Jack White 2026 Tour: Where to Find Sold-Out Tickets 41%

By Jonathan Zavaleta49%

7/16/2026, 11:06:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Availability Heuristic, and Status Quo Bias, with Attempt to Sell a Product or Service as the most egregious example at 38.5% saturation with 303 hits. Analysis detected 982 faulty-reasoning hits from 786 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 45.5% and a BS Rank of 41% (12,624 of 21,176 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 59.60% of the article peer group.

Jack White is on an extended run of shows through 2026. 
Here's what to know about finding tickets, including tickets to sold-out dates. 
Jack White’s latest album, Frozen Charlotte, arrived on July 10, the day he kicked off his North American tour. 
The record is “his most sustained maximalist-garage studio party in the eternity since the White Stripes’ breakthrough rager, 2003’s Elephant,” wrote Rolling Stone’s review, making for the kind of album that’s meant to be heard live. 
At a Glance: Where to Buy Jack White Tickets 
General Sale: Ticketmaster, AXS 
Resale: StubHub, SeatGeek, VividSeats, TicketNetwork 
Dates: July  November (North America) 
The North American leg of White’s tour will run through late November, with most of the stops at smaller theaters and standing-room venues. 
The best  and only  way to experience it is in person, because White’s tour is phone-free. 
Banning phones has become an increasingly popular policy among artists (to White’s credit, he’s been doing this for a long time); concertgoers at White’s shows will be expected to stash their devices in secure Yondr pouches. 
In addition to his North American dates, White has shows in Europe and the U.K. in August. 
He also has several festival dates, including a brand-new festival in Santa Monica, CA, in September, alongside The Killers, Olivia Dean, and Khrungbin. 
Where to Buy Jack White Tour Tickets 
In addition to a phone-free experience, Jack White is also trying to make the concert-going experience more affordable. 
He’s offering $20 rush tickets to students, which are available at 5 p.m. at the venue’s box office the day of the show. 
For everyone else whose 10-year reunion might be a few years behind them, you can find tickets on Ticketmaster or AXS. 
Given the smaller venues, many stops along the tour are sold-out or have low ticket availability. 
For sold-out shows, you can find stubs on Ticketmaster’s verified resale platform, as well as resale platforms like StubHub and SeatGeek. 
Here’s what to know about seeing Jack White live on tour. 
StubHub 
Tickets for Jack White's shows are fairly limited on StubHub, with some shows down to just a handful of listings. 
Tickets for the Sept. 25 show in Pomona, CA start at $167. 
SeatGeek 
Tickets start at $122 for the July 23 show at the Radius in Chicago, which is a standing-room-only, GA venue. 
Stubs start at $130 for the San Francisco show on Sept. 
24. 
VividSeats 
The most affordable show on VividSeats is Jack White's stop at Pine Knob Music Theatre in Clarkston, MI, which is a larger, outdoor venue. 
Lawn seats start at $63. 
There is just a smattering of tickets left for his Charlotte, NC date, with GA tickets starting at $196. 
TicketNetwork 
TicketNetwork has stubs starting at around $130 for his Los Angeles date, with similar prices for the Chicago date. 
You can save $150 off orders over $500 with code RS150. 
Jack White 2026 Tour Dates 
You can check out Jack White’s North American tour dates below. 
July 10  Washington, D.C., @ The Anthem 
July 11  Brooklyn, NY @ Brooklyn Paramount 
July 12  Brooklyn, NY @ Brooklyn Paramount 
July 14  Toronto, ON @ RBC Amphitheater 
July 15  Essex Junction, VT @ Champlain Valley Exposition 
July 21  Indianapolis, IN @ Everwise Amphitheater 
July 23  Chicago, IL @ Radius 
July 24  Chicago, IL @ The Salt Shed 
July 25  Clarkston, MI @ Pine Knob Music Theatre 
Sept. 
18  Cincinnati, OH @ MegaCorp Pavilion 
Sept. 
19  East Aurora, NY @ Borderland Festival 
Sept. 
24  San Francisco, CA @ Bill Graham Civic Auditorium 
Sept. 
25  Pomona, CA @ Fox Theater 
Sept. 
28  Los Angeles, CA @ Hollywood Palladium 
Sept. 
29  Los Angeles, CA @ Hollywood Palladium 
Sept. 
30  Del Mar, CA @ The Sound 
Oct. 
2  Las Vegas, NV@ Fontainebleau 
Oct. 
3  Phoenix, AZ @ Arizona Financial Theatre 
Oct. 
4  Albuquerque, NM @ Revel 
Oct. 
6  Austin, TX @ Moody Amphitheater 
Oct. 
7  Dallas, TX @ The Bomb Factory 
Oct. 
9  Nashville, TN @ The Truth 
Nov. 
8  Minneapolis, MN @ The Armory 
Nov. 
9  Madison, WI @ The Sylvee 
Nov. 
10  Milwaukee, WI @ Landmark Credit Union Live 
Nov. 
12  Pittsburgh, PA @ Citizens Live 
Nov. 
13  Charlotte, NC @ The Fillmore 
Nov. 
14  Charlotte, NC @ The Fillmore 
Nov. 
16  Orlando, FL @ Hard Rock Live 
Nov. 
17  Miami Beach, FL @ The Fillmore 
Nov. 
18  Miami Beach, FL @The Fillmore 
Nov. 
20  Atlanta, GA @ Coca-Cola Roxy 
Nov. 
21  Atlanta, GA @ Coca-Cola Roxy 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.1%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.9%Rolling Stone: 2.8%Confirmation Bias3.1%This article: 2.4%Jonathan Zavaleta: 3.9%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Anchoring Bias2.4%This article: 7.5%Jonathan Zavaleta: 2.1%Rolling Stone: 3.1%Availability Heuristic7.5%This article: 2.9%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.7%Rolling Stone: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic2.9%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.3%Rolling Stone: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.3%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.5%Rolling Stone: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias2.3%This article: 4.2%Jonathan Zavaleta: 4.2%Rolling Stone: 5.6%Framing Effect4.2%This article: 3.8%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.9%Rolling Stone: 0.6%Loss Aversion3.8%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.9%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Status Quo Bias4.6%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 2.3%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.8%Rolling Stone: 1.9%Optimism Bias2.3%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.5%Rolling Stone: 7.3%Negativity Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 2.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 3.4%Rolling Stone: 4.8%Halo Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.3%Rolling Stone: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.2%Rolling Stone: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 1.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 2.6%Rolling Stone: 3.4%Appeal to Authority4.6%This article: 2.3%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.8%Rolling Stone: 1.5%False Dilemma2.3%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 10.1%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.2%Rolling Stone: 5.3%Hasty Generalization10.1%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.9%Rolling Stone: 0.6%Bandwagon4.6%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.8%Rolling Stone: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 2.4%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.3%Rolling Stone: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.4%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.5%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Appeal to Nature4.6%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 2.3%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.7%Jonathan Zavaleta: 3.0%Rolling Stone: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.7%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.0%Rolling Stone: 1.5%Unattributed Quote4.6%This article: 4.6%Jonathan Zavaleta: 1.6%Rolling Stone: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection4.6%This article: 2.3%Jonathan Zavaleta: 2.5%Rolling Stone: 8.7%Biased Writer Voice2.3%This article: 3.7%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.4%Rolling Stone: 1.2%Indoctrination3.7%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 1.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Zavaleta: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 38.5%Jonathan Zavaleta: 28.8%Rolling Stone: 3.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…38.5%

786 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker4.6%attributed speech750writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageRolling Stone • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Rolling Stone

100%flagged-word coverage
36 attributed words100% of attributed speech57% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Rolling Stone: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -40.4 ptsWriter: 40.4%Rolling Stone: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%Rolling Stone: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.4 ptsWriter: 2.4%Rolling Stone: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.