Who Does Inglis Protect - the Musicians' or the Censors' - Assignment Example

In your opinion, is Ian Inglis's definition of censorship an adequate one? Why or why not?Yes, it is an adequate definition since censorship refers to any processes that involve the prohibition of something not just a policy or singular action, can be accounted for as censorship.Section 2 (“Bob Dylan ‘Talkin’ John Birch Society Blues’”)1. What does Bob Dylan’s refusal to perform a different song say about his motivations for appearing on the show?Bob Dylan’s refusal suggests that his motivation for appearing in the show was just for the sake of popularity and to promote his music without taking into consideration the integrity being upheld by the show and the laws and policies that govern it.

Section 3 (“The Rolling Stones ‘Let’s Spend the Night Together’”)1. What does Mick Jaggar’s insistence that he said “Mmmmm” instead of “time” suggest about how censorship is/was viewed by many musicians?Some musicians did not take in seriously the value of censorship on national television. It could also be that some musicians are not really that conservative when it comes to the lyrics of the song as long as they are benefiting from it and they are giving the kind of entertainment the general public wants to have.

Section 4 (“The Doors ‘Light My Fire’”)1. How did the Doors’ response to the act of attempted censorship on The Ed Sullivan Show ultimately work to their advantage? By doing what has been prohibited by the show, the band gains more popularity. They thought that being on the show was a big help to gain more exposure, the same exposure gained by the Beatles, the Stones, and Elvis during their guesting on the show.Section 5 (“Contexts and Consequences”) - What does Inglis mean about context and consequences being important when we consider individual acts of censorship?

Context and consequences are two important factors that comprise censorship. Inglisstated that there is a need to evaluate the context where the censorship happens and the general context where imposing such restriction is seen as acceptable as well as the particular context of the event. It is also important to evaluate the outcome of each censorship both for the censors and for the censored.- What was the Ed Sullivan Show’s motivation for allowing groups they found too controversial (Elvis, The Rolling Stones) to perform on the show?

Sullivan was motivated in protecting his reputation as a decent person with moral and ethical values. The public wanted to see them on the show and he pleaded with their request to please them. Section 6 (“Conclusion”)Based on the conclusion and on the last paragraph especially, whose side (if any) do you think Inglis takes, the musicians’ or the censors’? Explain why.Inglis did not favor any of the two. He is very fair in evaluating both sides of the story and presented only the facts and the proofs to prove his argument.

- Clarity of purpose [Is there a clear statement (or statements) of purpose in this article? Do you understand what the author is trying to do?] 5- Comprehensibility [Is it clear what claims Inglis is using his examples of censorship (Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, The Doors) to support? Is the article understandable, or too complex?] - Effective examples (Are Inglis’s arguments about censorship effective? Is his evidence logical?) - Organization (Is the article organized well? Does Inglis make connections between ideas?) - Convincing conclusion (Does Inglis reach a convincing conclusion about censorship in the end?

- Do you feel he “proves” the claims he makes about censorship?- Find one quotation from this article that could be easily incorporated into the paper you will write about censorship. “The contested subjects are the same — sex, politics, and drugs/alcohol; and the adversaries are the same — a counter-cultural or subcultural audience against the repre­sentatives of the country's dominant corporate order (p.15).”