|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Apr 26, 2003 19:12:11 GMT -5
Today when I signed onto my America Online account, there was a poll question that caught my eye. Normally, I don't vote on polls, but this one was interesting and I wanted to see the results.
The question was: "Do you think you should boycott an artist simply because of their views?" You could choose Yes, No, or Maybe. I chose No. Here are my reasons ...
I don't think that you should boycott an artist, be it a musical artist or any other kind for their views. There is a little something in the Constitution called the First Amendmant. As far as I am concerned, they regulate the entertainment business so much now, that there is little free speech. The music business is the last true place for wide self-expression.
I think my best example for this would be a band of six called Rammstein. They are an East Berlin band of Germany. All six of them grew up on the eastern side of the Berlin Wall and all knew each other before they formed Rammstein. All of their albums are pure self-expression and that is what I think I like most about them. I could care less that they sing in German. Their music is awesome and I think they express themselves in a very poetic way.
Read the English translations for their songs at HERZELEID.COM. The thing is, with their music you cannot take it for face-value. They use a lot of symbolism in some of their songs. The first album was really an anger release because all of them had lost relationships very recently.
I think the only reason Rammstein has been able to express themselves so freely is because they sing in German. Your average teenager who listens to rock music is not going to understand them, so the FCC figures why to even bother. What really gets me is that all these school shootings they blame on rock music, violence on TV and movies, and video games.
This is total bull! It is the parents' fault for not making sure that their children understood the difference between reality and fiction. Also, these parents did not make sure that their children were entirely stable or even keep their firearms locked away very safely.
I say that we should be able to express ourselves freely through music in any way we lawfully can. As far as the censorship on the TV, quit editing out swear words. Because I guarantee that those kids here the stuff that they censor out from both their parents and at school. Sometimes even worse than what they edit ...
Thank you for reading this long post.
|
|
|
|
Post by 80s Child on Apr 26, 2003 20:27:15 GMT -5
The censorship thing comes from those who have boycotted the Dixie Chicks for stating their views on Bush. They have had their albums smashed etc., and they now fear for their lives. This is probably where the question originated from.
|
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 26, 2003 23:26:29 GMT -5
I think that there is a huge difference between censorship and what some liberals have so politely termed as a new outbreak of "McCarthyism" in America, and grassroot movements and boycotts of artists and public figures that speak out against the war. Free speech is a two way street, and if you speak out against the war or our President, you must expect to be denounced and boycotted by people who do not agree with you.
Take the Dixie Chicks for example, they are a country music group, who went on to foreign soil and denounced a very popular President. Now logic tells me that this is not a very good idea, lets think about who are the key fans of country music, it is Southerners, and people from the South and country music fans in general are mostly conservative minded. It doesnt seem like it is a good PR move to denounce a person who your fan base probably has more respect for than yourselves. Now as for me, I do not like country music, and I really dont think I have ever heard the Dixie Chicks, but because of what they have said there is no way in hell that I would ever buy one of their albums. This boycott against the Dixie Chicks is a grass roots movement by private citizens. These private citizens have the same rights to denounce the Dixie Chicks for what they have said, just the same as they have the right to say it. These people are completely within their right to destroy albums and boycott stations that play their music. There is no government censorship, there is no House Committee on Un-American Activities, this is just a movement of people who find what was said by Natalie Maines makes it unacceptable for them to support them through any means.
For me there are some movies that I will refuse to see if certain actors or actresses are in them. People such as Richard Gere, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Alec Baldwin, and Janeanne Garofalo to name a few. I cannot personally justify seeing one cent of my money going into any of these people's pockets. Does my $7 at the movie stand really make a difference? No, but I just couldnt see one of these peoples movies if I wanted to. I wont eat Ben and Jerry's ice cream either.
|
|
|
|
Post by 80s Child on Apr 26, 2003 23:44:56 GMT -5
^^Why not Ben & Jerry's? (Just curious!)
Yeah, you're right that it's within our rights to boycott whatever we want. Personally, neither I nor anyone in my family will go see a movie with Mel Gibson. Why? Because his father is an anti-semite, and because Mel himself belongs to a sect of the Catholic church that is known for their belief that the Jews killed Jesus, and therefore should be denied freedom of religion. I will also not see a movie directed by Roman Polanski (i.e. the Pianist) because the man drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl, and it would go against all of my feminist beliefs to give him even a cent of my money.
For the record though, the Dixie Chicks may be country singers, but their fans are not normally conservative. Most of their fans are of the feminist, Lilith-fair hippie types, as are the band members themselves. When they made their statement during their concert, the audience cheered and applauded very loudly. Most of the people staging this boycott are not really "fans", they are people who just want to denounce the band because they disagree with them (again, totally within their rights). However, threats against the band's lives should not be tolerated, but that's just me.
|
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 27, 2003 0:09:27 GMT -5
<<Why not Ben & Jerry's?>>
They have come out to be extremely anti-Bush and anti-war.
I also agree with you that the death threats are unacceptable, but remember that most public figures receive periodic death threats anyways.
I am glad that you do not see a vast right wing conspiracy behind boycotts, because some liberals immediately cry "black lists" or McCarthy any time a liberal or liberal minded activists are boycotted.
|
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Apr 27, 2003 17:22:13 GMT -5
I honestly could care less what some people stand for, as far as actors or directors are concerned. They are extremely different people whenever they act and when they live their private life. If they entertain me, then I will watch them.
And as far as that thing about Mel, I don't think that is entirely true. His parents may be associated with it, but he may be related to that sect simply by birth. You cannot judge a person by their past or their parents. However, that thing about the parents is entirely a theory. Please show me proof where he has openly said that he belongs to this sect.
Also, Pettyluv, why do you not like any of the people you mentioned? Not including Ben & Jerry's.
|
|
|
|
Post by 80s Child on Apr 27, 2003 17:52:04 GMT -5
^^He is not just associated with them by birth. I don't have specific quotes, but he has made statements saying that he belongs to this group. I didn't say YOU had to boycott him - but as a Jew by blood, I will stand by my decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 27, 2003 18:08:42 GMT -5
The people that I have mentioned, I see as extremely anti-American, and they are the celebrity poster children of the anti-Bush and ant-war movements. I should probably add Michael Moore to my list as well. They all represent left-wing Hollywood elitism, and I want nothing to do with them, and I do not want to support them by any financial means.
|
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Apr 27, 2003 18:21:03 GMT -5
All right. I was just wondering why you all did not like these people.
Now, about the issue of censorship. What do you all feel about that? Do you think there should be total censorship? Slight censorship? Or no censorship?
|
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 27, 2003 18:27:47 GMT -5
^Could you elaborate a little more?
|
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Apr 27, 2003 18:39:11 GMT -5
All right ... I think it was in California or Florida where there was a rap group that was very .... ostentatious. Their album was banned and remove from all shelves across the state. There were "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics/Content" warnings on the album cover as well. Once it was banned, you could be arrested for selling it and/or carrying it on the shelves of your store.
The video they made was also very explicit as well. However, I think they should have simply just removed the video from airplay or moved it to late night rotation (like VH1 and MTV did when Cher came out with the video where she had the booty on her outfit cut out).
Total outright banning of an album is totally unnecessary. You can remove it from radio stations if the content is explicit, I have no problem with that. But to ban their album from sale? That is pretty excessive.
|
|
|
|
Post by m on Apr 29, 2003 13:12:35 GMT -5
Now logic tells me that this is not a very good idea, lets think about who are the key fans of country music, it is Southerners, and people from the South and country music fans in general are mostly conservative minded. It doesnt seem like it is a good PR move to denounce a person who your fan base probably has more respect for than yourselves.
I agree. It shows the Dixie Chicks didn't know their fan base, as Country Music fans are generally patrotic.
the Dixie Chicks may be country singers, but their fans are not normally conservative.
That may be true, as genres of music get blurred while the market changes. But the Dixie Cicks get their largest airplay on country music stations.
As to the issue on censorship, it's usually the people that don't want to hear rap (or Crap as I like to call it. How much skill does it take to lift a sample of someone else's music and tell how bad everything is?) Censorship is a very problematic issue, but if the lyrics or what have you are deemed to be hateful, harmful, or disruptive in some way, people have the right NOT to hear it or have it.
It's true people have freedom of speech, but that does not mean others have to listen to it, or have it around. Sure, one doesn't have to see something or listen to something they don't want, but if it's on all the time, on every street, at school, or work, one has the right to say, "enough!"
|
|
|
|
Post by YourCapnSpeaking on Apr 29, 2003 19:51:33 GMT -5
The song that was in question on the album that was currently being played over radio stations was removed across the state except the rap stations, and I am okay with that. But the thing that makes me mad is that they made it against the law to sell the thing.
I am not a big fan of rap either, I could really listen to anything except polka and country, but that subject just makes me mad that they are able to totally and outright ban an album.
Ah well ... that's the screwed up justice system for you ... people with cash walk and everyone else takes it up the @$$ ...
|
|
|
|
Post by paradoxPanda on May 3, 2003 15:03:13 GMT -5
It shows the Dixie Chicks didn't know their fan base, as Country Music fans are generally patrotic.
I feel fairly certain that they had some inkling of it.
But anyways, I don't think that their views would prevent me from buying their music. If I like a song, I won't let that stop me. But then, it wouldn't be like me to view people who are anti-Bush and anti-war as not being patriotic. If we didn't have such a wide spectrum of opinions, we wouldn't be America.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frosty The Ice-Bitch on May 12, 2003 22:58:35 GMT -5
While I do agree you have the right to boycott anything you like, I think it is strange to boycott somthing just because you don't agree with their believes. I'm not saying any of you are strange I just don't see why. I mean if I like a band and suddenly they they said somthing I didn't agree with I wouldn't stop listening to them because I still like their music, same goes with food actor/actresses. Now it would be different if I knew for a fact the the money I spent was going to terrorists or murders or somthing like that.
That is my two cents
|
|
