critique of surveillance-style consumer tech. They also highlighted how AI wearables have become a flashpoint in the broader argument over privacy, authenticity and what it means to look “real” in public.

What did Lorde say on stage in Madrid?

Lorde directly attacked the idea of AI-equipped glasses during her Thursday performance at the Real Cool Festival, though she did not name a specific brand. Her comments, however, appeared to be aimed at the Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses that have become increasingly visible at concerts, festivals and other public events.

According to videos circulating on social platforms, she thanked the crowd for showing up and for being part of “something real,” then pivoted to a broader complaint about the difficulty of telling what is authentic in everyday life. She followed that with a sharp warning against the devices.

“You don’t know if someone is wearing sunglasses or if they’re wearing those fucked up fucking… Can I just say, for the record, fuck the glasses. Don’t get the glasses. Not sexy,” she said, according to clips posted online.

The language was deliberately provocative, but the message was straightforward: Lorde sees AI glasses not as a fashionable accessory, but as a symbol of a culture increasingly comfortable with being recorded all the time.

Why are AI glasses drawing backlash now?

AI glasses are under fresh scrutiny because they combine a familiar object — eyeglasses — with camera, microphone and assistant features that can turn the wearer into a mobile sensor platform. That combination has made privacy advocates uneasy and has also created anxiety in social settings where people may not know when they are being captured.

The concern is not simply that smart glasses exist. It is that they normalize ambient recording in spaces where people typically expect at least some degree of privacy, such as concerts, bars, restaurants, backstage areas or private conversations among friends.

Meta’s Ray-Ban collaboration has become the most visible consumer example of that tension. The glasses are marketed as stylish and useful, but critics argue the category also makes surveillance feel casual, fashionable and socially acceptable.

How do these glasses change public behavior?

They change behavior by making recording less obvious and less socially disruptive than holding up a phone camera. That can make bystanders more uneasy, because they may not know whether a conversation, performance or personal moment is being captured.

At the same time, the design of the product blurs an old social signal. Sunglasses usually suggest the wearer is hiding from bright light or making a style statement. Smart glasses add hidden functionality, and that uncertainty is part of the discomfort Lorde was describing on stage.

How do the Ray-Ban Meta glasses fit into Meta’s broader strategy?

The Ray-Ban Meta glasses are part of Meta’s effort to make AI a daily consumer habit rather than a product confined to chatbots and apps. The company has spent heavily on wearable computing and on systems that keep users inside its ecosystem for longer periods of time.

By putting AI into a familiar fashion accessory, Meta is trying to lower the friction of adoption. Instead of convincing people to carry a new gadget, it is trying to make the device feel like something they would wear anyway.

That strategy has helped Meta present the product as more approachable than a futuristic headset. But it has also made the company vulnerable to criticism that the glasses encourage continuous observation under the guise of convenience.

What is Meta reportedly planning next?

Meta is reportedly preparing an even more advanced pair of “super sensing” glasses that would continuously record. That reported direction has intensified concerns around privacy, consent and how much of everyday life should be passively logged by consumer hardware.

While such a product would likely be promoted as more helpful and context-aware, the phrase “continuously recording” has already fueled unease because it implies a near-constant capture of surrounding activity rather than a limited, opt-in use case.

That prospect makes Lorde’s criticism feel less like a one-off comment and more like a preview of a coming cultural dispute over ambient AI hardware.

Why did the festival setting matter?

The setting mattered because festivals are among the most socially sensitive places for recording technology. People gather there to watch live performance, not to be part of someone else’s content capture workflow.

Lorde framed the crowd’s presence as a shared experience built around “something real,” which sharpened the contrast with a device category often associated with hidden recording and AI-mediated mediation of reality. In that sense, her criticism was not only about a gadget but about the authenticity of the live event itself.

That distinction matters in entertainment, where the boundary between audience participation and documentation has become increasingly blurred. Phones have already changed live music culture; AI glasses may push that shift further by making recording quieter, subtler and harder to detect.

Who else is connected to the Ray-Ban Meta push?

Blackpink member Jennie was reportedly the artist who followed Lorde on stage at Real Cool, and she is also tied to the Ray-Ban Meta push through ambassador work and promotional appearances. That detail adds an ironic layer to the moment: one global pop star criticizing the product while another has been used to market it.

According to reporting referenced by Stereogum, Jennie has appeared in Ray-Ban Meta campaigns on Instagram and in a festival video played between sets at Real Cool. The contrast reflects how wearable tech now sits at the intersection of celebrity branding, youth culture and corporate tech messaging.

For Meta, that kind of star power is valuable. For critics, it can also make the product feel less like a neutral gadget and more like a lifestyle pitch for ubiquitous capture.

Key facts at a glance

The bigger privacy debate around smart glasses

Smart glasses have long promised a future where digital assistance is seamlessly embedded into daily life. But every step toward that convenience raises the same question: who is being recorded, and who gets to decide?

That question is especially sharp in crowded public environments, where cameras are already common but social norms still matter. A phone camera is visible, obvious and usually easy to spot. Glasses designed to record can feel more covert, which changes the ethics even if the underlying technology is similar.

Privacy concerns also extend beyond casual bystanders. Performers, staff, venue workers and other attendees may not want their faces, conversations or movements continuously captured by a device that looks like ordinary eyewear.

Why does “not sexy” resonate as a critique?

It resonates because it turns a technical complaint into a style and cultural judgment. Lorde was not just saying the glasses are invasive; she was saying the idea itself is unattractive, uncool and socially off-putting.

That framing matters in pop culture, where design, image and identity often determine whether a product feels aspirational or alienating. By calling the glasses “not sexy,” she reduced the marketing appeal of the devices to something immediate and memorable.

The line also captures a growing backlash against tech products that rely on sleek branding to soften the reality of data collection. In that sense, her criticism functions as both a joke and a warning.

How are artists becoming critics of AI hardware?

Artists are increasingly acting as early public critics of AI hardware because they are among the first people to feel its effects in highly visible social spaces. Concerts, film sets and backstage areas are environments where recording tools matter immediately, not abstractly.

Musicians also understand how quickly audiences can turn a performance into content. That gives them a natural incentive to push back on tools that erase the line between live participation and passive surveillance.

Lorde’s comments fit a broader pattern in which public figures are using their platforms to question the social tradeoffs of AI products rather than merely their technical features. The result is a cultural critique that can spread faster than any product demo.

Timeline of the moment and the backlash

The incident unfolded quickly, but it sits inside a larger sequence of events around Meta’s wearables and public criticism of AI recording tools.

What this means for Meta and the wearable AI market

The criticism underscores a challenge that companies like Meta cannot solve with better marketing alone. Wearable AI depends on trust, but its most distinctive features often conflict with social expectations around consent and visibility.

As more celebrities, creators and everyday users comment publicly on these devices, the debate is shifting from product reviews to broader questions about the norms of public life. That is a harder problem for companies than battery life, voice quality or frame design.

Meta may continue to push the category by tying it to fashion brands and famous ambassadors. But moments like Lorde’s show that the product’s social meaning is still unsettled, and in some circles, deeply unwelcome.

What comes next?

The immediate effect of Lorde’s comments will likely be more online attention for both the festival moment and the glasses themselves. But the larger consequence is that AI eyewear is now being judged not only on utility, but also on whether people want to live in a world where everyone might be recording all the time.

If Meta moves forward with more advanced always-on glasses, that conversation is likely to intensify. The technology may become smaller, smarter and more fashionable. The backlash, however, could become louder as well.

For now, Lorde has given the anti-glasses argument a sharp, viral shorthand: don’t buy them, and definitely don’t assume everyone around you is comfortable with being part of the feed.

In other words, the future of wearable AI is no longer just a hardware story. It is a cultural one, and in Madrid, Lorde made that point impossible to miss.

Frequently asked questions

Did Lorde mention Meta by name?

No, Lorde did not explicitly name Meta during her performance. However, her comments appeared to target AI smart glasses in general and likely referred to the Ray-Ban Meta glasses because of the festival’s sponsor and the surrounding context.

Why are people upset about AI glasses?

People are upset because AI glasses can record audio and video in ways that are less obvious than a phone camera. That creates worries about privacy, consent and whether bystanders know when they are being captured.

Is Meta really planning always-recording glasses?

Meta has reportedly been working on “super sensing” glasses that would continuously record. That description has not only raised concern about the direction of the product line but also intensified debate about ambient surveillance in public spaces.

Why was Jennie mentioned in this story?

Jennie was linked to the event because she reportedly followed Lorde on stage and is also associated with Ray-Ban Meta promotional work. Her presence highlighted how celebrity endorsements can sit alongside, and sometimes clash with, public criticism of the same product.

What makes festival settings especially sensitive for smart glasses?

Festival settings are especially sensitive because they combine dense crowds, live performances and strong expectations of shared experience. People may be comfortable seeing phones raised briefly, but hidden or continuous recording by glasses can feel more intrusive and less consensual.