Post by johnnywright on Mar 1, 2009 18:03:49 GMT -5
Your radio might be blaring, playing one of the top songs on the charts, but then a BLEEP interrupts the rhythm completely. That is the sound of music censorship on the radio. Because songs are believed to ‘influence’ children, many artists have had to change their lyrics or have bleeps or other methods to remove expletives from their music. Because parents do not investigate what kind of music children listen to, they cry to the government to prevent the music from being sold or heard on the radio. Blatantly against First Amendment rights, in 1985, the Senate held a hearing which resulted in recording companies labeling their music as appropriate or inappropriate. Despite this, many parent and other organizations still call for censorship. Music, despite inappropriate lyrics, shouldn’t be censored from radios or removed from store’s shelves.
It is a parent’s responsibility to decide what is and isn’t appropriate for their children, not the government’s. No organization can decide for a nation what is considered inappropriate, as it is different for everyone. Parents should take an interest in what music their kids listen to and be the judge of its appropriateness. As for parents complaining about inappropriateness, aren’t many famous works of art portrayed with nude figures? Wouldn’t that be considered inappropriate?
Labeling music or even a specific artist as ‘censored’ often increases the sales of the artist. They appear to be an underdog, fighting against an oppressive government with their music. Music that contains expletives are already labeled, so cashiers should know not to sell the album to kids, and parents should know not to buy it for their children. The artist should not be blamed for writing an inappropriate song, but the parent who bought the album for their child or the cashier who sold it to a child.
Music and lyrics cannot be blamed for influencing children and teenagers into violent or abusive acts. While a gangster may smoke and do drugs, and a punk rocker may be violent or suicidal, the music they listen to is something they can relate to, and only a part of a much larger problem. The causes for violence or abuse can often be traced back to a child’s family or home situation, along with countless other circumstances. Blaming music for influencing children only furthers stereotypes that an African American teenager is a sleazy gangster and someone who wears black and pierces their nose is a strange or even suicidal.
While many songs can be considered inappropriate and vulgar, they should not be censored. Should children listen to them? Of course not. Should they be playing on Radio Disney? Absolutely not. To compromise, radio stations should play more adult songs during later hours at night, instead of the afternoon. Also, stores should ensure that albums labeled as explicit are not sold to children. However, the government should not judge what the people should or should not listen, as freedom of speech is a First Amendment right. While parents may complain now, the same thing happened with the generations that listened to Elvis or Jimi Hendrix, without any lasting affects to the country’s morality.
It is a parent’s responsibility to decide what is and isn’t appropriate for their children, not the government’s. No organization can decide for a nation what is considered inappropriate, as it is different for everyone. Parents should take an interest in what music their kids listen to and be the judge of its appropriateness. As for parents complaining about inappropriateness, aren’t many famous works of art portrayed with nude figures? Wouldn’t that be considered inappropriate?
Labeling music or even a specific artist as ‘censored’ often increases the sales of the artist. They appear to be an underdog, fighting against an oppressive government with their music. Music that contains expletives are already labeled, so cashiers should know not to sell the album to kids, and parents should know not to buy it for their children. The artist should not be blamed for writing an inappropriate song, but the parent who bought the album for their child or the cashier who sold it to a child.
Music and lyrics cannot be blamed for influencing children and teenagers into violent or abusive acts. While a gangster may smoke and do drugs, and a punk rocker may be violent or suicidal, the music they listen to is something they can relate to, and only a part of a much larger problem. The causes for violence or abuse can often be traced back to a child’s family or home situation, along with countless other circumstances. Blaming music for influencing children only furthers stereotypes that an African American teenager is a sleazy gangster and someone who wears black and pierces their nose is a strange or even suicidal.
While many songs can be considered inappropriate and vulgar, they should not be censored. Should children listen to them? Of course not. Should they be playing on Radio Disney? Absolutely not. To compromise, radio stations should play more adult songs during later hours at night, instead of the afternoon. Also, stores should ensure that albums labeled as explicit are not sold to children. However, the government should not judge what the people should or should not listen, as freedom of speech is a First Amendment right. While parents may complain now, the same thing happened with the generations that listened to Elvis or Jimi Hendrix, without any lasting affects to the country’s morality.
