Music Censorship - Report Example

Music Censorship Tony COM156 August 5, Music Censorship According to a survey by the National Institute of Music and the Family, upto 42% of top 10 CD songs in 1999 contained sexually explicit lyrics (Gentile, 1999). There is little doubt that in the more than 10 years since that time, the situation has only gotten worse. This surprising statistic shows that musicians are not playing the instrumental role they should within their communities--a role of saving people’s morals and money, upholding stringent censorship laws, and arguing for an efficient legal system to ensure musical censorship. It is common knowledge that music does not just entertain; instead, it provides a powerful avenue for expressing peoples feelings and influencing their desires. Historically, there were no regulations for governing music censorship in America. The censoring process began in the 1950’s, when the perceptions of the traditionalists and conservatives in the music industry started coming out into the open (Nuzum, 2001). Rock and roll music only exacerbated the issue, increasing immorality among American youths and bringing additional clashes with the beliefs of traditionalists within their community (Johnson & Cloonan, 2009). In response, the ethical bodies within the country were charged with the task of regulating the open discussion of drug abuse, violence and sex by several musicians. Since then, music censorship advanced in pace and prevalence until our day, when regulation has become lax and we are returning to immorality. In order to strengthen community morals and the cost effectiveness of the music industry, it is imperative that musicians support stringent censorship laws. By the end of the 1950’s, the younger generation had already begun to express new, more liberal opinions on the issues of sex, drugs and violence. These immoral views were what initially created the need for censorship in music. Although sex and drugs had existed before, they had been discussed in secret, but at this time musicians began to speak openly about them, so censorship of music became vital. The same is true today, as these topics are still common in music of all sorts. For example, with the onset of rhythm and blues music that is greatly associated with black musicians, the issues of sex and drug use became more openly spoken about (Johnson & Cloonan, 2009). The majority of the white population at the time perceived this music as responsible for the drug use and violence found among black youths. In regards to these accusations and trends, many songs by various black artists have been banned and termed as controversial, and they should therefore discard these lyrics (Nuzum, 2001). Similarly to this, in the 1960s when musicians advocated drug usage, "politicians and civic leaders started coming out of the woodwork to save the countrys youth from the evils of drugs” (Nuzum, 2001). Musicians should avoid producing music that will instill fear among their young listeners. Such content will prevent young people from leading ethical lives, while at the same time negatively affecting their growth. For instance, many radio stations banned the song the pill by Lynn Loretta in the year 1975, but it still led to the growing popularity of contraception among youths and an increase in unsafe sexual practices within their community. These activities in turn lead to unwanted pregnancies and life threatening diseases which become very expensive to their guardians and the system as a whole (Burns, 2004). Because freedom of speech is protected through the first amendment made on the American constitution, the censorship of music within the United States has brought forth many angry speeches from individuals and groups. The freedoms awarded to American society regarding their speech have also brought controversies and contests. For example, during the cold war era numerous anti-communist sentiments were allowed as long as the speaker did not incite other people to indulge in illegal activities, which raised controversy (Johnson & Cloonan, 2009). The first amendment on the American constitution goes against censorship imposed by other laws though it does not offer protection against commercial censorship. Television and radio broadcasts found to be indecent has been regulated regularly through the communications commission formed by the federal government (Nuzum, 2001). American musicians could save people a lot of money, as well as protecting their morals, if they were to regulate their own song lyrics, because doing so enables them to show some degree of responsibility (Semonche, 2007). Musicians should not be allowed to expose sexually explicit content to young children without the consent of their guardians or parents. Censorship, along with laws regulating sexual content in musicians work, provides a positive influence on the sexual behaviors of society. This is achieved through the regulation of sexual messages that musicians give to their audiences, especially on MTV or Music Television, which has "commercials for condoms [and] specials about safe sex" (Nuzum, 2001). As a result, those who watch these programs have a tendency to be more likely to engage in safe sexual acts, so that the advertising may be said to reduce sexually transmitted diseases, and the costs incurred when patient seek medication for them. This is in addition, of course, to the moral benefits of healthier sex practices. Added censorship in music would also assist in reducing negative stereotyping within American society. Such stereotyping may bring harm to society, as well as its individual members, as many such themes are immoral. For example, American rock and rap stars have often been accused of reaffirming violent and abusive stereotypes towards women that have been largely replicated by their fans. This is true around the world, such as in Ghana where a movement known as hiplife is "lewd, profane, and degrading to women" (Drewett & Cloonan, 2006, p183). The use of an efficient legal system and stringent laws by the federal government would force musicians to avoid negative stereotyping and offensive views that may harm women or help to propagate worldviews that demean their right to peaceful lives. Similarly, censorship in American music that is motivated by racism is not something that was carried out in the past but an issue that is still persisting. Yet another way American musicians could help is by limiting intolerance present among the country’s youth. This is because some of the musical lyrics that the youths get exposed to disrespect certain individuals and groups within their society. This is similar to how some music treats women, but with more widespread targets such as other races or ethnicities. Music can negatively effect peoples views similar to the way that "particular ethnic and racial attitudes [are] changed by viewing certain motion pictures" (Semonche, 2007, p112). Music which denigrates these groups may result in the denial of opportunities to them and harm their chance of benefiting from their activities. Through their censorship of such musical contents, musicians could enrich youths by enabling them to become more tolerant with other different groups or individuals. This is especially true as young children are more easily influenced by immoral lyrics, and often have a harder time telling when something is just words in music and when it is a suggestion for real life, so the need for this kind of money being spent on censorship is unfortunately necessary at this time. For instance, many children do note have properly developed abilities to differentiate between fantasies and what is actually happening in reality, even though many “are uncomfortable with, or outright reject, songs that contain moral” judgments (Nuzum, 2001). However, if such songs were more mainstream, this would not be a problem as they would be used to it. In addition to this, the increase of U.S. Laws on censorship of music would aid musicians in saving their country money by helping their government through the provision of finances to enable them perform their ethical obligations (Nuzum, 2001). In other words, the government would no longer have to spend so much money on the censorship of vulgar, obscene, and racist language within the music industry, and would be able to use these funds elsewhere in more positive ways. The censorship of music by American musicians may additionally help in improving the nation’s security, regulate obscenity, child pornography and hate speech while at the same time protecting the children. It is also vital as it enables the restriction on airing of political views that may cause tensions among the society, slander or libel and damage to intellectual property (Semonche, 2007). However, despite the inequalities and injustices that music censorship tends to offer to the American public, many critics around the globe have come against the censors for infringing on human rights (Burns, 2004). Setting aside how musicians could censor themselves in order to help others, there would be significant benefits for musicians and music dealers with an implementation of stringent laws and an efficient legal system. This is because through censorship which aimed at producing decent, moral songs, the musician would be able to get to a wider variety of audiences and appeal to individuals who were previously not aware of their music. According to Drewett and Cloonan, the censorship of music in the developing world has been motivated by issues like piracy which have greatly affected their economies through the loss of finances. He gives the example of Kenya where he states that the country’s government has lost millions in revenue through unscrupulous individuals and groups who participate in the illegal copying and distribution of music. These activities have in turn affected the lifestyles of the musicians in these countries that some of them are still living below the poverty line despite the fact that they have achieved a lot of success in the works (2006). Ultimately, the passing of laws to prevent the release of uncensored music by American musicians would go a long way in ensuring that the younger generation’s morals are good. Such censorship should cover live concerts, cover art and styles of dressing as well as just music. Even if the American constitution does not encourage music censorship, other legal agencies have been tasked with the responsibility of enforcing it. Issues like racism have continuously affected the music industry, as some genres are linked only to certain races and others explicitly target other races. Musicians should aim at producing music which will not motivate any racial prejudices among the community. This may be achieved by participating in the production of several genres of music and by refusing to use lyrics that promote racism. American musicians should aim at regulating the copying and distribution of their works to ensure that they do not incur losses on sales. The regulation of selling and distributing music should be performed by authorized bodies that are legally entitled to punish any wrongdoers. In order to minimize the moral decay of their listeners, and the loss of money by themselves and their government, American musicians should aim at producing works that are acceptable across the diverse cultures present within their economies. Since different cultures perceive various issues in different ways, musicians should ascertain the meaning of the words they are using before releasing their work to the public. With a little more attention to how we censor our music, we could soon being to see some of these benefits becoming a reality, saving our government money and improving the morality of our communities. At the same time, we could begin to quickly reduce the number of explicit and vulgar songs down from the numbers found by the National Institute of Music and the Family to a level where nobody would have to be offended. References Burns, K. (2004). Censorship. London: Greenhaven Press. Drewett, M. & Cloonan, M. (Eds.) (2006).Popular music censorship in Africa. London: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Gentile, D. (1999). Teen-oriented radio and CD sexual content analysis. National Institute of Media and the Family. Johnson, B. & Cloonan, M. (2009).Dark side of the tune: Popular music and violence. New York: Ashgate Publishing. Nuzum, E. D. (2001). Parental advisory: Music censorship In America. New York: Harper Collins. Semonche, J. E. (2007). Censoring sex: A Historical journey through American media. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More