Cens

Paraskevas Hadjikyriacou 10069/BRA 0306 Research Project/ RA303 Research Project Censorship of Popular Music in the United States and the United Kingdom: A Critical Analysis Word Count: 14890

Censorship of Popular Music in the United States and the United Kingdom: A Critical Analysis

Paraskevas Hadjikyriacou

Table of Contents 1. Introduction

1

2. Rationale

1,2

3. Research Methods

2

4. Defining and analyzing the issue of Censorship

3,4

4.1 A Definition of Censorship

3,4

4.2 The Three Levels of Censorship

4

5. A Brief History of Censorship of Popular Music in the United States and the United Kingdom

5-9

5.1 The United States

5-7

5.2 The United Kingdom

8,9

6. The Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC): Protecting the Children of the United States? Or Dictating a moral aesthetic in a Democratic Society?

6.1 An Introduction

9-23

9-11

I

Table of Contents 6. The Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC): Protecting the Children of the United States? Or Dictating a moral aesthetic in a Democratic Society?

9-23

6.2 The sociopolitical climate in the USA in the 1980s: The Rise of the Christian Right

11-13

6.3 The Theory and Political Influence of the Christian Right

13-15

6.4 The PMRC’s Rhetoric

15,16

6.5 An Analysis of the Case

16-23

6.5.1 The Congressional Hearings

16-19

6.5.2 An Analysis of the Outcome of the Senate Hearings

20-23

7. The Problem of Lyric Interpretation

23-27

7.1 Lyrics as an Art Form

23

7.2 The Problem of Lyric Interpretation by children and teenagers

24

7.3 Research in the Field of Lyric Interpretation

25-27

II

Table of Contents 8. Do Music Lyrics have the Ability to Insight Violent Behaviour?

27-33

8.1 The Theory behind the claim that Music Lyrics Can Insight Violent Behavior-Developing a Moral Panic

28,29

8.2 Research in the Effect Music Lyrics have in Insighting Violence

30-32

8.3 The effect the Parental Advisory Label plays in relation to Teenage preferences

32,33

9. Legislation Regarding the Censorship of Popular Music

34-52

9.1 Legislation regarding the Censorship of Popular Music in the USA 34

9.1.a The First Amendment- The Right of Freedom of Expression

34,35

9.2 Defining Obscenity in the Courts- The American Way

36-38

9.3 Defining Obscenity in relation to Broadcasting Legislation in the USA

39,40

9.4 Defining Obscenity in the Courts- The British Way

41

9.4.a..The Obscene Publications Act 1959

41-43

III

Table of Contents 9. Legislation Regarding the Censorship of Popular Music

34-52

9.5 European Legislation regarding Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

43

9.6 The Regulation of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom

44

9.7 The Problem of Obscenity Legislation

44-45

9.8 The Case of 2 Live Crew “As Nasty As They Wonna Be” The First Album to Be Legally Declared Obscene in the United States 45-47

9.8.b.Judas Priest v Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nevada (1988)

48

9.8.c The Ozzy Osborne case: McCollum v CBS (1988)

49

9.8.d. A conclusion of the two cases

50

9.9 The case of Anti Nowhere League’s song “So What” The First Musical Work to be declared Legally Obscene

10. Censorial Efforts in Margaret Thatcher’s Britain

51,52

53-64

10.1. The United Kingdom during the Thatcher Years

53,54

10.2. The Attempts to Censor Punk Rock in the 1970s and 1980s

54-55

IV

Table of Contents 10. Censorial Efforts in Margaret Thatcher’s Britain

53-64

10.3 The Censorial Efforts Against The Sex Pistols

55,56

10.4. The Case of Spectrum Records and Crass

57,58

10.5. The case of Eastern Bloc and A Flux of Pink Indians

58,59

10.6. The Prosecution and Censorship of Acid House

59-61

10.7. The case of Earache Records: Censorship of Record Covers

61,62

10.8. The case of Niggers With Attitude

63,64

11. The 1990s: The case of Gangsta Rap- Ice-T’s “Cop Killer”

64-68

11.1. The Censorship of Gangsta Rap in the 1990s

66

11.2. An Analysis of the Hearings on Gangsta Rap

67,68

12. Market Censorship: The Role of the Recording Industry in the Censorship Debate

69-70

12.1. Examples of Market Censorship in the UK

69

12.2. Examples of Market Censorship in the USA

70

V

Table of Contents 12.3. Examples of Record Label Censorship

70

13. Broadcasting and Censorship: The Censorial Efforts of the BBC in the UK

71,72

14. Censorship of Popular Music in the Post 9/11 World

72-75

15. A Critical Analysis of the Issue of Censorship

75-77

15.1. The Dangers of Establishing a Moral Code on Society

75,76

15.2 The Meaning and Significance of Popular Music and Freedom of Expression in Society

77

16. Conclusion

78

Bibliography

79-84

Appendix

85-122

1. Prince’s “Darling Nikki”- Lyrics and Music

85,86

VI

Table of Contents Appendix

85-122

2. Twisted Sister’s “Under the Blade”- Lyrics and Music

87,88

3. Denisoff’s Research- The Lyrics and Music to P.F. Sloan’s “Eve of Destruction”

89-91

4. An Overview of Miller v California (1973)

91-93

5. An Overview of FCC v Pacifica Foundation (1978)

93

6. 2 Live Crew’s “As Nasty As They Wonna Be”Lyrics and Music

94-96

7. Judas Priest’s “Better by you Better than Me”- Lyrics and Music 97,98

8. Ozzy Osborne‘s “Suicide Solution”- Lyrics and Music

99-100

9. Anti Nowhere League‘s “Suicide So What”- Lyrics and Music

100-102

10. Crass‘ “Sheep Farming in the Falklands”- Lyrics and Music

102-105

11. Ice-T’s ‘“Cop Killer”- Lyrics and Music

106-108

VII

Table of Contents Appendix

85-122

12. CD Track list

109

13. Learning Agreement

110-122

Images

123-125

Acknowledgements

126

VIII

Abstract A critical analysis of the issue of censorship in popular music will be presented in this research project. This research project will analyze the history of censorship in the last forty years in the United States and the United Kingdom. Key cases regarding the various aspects of the issue, such as cultural, political, social and legal, have been analyzed by consulting various publications, which deal with the issue such as popular music studies books, books regarding censorship of any material and legal, cultural, and political journals and reviews. The research project is divided into chapters that deal with the sociopolitical and legal aspects of the issue, along with chapters that analyze specific cases regarding censorship of popular music that occurred in the two countries in the last forty years. The research project concludes with the notion that censorship is not justifiable under any circumstances and is rather damaging in any democratic society as it limits free expression, marginalizes popular music and most importantly exposes objectionable material to the general public who would not seek or know about such material if it was not for censorial efforts.

IX

Censorship of Popular Music in the United States and the United Kingdom. A Critical Analysis 1. Introduction

This research project will deal with the issue of censorship of popular music in the United States and the United Kingdom. The issue of censorship in popular music is not new. The Rolling Stones censored the lyrics to their song, “Lets spend the night together” to “Lets spend some time together” on the Ed Sullivan show in 1967 (Inglis, 2006: p.559-560) and in 2006 the Rolling Stones were censored during the performance at the US Super Bowl (Anon, 2006) because just like in1967 the lyrics of their songs were deemed sexually explicit. So the issue of censorship is still highly debatable and often sparks controversy as the notion of the right that every individual has to free speech often clashes with the question of where to draw the line between what is regarded as art and what is regarded as blasphemous and obscene. On what grounds can our democratic society limit artistic expression for the “moral” protection of the general public? Can our society ban material that is regarded by some sociopolitical circles as obscene and violence insightful? Another question then arises. What is regarded obscene? Who will declare obscenity; and is obscenity able to deprave and corrupt our society? Can a song incite violence? These questions will be answered, through the analysis of important incidents that occurred throughout the last forty years in the world of popular music.

2. Rationale

This research project tries to answer the above questions, by critically analyzing the arguments put forward by advocates and opponents of censorship. In addition to that, this research project will analyze key cases in the issue of censorship in popular music in the United States and the United Kingdom.

1

2. Rationale

By comparing the various cases this research project will express the view that censorial efforts are socially conditioned and mainly politically driven by certain sociopolitical elites in both countries that try to impose their own moral agenda that is based on fear of everything different and opposing to their view in our so called “democratic” society. By critically analyzing censorial efforts that occurred in these two countries in the last forty years this research project will argue and express the view that censorship of popular music does not work. It always limits artistic expression and the right that every individual has to free speech alongside exposing controversial material to vulnerable groups such as children who would never have been exposed to this material if it wasn’t for the efforts of advocates of censorship.

3. Research Methods

In order to examine and analyze the subject various research methods have been used. As the subject is of a sociopolitical nature, all the research methods are based on secondary sources. The methodologies used are qualitative and based on historical, legal, and cultural sources. Various publications regarding the issue of censorship of popular music were used including books and journal articles that argue for or against any kind of censorship. More specifically books that present various arguments regarding censorship of popular music where used. An analysis of key case studies that deal with legal aspects of the issue and derive from law journals and reviews where used. A historical time line of the issue was conducted by analyzing books that deal with cultural studies and more specifically studies of popular music.

2

4. Defining and analyzing the issue of Censorship

4.1 A Definition of Censorship

In order to understand the whole issue of censorship, a definition must be given to further put the subject into context. According to Black’s Law Dictionary (1979 cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.23) censorship is: The review of publications, movies, plays, and the like for the purpose of prohibiting the publication, distribution, or production of material deemed objectionable as obscene, indecent, or immoral. Black’s Law Dictionary p203 (5th ed 1979, cited in Cloonan,1996:p.23)

Legally therefore, censorship is defined as the review and further examination of artistic works such as movies and art that deal with material that is deemed objectionable, indecent and obscene with the purpose of prohibiting their publication, distribution and production. This legal definition of censorship is quite interesting as it defines the whole purpose of prohibiting material that is deemed objectionable, obscene and immoral while at the same time raises a question about what is deemed obscene or immoral in any society and who is to judge this notion of obscenity. At the same time a more precise definition of censorship regarding specifically the issue of censorship of popular music can be found in Cloonan (1996:p.23): Censorship is the attempt to interfere, either pre or post publication, with the artistic expression of popular musicians, with a view to stifling, or significantly altering, that expression. This includes procedures of marginalization, as well as the overt banning, of such expressions. Note that this includes market, as well as moral censorship. (Cloonan, 1996:p.23)

So Cloonan here talks about censorship under a different spotlight. Cloonan (1996:p.23) talks about the interference of material that emerge from the artistic expression of popular musicians, either pre or post their publication, with the intention of significantly altering their expression. Cloonan here talks about the different ways this can be achieved; either by marginalizing the material of overtly banning it.

3

4.1 A Definition of Censorship

Also here Cloonan introduces us to the issue of market censorship along with moral censorship that was examined by the legal definition of censorship. From these two definitions some very important issues arise that will be further examined in this research project. First though the three main levels of censorship will be presented and examined and will be further put into context by the analysis of various cases that came into the public light in the last forty years.

4.2 The Three Levels of Censorship

The three main levels of censorship are prior restraint, restriction and suppression. (Cloonan and Garofalo (eds) 2003:p.17) Material that is deemed objectionable can be often censored by prior restraint. So even before the material is being released to the general public a record company for example, can restrain it and not publish it. Secondly once an artistic piece of work is published, the general public can be restricted from viewing it or listening to it by limiting its distribution in the media and the consumer market. Empirical and statistical evidence, as we shall see, show that this censorial method is most commonly used in the Western world and particularly in the United States and the United Kingdom. (Cloonan and Garofalo (eds) 2003:p.25) Finally the overt suppression of such material can and is usually achieved, mainly in authoritarian and totalitarian states, by the overt banning and often destruction of the material. (Street, 2003:p.114) Now that we have examined briefly the definition and the different ways that artistic material can be censored a brief history of censorship of popular music in the United States and United Kingdom starting from the late 1950s will be presented and later followed by an analysis of important censorial efforts that occurred in the two countries.

4

5. A Brief History of Censorship of Popular Music in the United States and the United Kingdom

5.1 The United States

The post war period proved to be highly influential in the entire western world as new sociopolitical conditions were established with the division of communist east and democratic west. Although attempts to censor popular music were always present, more specifically in the 1950s blues and rock and roll music were heavily censored (McDonald, 1988:p.297), social and moral attitudes started to change in human history leaning towards a more liberal tendency. With the emergence of the civil rights movement in the United States, much of the public outcry against rock and roll in the 1950s was, as expected, racially motivated. (Heins, 1993: p.80) A poster circulated by the Ku Klux Klan in 1955 clearly states this: “Help save the youth of America: Don’t buy Negro records” (McDonald, 1988:p.297) The racial tensions played a key role in the development of censorship in popular music as radical, racist right wing organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan in the United States tried to portray the dangers of “black music” while members of the liberal political left along with the civil rights movement started to support diversity in the arts and more specifically in music. “Rock and roll was unpopular with the cultural elites of the United States. The lyrical content of rock and roll was what was being attacked. Songs about intimate adult relationships that rock and roll derived from rhythm and blues clashed against the moral code that was established in the United States by its Puritan forefathers.” (Cloonan and Garofalo (eds) 2003:p.222)

The censorial efforts against rock and roll in the 1950s, however, were minimal compared to the censorial efforts which occurred in the 1960s. (McDonald, 1988:p.298)

5

5.1 The United States

The 1960s brought new progressive, left-leaning ideologies that originated from the 1930s folk music and merged into rock and roll, by such artists like Bob Dylan, ideologies that clashed with the already established conservative Puritanism that was leading and governing America. (Cloonan and Garofalo (eds) 2003:p.225) The Vietnam anti-war movement that emerged in the mid 1960s, also proved troublesome for the political elite. It was during president Nixon’s first term that the first major censorial efforts against popular music, and especially rock lyrics emerged. An order by president Nixon to his vice president Spiro Agnew portrays the climate and the real government agenda during that time: “Be hard on your rhetoric on antiwar protestors, the news media, students, ‘long hairs’, dope smokers, and rock music lyrics. (Nixon 1969 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.299) It was this hard line rhetoric that started the censorship of popular music in the early 1970s. Songs with strong political comments such as Neil Young’s song “Ohio” that portrayed the killing of four university student at Kent State University by the National Guard were banned by many radio stations and prompted vice president Spiro Agnew to call rock and roll anti-American. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.159) It was a “moral” issue, though that sparked the biggest censorial effort in the 1970s, the issue of drug oriented lyrics in rock songs. Vice president Spiro Agnew stated in a speech in Las Vegas during 1970: “We may be accused of advocating song censorship for pointing this out, but have you really heard the words of some of these songs?” (Agnew, 1970 cited in Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.202) It did not take long for the Federal Communication Committee (FCC) in March 1971 to notify commercial broadcasters about the responsibility they had not to promote or glorify illegal drug use in their schedules. (Kaufan, 1986:p.241) This case will be further examined in chapter nine.

6

5.1 The United States

The Watergate scandal that occurred in 1973 though and Vice president Agnew’s resignation for tax evasion brought a short halt to the efforts to censor popular music. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.14) It was during 1976 though, with the election of Jimmy Carter, a born again Christian, to the presidency in the United States, that the Christian right really started to develop and try to establish its own moral agenda that censorial efforts increased. This was reinforced by the election of Ronald Reagan as president in 1980, an electoral victory that was brought with the support of Jerry Falwell the leader of the highly influential Christian right think tank, Moral Majority. (Weinstein, 1991:p.247) During this period censorial efforts thrived under the guidance and leadership of the Christian right in the United States. (Hull, 1999:p.14) It was in the mid 1980s that such groups as the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) advocated efforts to censor rock lyrics in the United States as it will be shown in chapter six. The 1990s found the United States under the presidency of George Bush Senior, another conservatively backed president who reinforced the censorial efforts brought forward by his predecessors. (Levy, 1996:p.62) Although during 1992 the United States saw a different political approach with the election of Bill Clinton as president (Levy, 1996:p.84) the censorial climate did not go away as portrayed by the banning of hip hop’s artist Ice-T and his song “Cop Killer” that will be further examined in chapter eleven. Coming to our decade and the post 9/11 world things as we shall see are not much different. With more and more civil liberties taken away from the public due to the “terrorist” threat popular music is still suffering from censorial efforts as we shall see.

7

5. A Brief History of Censorship of Popular Music in the United States and the United Kingdom

5.2 The United Kingdom Although as it will be presented in the next chapters, the United Kingdom compared to the United States has not seen as many efforts to censor popular music, some important events did occur regarding censorship of popular music. The United Kingdom saw a rise of labor governments in the post war period that shaped the sociopolitical climate quite differently from the United States. Despite the more liberal attitude towards popular culture and popular music in particular the United Kingdom has its own groups that advocate censorship of popular music. The most influential of these groups and the one that tried to advocate efforts to censor popular music is the National Viewers and Listeners Association (NVALA) that was launched in November 1965 backed up by Christian moral values. (Cloonan, 1996:p.219) The predominant spokesperson of this organization, Mary Whitehouse, turned its views towards popular music during the emergence of punk music in the mid 1970s and the election of conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher during 1979. (Wicke, 1995:p.137) The case of punk music will be examined in chapter ten. It was during Margaret Thatcher’s governments’ conservative agenda, which run from 1979 to 1990 that music suffered the most attempts of censorship. (Cloonan, 1998:p.184) More importantly most of the censorial efforts that occurred in the United Kingdom were politically and sociologically driven. (Cloonan, 1998:p.185) More importantly the political issue of Northern Ireland and the Falklands War in 1982 (Seldon and Daniel, 2000:p.22) generated censorial efforts from the part of the broadcasting authorities that restricted the airing of politically driven songs along with punk songs that portrayed the sociological problems of the time such as the “No Future” slogan of the punk movement (Wicke, 1995:p.137) that will be examined in chapters ten and thirteen.

8

5.2 The United Kingdom

The 1990s brought more cases of censorial efforts from the broadcasting authorities that derived from political factors such as the Gulf War. (Petley, 1998:p.17) The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) played a significant role in this issue as it will be examined in chapter thirteen. Now that a brief history of censorship of popular music was presented a case by case analysis will be presented analyzing the various ways that popular music is censored and what factors influence these efforts.

6. The Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) - Protecting the Children of the United States? Or Dictating a moral aesthetic in a Democratic Society?

6.1 An Introduction

A highly influential case regarding censorship of popular music occurred in 1985 in the United States where a pressure group, the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) started a well prepared and publicized effort that called for self regulation by the music industry regarding rock music lyrics. (Chastanger, 1999: p.190) The PMRC was founded by the wives of Washington politicians. Two of its predominant founders were Susan Baker wife of the then US treasury secretary, James Baker and Tipper Gore, wife of the then Senator and future vice president of the United States Al Gore. (Gore, 1987:p.18) It is also worth mentioning that the PMRC was financially backed by Joseph Coors, the owner of Coors Beers and Mike Love of the Beach boys. Both of these individuals were active supporters of the presidential candidacy of Ronald Reagan. (Chastanger, 1999: p.181) The whole campaign started in 1984, when Tipper Gore purchased the album “Purple Rain” by the artist Prince for her eleven year old daughter. (Gore, 1987:p.17)

9

6. The Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) - Protecting the Children of the United States? Or Dictating a moral aesthetic in a Democratic Society?

6.1 An Introduction

It was a song on that album; “Darling Nikki”, (see appendix one), which talked about masturbation that started the whole censorship debate. (Gore, 1987:p.17) The PMRC held its first meeting on May 15, 1985 at St Columba’s church in Washington DC. (Gore, 1987:p.19). During this meeting the group decided to “launch a grass-roots media campaign that soon took on a life of its own”. (Gore, 1987:p.23) In this campaign the PMRC called for self regulation by the music industry in limiting the publication of offensive and obscene lyrics of rock songs with the belief that such lyrics were harmful to minors and teen-agers. Even president Reagan showed his support for the PMRC’s campaign in a speech he gave in 1985 during a fund-raising event, where he stated that “the music industry and the media with the glorification of drugs and violence and perversity” (Reagan, 1985 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.304) were no more than pornographers, pornographers that had more rights than parents. (Reagan, 1985 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.304) The PMRC’s campaign resulted in Congressional Hearings before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation regarding the contents of music and the lyrics of records on September 19, 1985, dubbed by the media as the “Porn Rock Hearings”. (Flood, 1991: p.415) The hearings resulted in the voluntarily labeling of music works by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The all too familiar sticker “Parental AdvisoryExplicit Lyrics” was and still is placed on albums that are deemed offensive. (Flood, 1991: p.418)

10

6. The Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) - Protecting the Children of the United States? Or Dictating a moral aesthetic in a Democratic Society?

6.1 An Introduction

Before moving to a more detailed analysis of the case of the PMRC, an introduction to the sociopolitical background in the United States will be given, as this will help us better understand the motives that triggered the censorial efforts of this pressure group.

6.2 The sociopolitical climate in the USA in the 1980s: The Rise of the Christian Right

The 1980s were an important period in the development of the political background in the United States that influenced all factors of everyday life. “America was moving back politically and “morally” to the ways of its first European immigrants, the Puritans. The Puritanical intolerance of anything different to its own strict Christian morals, as was the case in late 18th century America was returning again in 1980s America under a different more “polished” diplomatic approach.” (Fischer, 2003:p.4)

They declared a “cultural war” in what they saw as “Their America” that called for a return to their Christian morals. (Fischer, 2003:p.4) Although as mentioned in chapter 5, the political blows that the Christian conservative right received in the early 1970s with the forced resignation of Richard Nixon from the presidency and the end of the Vietnam war, the only war that the United States ever lost, (we shall of course wait and see what will happen in Iraq and Afghanistan) made the conservatives keep a low profile during the early 1970s. But by the end of the 1970s and the alleged failures of the Carter presidency, the Christian conservative right’s rise to power was stronger than ever before. (Weinstein, 1991:p.247) Their rise to power was influenced by the support of fundamentalist Protestant Church groups along with the support they received by the mass media. (Weinstein, 1991:p.247)

11

6.2 The sociopolitical climate in the USA in the 1980s: The Rise of the Christian Right

One of these Christian groups that were highly influential in the election of Ronald Reagan as president in 1980 and 1984 was the Moral Majority led by Jerry Falwell. (Kurz, 1996:p.64) The Moral Majority declared a “culture war” in America. Patrick Buchanan, a former Nixon speechwriter and presidential candidate, a member of the Moral Majority declared that this was “the time for God’s people” in one of his many speeches. (Buchanan 1980 cited in Kurz, 1996:p.65) It is worth mentioning here that during the late 1970s systematic record burnings of objectionable material, such as Beatles records were being held by an organization called Truth About Rock. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.36) The record burnings were organized in Minnesota by ministers Charles Boykin and Steve and Dan Peters of St Paul’s church. Both of these ministers had strong connections with the Moral Majority. The record burnings occurred during the same period that televangelism was beginning to emerge as a powerful media tool for the Christian right. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.36) The Christian right’s agenda stressed the importance of “social” issues, such as sexuality, the role of women, patriotism and religion and called for a return to Christian cultural values. (Heins, 1993: p.122-123) It was this decline in morals and the negative effect of popular culture that the Christian right was focusing on and not the worst recession since the great depression of the 1930s, that the USA had witnessed in the first part of Reagan’s first term. (Kurz, 1996:p.228) Unemployment was rising during 1981 and 1983 with figures reaching 10.8%. The reaction of Reagan’s government to this was to cut social spending during his first term. (Kurz, 1996:p.228)

12

6.2 The sociopolitical climate in the USA in the 1980s: The Rise of the Christian Right

Although the economic situation in the USA was stabilizing during the end of the Reagan presidency, it was during this period in the mid 1980s that the social division between rich and poor was significantly rising giving way to an urban underclass, that was often ignored socially, an underclass that was largely comprised of Blacks and Latinos. (Kurz, 1996:p.259) Before returning to the case of the PMRC, though some issues regarding the Christian right in the USA such as its theoretical rhetoric and its important influence in society must be addressed.

6.3 The Theory and Political Influence of the Christian Right

It is important to stress out the theory of Richard Hofstadter (cited in D’Entremont, 1998:p.34), a political analyst who stated that: “In the USA the extreme right has demonstrated how much political leverage can be got out of the passions of a small minority”. (Hofstadter, 1996 cited in D’Entremont, 1998:p.34) The power that Christian right-wing movements, with their often weak alliances, have sufficiently less support by the general public than the support they often claim to have. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.34) Despite this weak support though, the Christian right remains one of the most powerful authoritarian movements ever to come out of the USA. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.34) This power derives from the concentration of the media that they hold, along with highly influential roles they hold in economic organizations and of course in government. (Blecha, 2004:p.184) One of their priorities is to erase the secularly driven US democracy by making the connection of the church and the state more powerful. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.34)

13

6.3 The Theory and Political Influence of the Christian Right

This highly influential alliance is comprised by numerous groups of Protestants, fundamental Baptists and Pentecostals. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.34) What all of these fundamental Christian organizations have in common is their belief in “the unerring literal truth of the Bible, in apocalyptic prophecy, and in justice as clean, swift, merciless and mighty as Jehovah’s thunderbolt.” (D’Entremont, 1998:p.34) It is these beliefs that they hold that contradict with the fundamental right that every individual has of free speech as portrayed in the USA by the First Amendment. (see chapter nine) These beliefs, according to D’Entremont (1998) can be traced back at the Puritanical environment of New England during the seventeenth-century. “It was this environment which set the tone for the cultural life of colonial America.” (D’Entremont, 1998:p.34) So the suspicion and fear of any art form which clashed with their firm theocratic beliefs can be seen throughout the short history of the USA. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.36) The issue of censorship is therefore not new but it climaxed in 1980s America because of the rise in power of these individuals along with the sociopolitical conditions of the time such as the beginning of the end of the communist threat. The Christian right started to see during the 1980s the undermining of their family traditions through popular culture such as objectionable art and threatening music. (D’Entremont, 1998:p.36) As it will be shown with the case of the PMRC the Christian right was scapegoating the issue of obscenity in rock lyrics for the social ills of the time. According to Heins (1993:p. 122-123): Historically, periods of frustration or insecurity are breeding grounds for demagogues who distract attention from social problems by attacking artistic rebels and other dissenters, and by scapegoating symbols. (Heins, 1993: p.122-123)

14

6.3 The Theory and Political Influence of the Christian Right

During the following chapters this author will argue that the whole issue of censorship of rock lyrics emerged in the 1980s because of the persistence of the Christian right to “push” its own moral agenda upon society.

6.4 The PMRC’s Rhetoric

In her book “Raising PG Kids in an X-Rated Society” Mrs. Gore talked about the moral decay of American society that derived from “overexposure to violent images that desensitize us to violence” (Gore, 1987:p.48), about “teenage suicide reaching epidemic proportions” (Gore, 1987:p.163), that resulted from the negative images portrayed in popular culture and consequently called for a volunteering rating system by the record industry to label their content for sex, violence and profanity in order to inform the parents of the dangers that such lyrical content can impose on minors and teenagers. (Gore, 1987:p.23) Mrs. Gore stated that: “The PMRC’s proposal does not infringe on the First Amendment, it does not raise a constitutional issue. But it does seek to reform marketing practices by asking for better and more informative packaging. And it does seek to inform consumers when artistic expression borders on what legendary singer Smokey Robinson has called “musical pornography………..Who decides which songs are music pornography? Only the record company can make that decision, not the government”. (Gore, 1987:p.27-28)

In addition to that the PMRC declared in a press release on May 13 1985 that: “Our purpose is to promote ethical boundaries in rock music, to provide and disseminate information on rock culture and to refer parents to sources of help.” (PMRC, 1985 cited in Kaufan, 1986:p.224)

Mrs. Gore (1987) also stated in her book that: “Censorship is not the answer. In the long run, our only hope is for more information and awareness, so that citizens and communities can fight back against market exploitation and find practical means for restoring individual choice and control…………. More than anything else, I want this book to be a call to arms for American parents, I want to offer them the very real hope that we can reassert some control over the cultural environment in which our children are raised”. (Gore, 1987:p.13)

15

6.4 The PMRC’s Rhetoric

Although by Mrs. Gore (1987) statements that called for self restraint by the music industry, in a campaign that was driven solemnly for the purpose of informing parents about the lyrical content of songs their children listen to, and that this campaign was in no way a campaign that called for censorship, as it will be portrayed in the analysis of this case the PMRC’s efforts promoted no more than plain censorship.

6.5 An Analysis of the Case

6.5.1 The Congressional Hearings

The Congressional hearings were held on September 19, 1985. One of the opening statements in the hearings that were held for informative purposes according to the committee and not legislation, Senator Hollings, a member of the committee in his opening statement said that: “If I could find some way constitutionally to do away with it,( offensive rock lyrics) I would”. (Holdings, 1985 cited in Weinstein, 1991:p.266) This gives us a small flavor of the threatening climate that these hearings had, and their intention as it will be portrayed in the next paragraphs. Among the panel of experts who testified on behalf of the PMRC were: Dr. Thomas Radecki, M.D., chairperson of the National Coalition on Television Violence; Dr. Paul King, an adolescent psychiatrist; Dr. Clarence Joe Stuessy, a professor of music at the university of Texas at San Antonio; and Mr. Jeff Ling, a minister and youth counselor. (McDonald, 1988:p.302-03) Behalf of the artists, singer and producer Frank Zappa, singer John Denver and Singer Dee Snider from the band Twisted Sister, that was attacked by the PMRC testified in the hearings. (Chastanger, 1999: p.184)

16

6.5 An Analysis of the Case

6.5.1 The Congressional Hearings

In the hearings the PMRC’s consultants testified that music played a highly influential role in the lives of teenagers and thus songs with objectionable and obscene lyrics can lead teenagers to commit violent offences, such as murder, rape, suicide and drug abuse that could be harmful to themselves and others. (Block, 1990: p.782) During the hearings the PMRC’s music professor consultant Mr. Ling, argued that: They (teenagers) are malleable, beset by internal and external conflicts about authority (especially parents), drugs, sex, theology, education etc. They are in the process of defining who and what they are. At such a time, heavy metal’s influence can be significant” (Ling, 1985 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.306)

Mr. Lings’s argument about the ability of music to influence teenager’s perceptions about such issues as authority, drug use, sexual activity, theology and education, though did not offer and substantial evidence supporting his claims. (McDonald, 1988:p.306) The testimonies of the PMRC’s consultants had the tone of Mr. Ling’s testimony: they made blatant statements about the impact of music lyrics to the lives of adolescents and teenagers without backing them with any serious academic data. The issues expressed in the statements by the consultants of the PMRC will be further analyzed in the next chapter. On the other side record industry consultants testified that some of the most heavily criticized songs by the PMRC, where record flops and received little to non air time until the PMRC publicly denounced them. (Flood, 1991: p.415) The industry consultants also stressed out the practical difficulties that would occur from rating rock songs as at the time there were more than 25000 songs released every year. Finally the industry consultants stressed another important issue, the issue of record labeling interfering with the First Amendment rights that both the industry and consumers had. (Flood, 1991: p.415) On of the most colorful artists that testified behalf of the musicians’, was Frank Zappa, who made quite a few, interesting points about the whole issue.

17

6.5.1 The Congressional Hearings

Zappa (1985) testified in the committee that: The PMRC’s demands are the equivalent of treating dandruff by decapitation….. The complete list of PMRC’s demands of the record companies reads like an instruction manual for some sinister kind of toilet training program to house-break all composers and performers because of the lyrics of a few….. The establishment of a rating system…opens the doors to an endless parade of moral quality control programs… What if the next bunch of Washington wives demands a large yellow ‘J’ on all material written or performed by Jews, in order to save helpless children from exposure to concealed Zionist doctrine? Children in the vulnerable age bracket have a natural love for music. If as a parent you believe they should be exposed to something more uplifting than “Sugar Walls” support music appreciation programs in schools. Why have you not considered your child’s need for consumer information? Music appreciation costs very little compared to sports expenditures. Your children have a right to know that something besides pop music exists. (Zappa 1985 cited in Kostelanetz, 1997:p.195) No one has forced Mrs. Baker or Mrs. Gore to bring Prince or Sheena Easton into their homes. Thanks to the constitution, they are free to buy other forms of music for the children. Apparently, they insist on purchasing the works of contemporary recording artists in order to support a personal illusion of aerobic sophistication. Ladies, please be advised: The $ 8.98 purchase price does not entitle you to a kiss on the foot from the composer or performer in exchange for a spin on the family victrola… Ladies how dare you? The ladies’ shame must be shared by the bosses at the major labels who, through the RIAA, chose to bargain away the rights of composers, performers, and retailers in order to pass H.R. 2911, The Blank Tape Tax, a private tax levied by an industry on consumers for the benefit of a select group within that industry… Are we expected to give up article 1 so the big guys can collect an extra dollar on every blank tape and 10 to 25 percent on tape recorders? (Zappa 1985 cited in Kostelanetz, 1997:p.195)

As it is clearly portrayed by Mr. Zappa’s statement to the committee some very serious issues emerge, regarding the PMRC’s claims. Firstly the issue of the establishment of a rating system that would be put in place for the regulation of all song lyrics, and would compromise the artistic expression of all artists, for the offensive lyrics of a few artists raises some significant issues. Firstly who would be in charge of this rating system, what would be the benchmarks of this system and if such a system would be put in place would it not open the doors for various other rating systems dealing with other artistic material? This rating system would open the floodgates for others systems and a question arise: where to draw the line? In addition to that Mr. Zappa stated, correctly that no one is obliged to purchase such material and brought the issue of education regarding music appreciation.

18

6.5.1 The Congressional Hearings

If children and teenagers were aware that more than the material mentioned existed, maybe there would not be drawn to that material. Mr. Zappa also criticized the members of the recording industry for compromising the rights of musicians in order to gain support from the Congress for passing H.R. 2911, the Blank Tape Tax, which would make the industry eligible to collect an amount of money from every blank tape and tape recorder sold. Regarding the issue of the bill H.R. 2911, that the Record Industry Association of America (RIAA) was trying to pass since 1982, a bill which would have gained the industry a further amount of $250,000,000 a year, an amount which only the record companies and a few superstars would have received and Mr. Zappa was criticized for bringing it up by both politicians and the record industry as being irrelevant to the case, unfortunately, as well documented facts have stipulated, this issue was true in every way. (Chastanger, 1999: p.184-85) To begin with, was it a coincidence that four senators who were part of the hearings of the commerce committee, Senator Gore, Packwood, Thurmond and the chairman of the committee, Senator Danforth were also part of the committee dealing with the bill, HR 2911? On top of that Senator Gore was also married to one of the most influential founders of the PMRC, Mrs. Tipper Gore. (Chastanger, 1999: p.184-85) It was on the first of November 1985, that the RIAA signed an agreement with the PMRC that stipulated an agreement by member record companies of the RIAA to print a warning label on albums that contained lyrics with explicit material dealing with sex, violence and drug abuse. The agreement mentioned, also stated that any member company would have the alternative to print the lyrics of the songs on the back of the album cover. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.595) A few months after the agreement of the RIAA with the PMRC, tax bill HR 2911, was passed by Congress. (Chastanger, 1999: p.185)

19

6.5.2 An Analysis of the Outcome of the Senate Hearings

As was mentioned in the previous paragraph the Senate Hearings resulted in the voluntarily labeling of rock lyrics by the music industry primarily because of the enormous political pressure and the portrayal of the hearings by the mass media. (Block, 1990: p.828) As the RIAA stated in a public statement that it released in 1985: This constructive policy was intended to respond sensitively to the concerns of parents of younger children and to achieve a fair balance with the essential rights and freedoms of creators, performers, and the adult purchasers of recorded music. (RIAA, 1985 cited in Block 1990:p.330)

The question one might ask though is that firstly was the agreement a “constructive policy” (RIAA, 1985 cited in Block 1990:p.330) and did it “achieve a fair balance with the essential rights and freedoms of musicians and purchasers of recorded music”? (RIAA, 1985 cited in Block 1990:p.330) To begin with the hearings were primarily held to symbolically portray the power that the PMRC had with its political contacts as no legislation had been issued, because of the complex constitutional issues involved, such as the First Amendment of the Constitution (see chapter nine). (Chastanger, 1999: p.184) Of course this was the outcome that the PMRC wanted and finally got the voluntarily rating system. The PMRC rightly believed and eventually succeeded by threatening the music industry, to establish its own voluntarily system. (Chastanger, 1999: p.184) Although a voluntarily rating system was established the PMRC’s efforts generated a significant amount of legislative efforts to ban the sale of objectionable lyrics either to everyone or at least to children (Flood, 1991: p.415); the fear that Mr. Zappa expressed in his testimony to the committee, a fear that ultimately portrayed the failure of the RIAA’s “constructive policy” (RIAA, 1985 cited in Block 1990:p.330) and its failure to “achieve a fair balance with the essential rights and freedoms of musicians and purchasers of recorded music” (RIAA, 1985 cited in Block 1990:p.330) So by the PMRC’s efforts the floodgates have opened for the construction of legislation to “protect the children” by rock lyrics. 20

6.5.2 An Analysis of the Outcome of the Senate Hearings

It was in Maryland, where a member of the State assembly, Democrat Judith Toth introduced a bill in January 1986 into the House of Representatives. This bill would have made it a crime in the State, punishable by a jail term of one year and/or a fine up to $1000 for any retailer who would sell any music album that used obscene lyrics to a child. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.310) Toth’s amendment passed in the House of Representatives with a vote of 96 to 31 and then moved on for a full senate vote to the Judicial proceeding committee. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.311) The bill was eventually defeated by a vote of 7 to 4 on the first of April 1986 by the senate committee. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.311) Although the bill failed it is quite obvious how a work of a pressure group such as the PMRC can result in dangerous and unconstitutional legislation. Even when the hearing noted, that the PMRC “failed to exhibit a correlation between the rise in the reported incidents and youth listening to rock music…” (Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 1985 cited in Block, 1990: p.786) and that the PMRC’s consultants did not offer any proof that children or teenagers that listen to music with explicit lyrics have a tendency for antisocial aggressive behavior (Kaufan, 1986:p.227), the goals of the PMRC for imposing a rating system on music lyrics were achieved. This is clearly portrayed by the legislative efforts in Maryland and in other states in the USA alongside the introduction of the warning sticker. So how did this happen? First and foremost the links that the PMRC had with religious organizations and the government even though they were always denied are quite obvious.

21

6.5.2 An Analysis of the Outcome of the Senate Hearings

One of these organizations was the Christian fundamentalist group, Focus on the Family. A member of this organization was Republican Jean Dixon from Missouri. Mr. Dixon promoted censorship bills similar to the one that was proposed in Maryland and was supportive of other “causes” derived from the Christian right’s agenda, among others the right to teach Intelligent Design at schools and anti-abortion legislation. (Chastanger, 1999: p.189) With the help of such individuals such as Mr. Dixon the PMRC, portrayed as an independent pressure group and often exposed by the mass media, the PMRC was able to promote issues such as censorship of rock lyrics, issues that the Christian conservative government had on its agenda and wanted to promote but could not due to constitutional restraints and its portrayal as a truly democratic administration. As stated by Berry and Wolin (1986): Despite the dangers of abdicating to private groups the power to regulate expression, private regulation is lauded as a means of preserving individual liberties from government intrusion. This misplaces the locus of the free speech concern, emphasizing the source rather than the substance of regulation…… It is in playing a significant and sustained role in monitoring rock lyrics that a private group’s function comes to resemble that of government. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.610)

Finally the whole campaign by the PMRC, that was set up according to the organization to inform the parents about the dangers of objectionable lyrics in order to protect their children, can be argued that it actually, exposed children and teenagers to material that they would not normally be exposed too. (Blecha, 2004:p.106) Figures released by the RIAA in 1985 dealing with the figures of records sold in 1984, showed that children aged ten to fourteen held only nine percent of rock and metal records sales, teenagers between the ages of fifteen to nineteen years old held twenty two percent of rock and metal records sales, and the bulk of rock and metal records were sold to buyers over the age of twenty. (RIAA, 1985 cited in Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.606) So could one state that the PMRC can be held accounted for exploiting innocent children and exposing them to obscene and objectionable material?

22

6.5.2 An Analysis of the Outcome of the Senate Hearings

The case of the PMRC raises some very important and serious issues such as the ability that music has to insight violence, what effect do music lyrics have on children and does the regulation of such music infringe on our fundamental right of freedom of expression? These issues will be analyzed in the next chapter.

7. The Problem of Lyric Interpretation

7.1 Lyrics as an Art Form

One can state that the regulation of song lyrics is highly problematic due to the impossibility of giving a unified interpretation of the lyrical content of any song. This is clearly evident by Gracyk’s (2001) statement that: “Whatever the original meanings might be for a song, such meanings may demand many distinct and even conflicting readings when, as mass art, the song makes its way into other contexts for interpretations”. (Gracyk, 2001:p.40)

Music and its lyrics, which can be considered as an art form can often be interpreted in many ways. Lyrics can be considered as a form of literature, because by taking away the music only words are left. Thus as art form lyrics can be seen as literature and by this we derive the theory that all concepts applied to literature can apply to lyrics. (Lombardi, 1991:p.1)

23

7.2 The Problem of Lyric Interpretation by children and teenagers

The problem of lyric interpretation was quite obvious during the PMRC hearings. An example that clearly states this problem was evident when Tipper Gore, in one of her many articles that were published by numerous newspapers claimed that Twisted Sister’s song, “Under the Blade” (see appendix two) talked about sadomasochism. (Block, 1990: p.782) During the senate hearings Dee Snider, the lead singer of Twisted Sister testified that the lyrics he wrote dealt with the issue of “Surgery and the fear that it instills in people”. (Snider, 1985 cited in Weinstein, 191:p.256) He also testified that he had written the song for a friend who had undergone surgery and further stated to the amazement and embarrassment of Mr. and Mrs. Gore that: “I can say categorically that the only sadomasochism, bondage, and rape in this song is in the mind of Ms. Gore”. (Snider, 1985 cited in Weinstein, 1991:p.256) This example clearly portrays the problem of lyrics being interpreted by people who try to regulate and probably restrict material that are not familiar with and would probably never listen to for the alleged protection of those who listen to those “questionable” materials. (Block, 1990: p.782) Furthermore Street (1986, p:153) stated that: Musicians play the music, companies manufacture it, radio stations broadcast it, governments censor it, and political movements use it, but ultimately all these activities depend on what the audience makes of it. (Street, 1986: p.153) The song’s meaning depends both on what the listener understands and on what the singer intends. A literary critic may be able to describe what the lyrics say, but the critic cannot determine what the song means. (Street, 1986: p.157)

So here we see the problem of lyric interpretation arising again. Quite often the audience misinterprets the meaning of song lyrics that the author was trying to express. Certain questions arise from the above statements: How and who will regulate what is objectionable and damaging to children? Do children actually pay attention to music lyrics and if they do, do they really understand them?

24

7.3 Research in the Field of Lyric Interpretation A highly influential research in the field of lyric interpretation was conducted by R.S. Denisoff in the mid 1960s. The study had the purpose of observing young people’s listening habits and their understanding of song lyrics. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.617) Denisoff (1967 cited in Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.162) used a “nihilistic, pessimistic song of warning” (Denisoff 1967 cited in Berry and Wolin, 1986:p.167), that sparked controversy due to its political content and was banned by many radio stations. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.162) The song by P.F. Sloan was entitled “Eve of Destruction”. (see appendix three) Denisoff sampled answers given by 180 students regarding their response to the lyrics of the song. The results of this research showed that only thirty-six percent of the people that participated interpreted the lyrics in the way that the composer interpreted them. Furthermore Denisoff observed that twenty three percent misinterpreted the lyrics completely and only thirty seven percent could interpret some of the lyrics to the song like its author did. (Denisoff, 1967 cited in Block, 1990: p.786) Denisoff (1967) concluded that: “It would appear that the protest song is primarily seen as an entertainment item rather than one of political significance. (cited in Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.162) So this highly influential research in the field of lyric interpretation concluded that teenagers see songs as forms of entertainment more than anything else. More specifically what this research has shown is that teenagers are attracted more to the music rather than the lyrics of the song. (Block, 1990: p.786) This research highly contradicted the statements given by the consultants of the PMRC and was never presented in the Congressional hearings. Another theme that emerges from the issue of lyric interpretation involves songs that contain sexually explicit lyrics.

25

7.3 Research in the Field of Lyric Interpretation Even highly explicit and suggestive lyrics though fail to satisfy the obscenity criteria (Kaufan, 1986:p.256) set by the legislation of the US as it will be stipulated in chapter nine. Only briefly here it is worth mentioning that lyrics are often considered to be secondary to the music. It is the music that sets the tone for a song and even in songs which are interpreted as being predominantly sexual it is hard for them to arouse any sexual suggestiveness. (Kaufan, 1986:p.256-57) In addition to the above one can argue that children are too immature to understand or interpret the sexual references that can be found in some rock songs. (Kaufan, 1986:p.256-57) Another research was conducted regarding the impact of lyrics to teenagers by Robinson and Hirsh (1976 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.37) This research concluded that 70% of all students questioned about the lyrics and the message of a song replied that they were more interested in the music and its beat rather than the lyrics and the message of a song. (Robinson and Hirsh, 1976 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.37) Furthermore research regarding the effect that music lyrics have in the promotion of drug use conducted by Lewis (1980) concluded that it is not the lyrics of a song that encourage drug use, but as Lewis (1980) stated: “it seems it is something about the ‘newness’ of the music-perhaps as a symbol of a ‘new’ generation in rebellion, that is linked to drug use, and not the content of the music either lyrically or stylistically (Lewis, 1980:p.180 cited in McDonald, 1988:p.307)

So here, Lewis (1980) identified that it is often the teenager’s rebellious character that wants to challenge authority that drives him/her to drug use and that the content of the music and its lyrics are to an important extent irrelevant. From the above studies that were presented, we can clearly see the problem of lyric interpretation. Even though lyrics are regularly misinterpreted by the public it is quite obvious that they have a minimal effect on adolescents’ and teenager’s behavior.

26

7.3 Research in the Field of Lyric Interpretation Adolescents and teenagers see music primarily as a form of entertainment. By seeing it as a form of entertainment they do not give specific attention to the lyrics of a song as research has proven. The PMRC’s argument that it wanted to protect children from harmful material then is in an important extent unjustified. Or is it justified? The PMRC also argued about the power music lyrics have to insight violent behavior. The next chapter will deal with this argument and will present the reader with the thesis that there is virtually no evidence that music and its lyrics can insight psychologically stable individuals to become violent in any way.

8. Do Music Lyrics have the Ability to Insight Violent Behavior?

On of the most common arguments that the groups that advocate censorship such as the PMRC often stress out is the ability that the media and in this case music lyrics have to insight violent behavior especially amongst adolescents and teenagers. This argument is formed on the theory that music has the power to affect behavior and moral values because of its ability to trigger strong emotions. This is why; advocates of censorship believe that music should be regulated in order to protect the public from deviant behavior. (Lynxwiler and Gay, 2000: p.64) As it will be stated though in this chapter, there is no dependable research available so far that supports the claim that any media form including music lyrics can affect the tendency of violent behavior amongst any individual. (McQuail, 1977:p.83 cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.33)

27

8.1 The Theory behind the claim that Music Lyrics Can Insight Violent BehaviorDeveloping a Moral Panic

Advocates of censorship believe that the growing impact that such musical genres as gangsta rap and heavy metal have on young people is significant on the moral development of their character and the ability that these music genres have to promoting deviant violent behavior. (Lynxwiler and Gay, 2000: p.66) These two musical genres were particularly singled out because of their lyrical themes. Heavy metal was singled out during the PMRC’s attempts in the mid 1980s (see chapter 6) because of its overt violent and sexually explicit lyrical content. (Lynxwiler and Gay, 2000: p.67) What the PMRC failed to notice though was that metal barely reflected the problems that American society was facing at the time, (Weinstein, 1991:p.240) as it was stated in chapter six and will be stated in chapter eleven. During the early 1990s and particularly during 1992, which is important to state that it was an election year, the effect of gangsta rap music in the rising levels of violence amongst youths were portrayed in the public eye by ex President George Bush Senior and President Bill Clinton. (Lynxwiler and Gay, 2000: p.648) In 1994 Senate hearings were held, this time not against heavy metal but against gangsta rap. (Lynxwiler and Gay, 2000: p.69) (see chapter eleven) As it was presented by the case of the PMRC public support for censorship is easily obtained by calling upon the protection of children from such music. Such groups as the PMRC often try to develop a moral panic in society and feed the public with fear of the danger of music has to insight violent behavior among young people. (Thompson, 1998:p.94-96)

28

8.1 The Theory behind the claim that Music Lyrics Can Insight Violent BehaviorDeveloping a Moral Panic

It is quite easy for a certain group to develop a moral panic in society, because as Thompson (1998:p.2) stated “moral panics always existed as this is human nature”. There are various ways to spark of a moral panic as it was portrayed by the case of the PMRC. Firstly a certain group such as heavy metal artists has to be depicted as a threat to the moral values and interests of a society by the mass media in order to build up public concern. Secondly government authorities such as the Senate Committee and opinion makers such as the PMRC step in to try to find a way to solve the “problem”. (Thompson, 1998:p.8-10) Finally the panic results into social changes, such as the introduction of the Parental Advisory sticker. Now as Thompson (1998:p.38) argued quite often politicians and the mass media have much to gain from provoking a moral panic. The media of course are always trying to find a story to attract audiences, preferably a story that can touch people on a personal level just like the issue of child protection from dangerous music. On the other hand as it was portrayed by the whole rhetoric of the Christian right, it is quite easy to focus the attention of the public on issues dealing with morality (Thompson, 1998:p.88) than to try and solve such social ills, as the growing disparity between rich and poor, and education, the real reasons why people result to violence. It is easy to see the effect of this moral panic. According to Lynxwiler and Gay, in the USA nineteen states so far tried but failed to pass, legislation dealing with the regulation of the distribution and sales of albums with the Parental Advisory label. (Lynxwiler and Gay, 2000: p.69) During the following paragraphs research will be presented which deals with the issue of music lyrics being able to have an effect on someone’s behavior and the effect that such restrictions as the Parental Advisory label have in relation to the ability such labels have in protecting the children from exposure to objectionable material.

29

8.2 Research in the Effect Music Lyrics have in Insighting Violence

According to Hull (1999), most experts believe that the effects of music lyrics and the media in general are marginal in triggering violence compared to other factors such as family and social background. Although research conducted in the field of music’s ability to promote violence is insufficient, there is similar research conducted in the field of television’s and film’s ability to promote violence. Research conducted in 1972 entitled “Television and Growing Up: The Impact of Televised Violence” (1972 cited in Hull, 1999:p.126) concluded that: “The effect of television is small compared with many other possible causes, such as parental attitudes or knowledge of and experience with the real violence of our society”. (US Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee on television and social behavior, 1972 cited in Hull, 1999:p.126)

So the results of this research are quite obvious. Sociological factors such as the influence of the parental environment and the real violence than can be found in any society have a far more influential effect on promoting violence amongst young people that television, music lyrics or any form of media will ever have. Further research conducted by the American Psychological Association in 1993, entitled “Violence and Youth” (cited in Hull, 1999:p.26) also concluded that: “The greatest predictor of future violent behavior is a previous history of violence” (American Psychological Association, 1993 cited in Hull, 1999:p.26) Furthermore research conducted by the Center for Communication Policy that monitors television violence at the University of California in 1995, also concluded that: “It is known that television does not have a simple, direct stimulus-response effect on its audiences.” (UCLA, 1995 cited Hull, 1999:p.126) A quite recent tragic event that occurred in the United States in 1999, at Colorado’s Columbine High School, where two students shot thirteen of their classmates and then committed suicide (Heins, 2001:p.1) triggered further Senate hearings about the impact that rock music, television violence and other forms on entertainment have on teenagers’.

30

8.2 Research in the Effect Music Lyrics have in Insighting Violence

During these hearings Henry Jenkins, an MIT professor, questioned the claim that media violence was to blame for the actions of these two teenagers. He argued that different individuals see and interpret messages and images in popular culture according to their family environment and upbringing and according to their inherited characteristics and their character. (Heins, 2001:p.1,2) Jenkins (1999 cited in Heins, 2001:p.2) testified to the committee, that himself and numerous other scholars challenge the idea that violent entertainment has the ability to affect and desensitize viewers by making them more aggressive. Jenkins stated that such an idea was inadequate and offered a “simplistic representation of media consumption and popular culture”. (Jenkins, 1999 cited in Heins, 2001:p.1,2) Heins (2001:p.5) also stated that even some psychologists findings that state a causal relationship between media violence and its significant influence on young peoples’ behavior fail to agree about which violent types cause this. Heins (2001:p.5) also states the problem with the subjectivity of research that deals with the issue of media violence and young people’s behavior. Heins (2001:p.5) points out that most studies in the field fail to prove any significant point because they do not measure violence but aggressive attitudes and aggressive behaviors. Heins (2001) clearly states the enormous difference that the two approaches have. Research conducted by Lacourse (et al. 2001:p.321) in the field of the impact that heavy metal has on suicidal risk among adolescents and teenagers found that the effect heavy metal has in relation to suicidal risk when one considers other risk factors, is minimal. This research has shown that depression, alienation feelings, drug abuse and most importantly family relationships play a far bigger role compared to heavy metal in assessing suicidal risk. (Lacourse, et al. 2001: p.322)

31

8.2 Research in the Effect Music Lyrics have in Insighting Violence

Arnett (1996) also conducted extensive research in the field of heavy metals’ influence on teenagers. Arnett (1996:p.80) concluded that the primary motivation that some teenagers have for reckless behavior lies in sensation seeking and not heavy metal. On the contrary, Arnett (1996:p.81-89) observed that in many instances heavy metal helped certain troublesome teenagers to calm down and did not inflame their aggression but rather purged it. What all these studies in the field show is that one cannot simply blame violent events on the media as the social structure of a society is what plays a primary role on the issue. It is quite naïve for any rational individual to blame the music for the violence we see quite often on our streets and not question the deeper implication that the issue holds such as quality of life, public and family education. Violence is a theme that appears constantly in any art form. It is quite ironic that amongst the most influential literary works from Shakespeare to Dostogievsky and dare we say the Bible, the precious holy book that the Christian right interprets literally is full of scenes depicting violent behavior.

8.3 The effect the Parental Advisory Label plays in relation to Teenage preferences

There are two competing theories about the effects that the advisory label that is placed on musical works with objectionable material has in the music preferences of teenagers. As stated by Lewis (1992) there is the ‘forbidden-fruit’ theory, that argues that such labels attract teenagers to objectionable material, and the ‘tainted-fruit’ theory, that argues that such labels inform teenagers about objectionable material and help them stay away by such material.

32

8.3 The effect the Parental Advisory Label plays in relation to Teenage preferences

Brehm (1972 cited in Lewis, 1992:p.106) with his reactance theory (1972) argues that the forbidden fruit theory is the correct theory regarding the issue. Brehm’s theory (1972 cited in Lewis, 1992:p.106) states that when a person’s freedom is threatened or taken away, then the person is leaned towards restoring his/her freedom. A method used to restore the freedom by the person is to try and engage as much as possible in the forbidden activity. (Lewis, 1992: p.106) This theory can be applied in the issue of the Parental Advisory label. Adolescents and teenagers will try and obtain material that is labeled as objectionable. Lewis’ (1992) study though rejected this theory and reinforced the tainted fruit theory. Lewis (1992) came to his conclusion because he found that the impact of labeling is minimal because adolescents give relatively little if no attention to music lyrics when forming their music preferences (Lewis, 1992: p.112) as it was shown in chapter seven of this paper. An other important outcome of Lewis’s (1992:p.112) study is that when students between the age of ten and fifteen were asked about their views on the PMRC’s campaign, they said that they found the campaign irrelevant as most of them already disapproved sexually explicit and violent lyrics even though some of them owned albums that contained such material. Now that the issue of music being able to insight violence has been addressed, it would be beneficial to look at the role that current legislation has in the whole issue of censoring popular music because at the end of the day legislation affects censorial efforts far more than any theory or pressure group can.

33

9. Legislation Regarding the Censorship of Popular Music

In order to better understand the various aspects of the issue of censorship of popular music, one must look closer to the legislation that affects the issue, because it is legislation that regulates and formulates the issue of censorship in any country. During this chapter the current legislation that is in place in the USA and the UK regarding the factors that emerge from the issue of censorship of popular music such as the fundamental human right that every individual has to free speech, obscenity and social and moral control will be addressed. Furthermore this chapter will present the reader with influential court cases that dealt with the issue of censorship in popular music in the two countries.

9.1 Legislation regarding the Censorship of Popular Music in the USA

9.1.a The First Amendment- The Right of Freedom of Expression The most important piece of legislation regarding the right that every individual has of free speech in the United States can be found in the First Amendment of the Constitution of the country. The First Amendment states that: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge, the privileges or immunities of citizens of the USA; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws First Amendment of the United States of America

The First Amendment clearly states that any person is entitled to express himself freely without the fear of prosecution by the state. As music is a form of expression it is protected by the First Amendment. (Flood, 1991: p.406) Although the First Amendment protects freedom of expression, certain categories of speech have been eliminated from this.

34

9.1.a The First Amendment- The Right of Freedom of Expression

Courts have determined that speech that is deemed obscene or incorporates “fighting words” that may encourage violence or acts of hatred such as racially motivated episodes of violence are not entitled to full First Amendment protection. (Block, 1990: p.780) If speech is categorically excluded from First Amendment protection, it can be regulated. (Block, 1990: p.791) This issue was defined in Chaplinsky v New Hampshire (US 568 (1942 cited in Block, 1990:p.791) where the court stated: There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech; the perversion and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and the obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting of “fighting words”-those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite and immediate breach of the peace. (Chaplinsky v New Hampshire (1942) cited in Block, 1990:p.791)

So speech that deals with obscene and insulting language which can inflict injury or tends to incite the breach of the peace are excluded from First Amendment protection. Even though these restrictions apply such categories of speech are also subject to other constitutional guarantees. (Block, 1990: p.791) Secondly certain types of speech that are not categorically excluded from the First Amendment can also be restrained if the constitution is altered in order to do so. As previously mentioned music is a form of expression and so it deserves First Amendment protection, making any attempt to regulate it very difficult by any court (Block, 1990: p.792) Having that in mind though, if certain music is categorized as obscene this First Amendment protection seizes to exist as it was the case in the 2 Live Crew’s album “As Nasty As They Wonna Be” which will be analyzed in this chapter. First though one must look at the legal definition of obscenity in the United States.

35

9.2 Defining Obscenity in the Courts- The American Way

Legally obscenity was defined under a three-pronged test that was ruled in Miller v California (1973 cited in Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.598). For a detailed analysis of Miller v California please refer to appendix four. According to Miller v California (1973) speech may be defined as obscene if it fails to pass a three-pronged test that states that: a) “whether the average person, applying contemporary standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest…” b) “whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; “ c) “whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.” (Miller v California 1973 cited in Flood, 1991: p.417)

So legally material can be deemed obscene under the American Judicial system if it appeals to the prurient interest of the average person applying contemporary standards, if the material depicts or describes sexually explicit material and finally if the work taken as a whole lacks any serious artistic, political, legal or scientific value. (Miller v California 1973, cited in Flood, 1991:p.417) It is therefore difficult to depict any musical work as obscene because of the following reasons. The work must be “taken as a whole” to be deemed obscene. So every song on any music album must be deemed obscene in order for the album to be deemed obscene. So even if a song has some lines of objectionable material it cannot be deemed obscene, according to the Miller test. Then the issue of “serious artistic value” comes in place. Music and its lyrics are considered an art form and as such they do not lack serious artistic value. Even if lyrics depict violence or encourage drug abuse they still cannot be deemed obscene because they do not “appeal to the prurient interest”. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.598) In addition to the above Berry and Wolin (1986:p.598) state that even lyrics dealing with objectionable themes, and are profane are still protected by the First Amendment. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.598)

36

9.2 Defining Obscenity in the Courts- The American Way

However some problems can be observed under the current definition of obscenity as it is shown by the Miller test. Quite often the courts employ a variable approach to obscenity. The courts evaluate the interest of the state in issues such as child protection and often collide with the fundamental rights that can be found in the First Amendment. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.599) This is precisely the case with music lyrics: the “average person” seizes to exist in order to protect the children. Under the guise of child protection the courts quite often disregard First Amendment rights. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.599) This was clearly the case in Ginsberg v New York (1968 cited in Berry and Wolin, 1986:p.600), where the court ruled that it had the power to significantly alter the way obscenity is defined in order to protect adolescents by restricting their access to materials that were not found to be obscene under normal legislation. So if material is deliberately distributed in a way as to appeal to those who seek suggestive material then those materials can be defined as obscene. The motives behind the distribution of such material along with the audience that the material is directed too are also considered by the Court. In addition to the above the court takes in consideration the way the material is being distributed, and if it found that the material deals with sexually explicit themes and is publicly displayed, then it can be deemed obscene. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.600-01) This relates to album covers that appeal to “the prurient interest” of certain individuals. This is another way where musical material can be deemed by the court to be obscene.

37

9.2 Defining Obscenity in the Courts- The American Way

Another issue that proves troublesome with the current obscenity laws in the United States is the issue of material that appeals “to the prurient interest of the average person applying contemporary standards” (Miller v California, 1973 cited in Flood, 1991:p.419) What is the problem here is “contemporary standards” as every state in the United States can apply its own “contemporary standards”. With this definition in mind there are no national standards for obscenity in the United States. So if for example the state and the judge presiding a case that deals with obscenity come from a strict religious moral background, then material that would not otherwise be deemed obscene by a rational secular individual could be deemed obscene here Now that the complex way of defining obscene material in the USA has been presented, a further description of the legislation for the broadcasting of obscenity in the US will be presented. Furthermore legislation dealing with obscenity in the UK will be presented before moving to important court rulings regarding the issue that emerged in the two countries.

38

9.3 Defining Obscenity in relation to Broadcasting Legislation in the USA

The Federal Communication Committee (FCC) is the regulator of broadcasting in the United States. The FCC can revoke radio and television stations licensees and produce fines to stations if they broadcast material that is deemed to obscene or offensive. (Kaufan, 1986:p.250) The way the FCC regulates broadcasting derived from various court cases in the last fifty years with the FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978) (see appendix five) being the case that influenced to an important extent the way the FCC deals with the regulation of offensive material today. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.54) The case of the FCC’s efforts to regulate the broadcasting of songs with drug oriented lyrics (see chapter five) failed as it was ruled as infringing the broadcasters First Amendment rights in Yale Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1973) (cited in Kaufan, 1986:p.241) The court observed the difficulty of interpreting song lyrics and thus ruled that “Licensees could neither be subject to license revocation nor sanctions against renewal for broadcasting songs with objectionable lyrics which they had either misunderstood or misinterpreted.” (Yale Broadcasting Co v. FCC (1973) cited in Kaufan, 1986:p.242)

So prior to 1978 any effort by the FCC to regulate the broadcast of offensive material was deemed unconstitutional. What changed in 1978 though, was that the notion of variable obscenity was applied in relation to children listeners. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.601) In FCC v Pacifica (1978) the court applied variable obscenity to cover the broadcasting of indecent expression. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.601) The court ruled in favor of the FCC because it identified the influence that the broadcast media have in the home, making the broadcasting of indecent material more available to children. (Berry and Wolin, 1986: p.601) The FCC though, by this ruling violated the constitution; because the ruling did not satisfy the Miller test. (M.S.S, 1975:p.641) It took the US courts thirteen years to acknowledge this though.

39

9.3 Defining Obscenity in relation to Broadcasting Legislation in the USA

In 1991 the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, ruled that the overall ban on indecent material violated First Amendment rights, and the court ruled that indecent material could be broadcasted between the hours of ten pm until six am because during these hours the possibility of children listening or watching such material was minimal. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.54) This soon changed though were in 1999 the FCC created an Enforcement Bureau to deal with claims by the public of indecent material being broadcasted before ten pm. (Nuzum, 2005:p.47-48) The Enforcement Bureau used a complex process of identifying if material could be deemed indecent. Again this process of identifying obscene and indecent material was problematic because of the lack of a national standard for indecency and obscenity. In 2002, the FCC tried to clarify to broadcasters what was deemed obscene before embarking on an “indecency war” with hip-hop stations being the primary targets. In this clarification process the FCC announced that any material that included the use of any innuendo describing “sexual or excretory” activities was also deemed obscene. (Nuzum, 2005:p.47-48) Again with the introduction of this clarification, the FCC made things even more complicated to broadcasters as in our day and age any material can be interpreted as describing sexual innuendo. In April 2002 twenty four broadcasting organizations including such giants as Viacom and the RIAA petitioned the FCC’s guidelines as being highly unconstitutional, without any success. (Nuzum, 2005:p.52) The ironic part of the FCC’s campaign is that all songs that were broadcasted and were deemed objectionable had obscene words already “bleeped” out or completely removed from the majority of broadcasters. The new standards prohibited the “clean” versions of songs as well. (Nuzum, 2005:p.52)

40

9.4 Defining Obscenity in the Courts- The British Way

The British legal system is even more highly complex that its American counterpart for the reason that, that “there is no document or group of documents called the British constitution” (Flood, 1991: p.428) As Flood (1991:p.429) stated: “Liberty in Britain is a state of mind rather than a set of legal rules” (Flood, 1991: p.429), because of a lack of constitution. It is the parliament in Britain, which constructs and passes legislation in any issue. The British parliament constructs different Acts that form the basis of the British legal system. (Flood, 1991: p.429) The Obscene Publications Act of 1959 and its minimal 1964 revisions is the act that deals with obscene material in the United Kingdom.

9.4.a..The Obscene Publications Act 1959

The Obscene Publications Act 1959 is derived from Robertson v Hicklin (1863). The standard test of obscenity was defined by Robertson v Hicklin (1863) where the court ruled that for a material to be deemed obscene it should be proved that: “whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences, and into whose hands a publication of this sort may fall.” (Robertson v Hicklin (1863) cited in Flood, 1991: p.433)

So according to the ruling, which was similar to Miller v California (1973) material that is able to “deprave and corrupt” people who are exposed to it is deemed obscene. This was further specified by the Obscene Publications Act 1959 which states that: Material must be taken as a whole, and have the tendency to “deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.” ( Obscene Publications Act 1959 cited in O’Higgins, 1972:p.24)

Furthermore the Act states that a person cannot be convicted of obtaining and publishing material that is regarded as obscene if it can be proved that the questionable publication has some sort of scientific, educational, artistic or literally value. (O’Higgins, 1972:p.25)

41

9.4.a..The Obscene Publications Act 1959

The value of such material must be proven in court by a testimony of experts on the field of literature, art or science. (O’Higgins, 1972:p.25) Section 2 of the article also states that the prosecution must involve a high court judge and if material is deemed as obscene distributors or people who possess such material can be fined by an unlimited amount and/or be imprisoned. Finally the Act states that any material that is seized and proven to be obscene can be destroyed. (Flood, 1991: p.437) The 1964 revision of the Act was put in place to expand material that may be deemed obscene, such as drug taking encouragement. (Flood, 1991: p.434) By analyzing the act some important issues need to be clarified. Firstly similar to variable obscenity in the United States, the target audience of such material is highly influential in defining if the material is obscene. (Flood, 1991: p.434) In addition to that, before material can be deemed obscene it must be proven that a substantial number of people were depraved and corrupted by the material. (O’Higgins, 1972:p.17) Finally just like the Miller test it must be proven that the material taken us a whole is able to deprave and corrupt. (Flood, 1991: p.435) It is quite evident that this Act just like the American law is highly problematic in being able first to define and identify obscenity and secondly and most importantly to be able to prove that a song is deemed obscene. Firstly there is no national standard for obscenity just like the United States. It is up to the judge’s discretion to deem what is or is not obscene. Again here we can observe that is it up to the judges’ interpretation of what is indecent and obscene that a case is ruled and this is highly problematic and particularly dangerous for music as here aesthetical issues also come in place along with the issue of morality that different individuals hold in society.

42

9.4.a..The Obscene Publications Act 1959

In the United Kingdom this lack of jury in any case dealing with obscenity is the most problematic aspect of the Act, for the reasons already stated. (Flood, 1991: p.432) Finally indecent material is regulated by the Indecent Displays Act of 1981 in the United Kingdom. (Flood, 1991: p.432) This Act is also problematic if one considers it in relation to freedom of speech as it prohibits the display of indecent material while at the same time gives unlimited powers to any police constable, to seize without a warrant, the questionable material only under the guise of “reasonable suspicion” and arrest any person under the suspicion that the person is violating the Act. (Flood, 1991: p.432) Before moving on to the legislation that deals with broadcasting in the United Kingdom and its relation to the Obscene Publications act, as the United Kingdom is a member of the European Community, European legislation that is related to the subject must also be analyzed.

9.5 European Legislation regarding Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

Just like the First Amendment in the United States, that protects the right of freedom of expression the European convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms, deals with the issue of censorship and freedom of expression under article eight, article nine and article ten of the convention. (O’Higgins, 1972:p.16) Article eight guarantees the right to privacy, article nine, protects the right to “freedom of thought, conscience and religion”, and article ten protects the right to “freedom of expression”. (O’Higgins, 1972:p.16) Even as mentioned earlier there is no constitution in the United Kingdom the above European rights guarantee fundamental rights such as freedom of expression in the country.

43

9.6 The Regulation of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom

The Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) is the primary body that regulated commercial radio in the United Kingdom. (Flood, 1991: p.430) The Broadcasting Act 1981 is the primary act that guides the IBA. The Act clearly states that it has the duty to: “ensure that, so far as possible, nothing is included in the programs which offends, good taste or decency or is likely…….to be offensive to public feeling” (Broadcasting Act (1981) cited Flood, 1991: p.430)

The IBA or a private citizen can ask for an injunction by the Attorney General for a breach of the Broadcasting Act. (Flood, 1991: p.430) The British Broadcasting Cooperation (BBC) though is also governed by the Home Secretary as it is a governmental body. The Home Secretary has highly influential powers of the BBC as he/she can require the restraint the broadcasting of any program by the cooperation at any time. The BBC is obliged to inform the public that such order has been issued by the home secretary. (Flood, 1991: p.430) Various cases of censorship by the BBC will be analyzed in chapter thirteen.

9.7 The Problem of Obscenity Legislation

As it is clearly evident by the legislation regarding obscenity and the right of free speech in both countries, the issue of where to draw the line between what is regarded as speech that is entitled to freedom of expression rights and what speech is not due to its explicit, indecent and obscene tone is highly problematic. From 1957 until 1973, for example there were more than thirty one obscenity cases ruled in American courts. (M.S.S, 1975:p.582) During all these cases not one majority of jurors agreed upon what speech deserved freedom of expression protection.

44

9.7 The Problem of Obscenity Legislation

In Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964 cited in M.S.S, 1975:p.582), a case about a publication being obscene or entitled to First Amendment protection Judge Justice Stewart clearly expressed the problem by stating that: I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that short hand description (hard core pornography); and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know when I see it….. Jacobellis v. Ohio, (1964) cited in M.S.S, 1975:p.582)

Finally, as Justice John M. Harian, in Cohen v California (1971), stated during the conclusion of the legal procedures “one man’s vulgarity is another man’s lyric.”

9.8 The Case of 2 Live Crew “As Nasty As They Wonna Be”- The First Album to Be Legally Declared Obscene in the United States

A highly influential case regarding censorship of popular music occurred in 1990, in the state of Florida in the United States (Skywalker Records Inc v. Navarro,(1990))where for the first time a musical piece of work was declared legally obscene and thus banned in the state of Florida. The album by the band 2 Live Crew, “As Nasty As They Wonna Be”, was released in 1989 and sold 1.7 million copies before the court case. (Campbell, 1991:p.175) The case started after residents from South Florida filed complaints against the indecent material found on the album, with their local sheriffs’ office in Broward County and the local sheriff began an investigation. (Campbell, 1991:p.181) In March 1990 the Florida circuit court issued an order which declared that there was probable cause to believe that the album was obscene. (Friedland, 1990:p.137)

45

9.8 The Case of 2 Live Crew “As Nasty As They Wonna Be”- The First Album to Be Legally Declared Obscene in the United States

The sheriff of Broward County distributed the legal order that the recording was under “probable cause” obscene in the state of Florida to music retail departments that had the recording for sale. After the sheriff distributed the order a vast majority of the music retail departments stopped stocking and selling the album under fear of distributing obscene material. (Campbell, 1991:p.178) Skywalker records the record company of 2 Live Crew filed suit in a federal district court In order to determine that the album was not obscene and to determine that the actions of the Broward sheriff were acts of improper prior restraints. (Friedland, 1990:p.137) The court ruled that the sheriff’s actions were improper prior restraints, but at the same time ruled that the album was legally obscene under Florida law, because it failed the Miller test. (Campbell, 1991:p.182) The court’s decision was based upon the frequency and graphic nature of the sexually explicit lyrics on the album, which the court found that they appealed to the prurient interest and because the lyrical descriptions on the album were patently offensive. (Friedland, 1990:p.138) (see appendix seven for a lyrical and musical example) The court’s ruling enabled the state to prosecute the distributors of the album and the performers of the album under Florida’s obscenity laws. (Campbell, 1991:p.182) Of course Skywalker records appealed the court’s ruling and eventually won the case (Winfield and Davidson, 1999:p.74) but it is worth seeing the reasons why the album was deemed obscene in the first place. As mentioned earlier the album failed the Miller test. The judge found that the lyrics of the album appealed to the prurient interest of individuals and were patently offensive, because the lyrics had a tendency to excite lustful thoughts. (Campbell, 1991:p.185) In addition to that the court ruled that as the album was a rap album, and in rap music an emphasis is given on the verbal message rather than the music the work was obscene.

46

9.8.a. The Case of 2 Live Crew “As Nasty As They Wonna Be”- The First Album to Be Legally Declared Obscene in the United States

Also because the album used “dirty” words extensively and described explicit sexual acts it failed the second part of the Miller test so it was found to be obscene. (Campbell, 1991:p.190) Regarding the third part of the Miller test, which talks about the piece of work in relation to community standards and the artist value of the material the court, or rather the judge as there was no jury decided that the work was obscene because no “reasonable person” would find any social, artist or other value in the material. (Campbell, 1991:p.191) The bands’ lawyers denied the above statements by arguing that the prosecution did not introduce expert testimony regarding the determination of the community standards regarding prurient interest. In addition to that they stated that because the court refused to empanel a jury, the ruling reflected only the personal opinion of the judge presiding the case and not the community’s opinion. (Campbell, 1991:p.186) Experts also testified about the serious cultural value and the comedy and satire value of the album on behalf of the band. (Campbell, 1991:p.191) The court found all of the plaintiffs’ arguments not persuasive. (Campbell, 1991:p.192) From this case the problems of current obscenity legislation emerge. Without national community standards in a highly diversified society, were ideas about what can appear to our prurient interest constantly changing it is highly difficult if not impossible to depict any piece of work as obscene. Once again the judge’s morality was crucial in the verdict for this case and the album and the band gained massive publicity as before the case 2 Live Crew were only known to fans of hip hop music. Finally the band won because the appeal was presented under a different judge and a jury, during this appeal. It is also worth mentioning that the album was released heavily censored and sold 250000 copies after the case was decided. (Campbell, 1991:p.177)

47

9.8.b.The Judas Priest v Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nevada (1988) case

A very unfortunate event occurred in December 23, 1985, where two teenagers Raymond Becknap and James Vance committed suicide while listening to the Judas Priest album “Stained Glass”. (Block, 1990: p.778) The two teenagers listened to the album for six hours straight while consuming large amounts of beer and marijuana. During this binge drinking and smoke taking session the two teenagers committed suicide by shooting themselves. (Block, 1990: p.788) The two teenagers’ parents filed suit against the band claiming libel damages as their lawyers argued that the music found on the album contained subliminal messages that brainwashed the teenagers in committing suicide. (Block, 1990: p.788) Their lawyers argued that the phrase “Do it, Do it” could be found in the background of the song, “Better by you Better than me”, (see appendix eight), and that this phrase brainwashed the two teenagers in committing suicide. (Block, 1990: p.788) Both the band and their record label CBS Columbia denied the claim and filed an expert witness report with the District court of Nevada that stated that research conducted in the field of lyric interpretation (see chapter seven) showed that most teenagers, focus more on the entertaining qualities of a song, such as its beat and melody rather than its lyrics. (Block, 1990: p.778) Furthermore the band and their record label were successful in proving to the court that subliminal messages could not be scientifically or otherwise found on the album. (Block, 1990: p.788) The case was dismissed on First Amendment grounds. (Block, 1990: p.788)

48

9.8.c The Ozzy Osborne case: McCollum v CBS (1988)

A tragic event occurred in October 26, 1984, when a teenager, John McCollum, took his own life while listening to Ozzy Osborne’s song “Suicide Solution”, (see appendix eight for the lyrics of the song) from the album “Blizzard of Oz”. (Block, 1990: p.777) Mr. McCollum’s family filed suit against Ozzy Osborne and his record label CBS records for “negligence, product liability and intentional misconduct.” (McCollum v CBS (1988) cited in Block, 1990: p.778) The case was ruled in favor of Mr. Osborne and CBS records on First Amendment grounds. The court found that musical lyrics and poetic conventions were not intended and should not be read literally and that: “No rational person would or could believe otherwise nor would they mistake musical lyrics and poetry for literal commands or directives to immediate action.” (McCollum v CBS (1988) cited in Block, 1990: p.778)

The court reached this verdict because it observed that no recording artist, broadcaster or distributor could be found accountable for the actions of a listener without first determining, the listener’s psychological state of mind. (Block, 1990: p.808) The court ruled that it could not restrict and limit artistic creativity for the purpose of avoiding the distribution of artistic speech which could influence emotionally disturbed individuals. (McCollum v CBS (1988) cited in Block, 1990: p.809) The court concluded that this kind of liability if brought upon artists would limit their First Amendment right of freedom of expression. (McCollum v CBS (1988) cited in Block, 1990: p.809)

49

9.8.d. A conclusion of the two cases

Unfortunately there are certain individuals in all societies that are psychologically unbalanced and interpret artistic themes such as music lyrics realistically. These individuals, quite sadly, cannot distinguish the fundamental difference between fiction and reality like millions of rational individuals can. What is most troubling though is that it is practically impossible to predict how when and why certain works of popular culture trigger such individuals to act the way the teenagers mentioned in the above cases acted. It is highly irrational to blame artists and their works for the actions of these individuals. Millions of people listened to the songs mentioned in the above cases without harming others and most importantly themselves. It is quite understandable that the parents of these teenagers would look for someone to blame. What is not understandable and highly immoral though is blowing such incidents way out of proportion and taking advantage of these people by trying to promote hidden agendas that their solemn purpose is, to limit freedom of expression and implement the moral agenda of a minority to the majority of society. What is even more ironic is that the song “Suicide Solution” by Ozzy Osborne was a song that the artist stated he wrote when he was fighting his own demons with alcohol and drug abuse, and that the song was intended to be a “wake up call” to abusers of such substances. (Weinstein, 1991:p.252-253)

50

9.9 The case of Anti Nowhere League’s song “So What”- The First Musical Work to be declared Legally Obscene

A similar case like the case of 2 Live Crew in the United States occurred in the United Kingdom in 1982. After substantial pressure from the pressure group National Viewers and Listeners Association led by Mary Whitehouse (see the following chapter) the song “So What”, (see appendix nine for the lyrics of the song), by the band the Anti-Nowhere League was the first song to be prosecuted under the Obscene Publications Act. (Petley, 1998:p.17) After complaints by a number of public citizens law enforcement officers seized copies of the song under the Obscene Publications Act 1959. (Cloonan, 1996:p.78) The complaints came under the guidance of Mary Whitehouse and NVALA. Whitehouse’s organization, after “concerns about the well being of children” that listened to the song, under a media campaign pressed for a prosecution of the song under section 2 of the Obscene Publications Act 1959. (Cloonan, 1996:p.78) The prosecution pressed for forfeiture under section 3 of the act that states that a material has the “tendency to deprave and corrupt” (Obscene Publications Act (1959) cited in O’Higgins, 1972:p.17) The prosecution won the case and under the provisions of section 3 all copies of the single that were seized were destroyed by the authorities. (Cloonan, 1996:p.78) The decision was overturned two years later. (Cloonan, 1996:p.78) This is another case that must be criticized heavily because of the fact that under any circumstances, “dirty words” cannot make a case for a piece of work to be declared as obscene because of the provisions of the Obscene Publications Act 1959. (Obscene Publications Act (1959) cited in O’Higgins, 1972:p.17)

51

9.9 The case of Anti Nowhere League’s song “So What”- The First Musical Work to be declared Legally Obscene

Another provision of the Act, as analyzed in this chapter, states that a material must be deemed obscene if it is considered that the material has an effect on “persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it” (Obscene Publications Act (1959) cited in O’Higgins, 1972:p.17) This could not be the case with the song “So What”, a hardcore punk song, that before the case was only listened to by the underground hardcore punk scene in the United Kingdom. (Cloonan, 1996:p.78) Various other efforts of censoring material in the United Kingdom were administered, but not with the same level of success as the Anti Nowhere League’s case. These cases will be further analyzed in the next chapter.

52

10. Censorial Efforts in Margaret Thatcher’s Britain

As mentioned in the previous chapter, most of the censorial efforts that occurred in Britain during the late 1960s until the 1990s, were politically and morally driven by such groups as the National Viewers and Listeners Association (NVALA) and the election of the conservative government of Margaret Thatcher. Even cases that occurred after Thatcher’s administration were the direct results of that administration’s policies as it will be stated in this chapter. Before analyzing these censorial efforts it is quite important to state the sociopolitical conditions that were put in place in the United Kingdom during the period examined as these conditions were crucial in forming the whole censorial climate.

10.1. The United Kingdom during the Thatcher Years

The United Kingdom saw massive economical problems emerging in the 1970s. James Callaghan’s labor government saw massive union strikes during the end of the 1970s that resulted to a three day week, a dark period in British history often called the “winter of discontent”. (Seldon and Daniel, 2000:p.6) During this period unemployment reached critical levels never seen before in the country. British youth saw a bleak future emerging as unemployment figures in1977 for teenagers under the age of eighteen reached 29.6% for females and 28.6% for males. (Wicke, 1995:p.140-41) The previous year violent riots broke out in the Notting Hill area in London 1976 between black immigrant teenagers, the worst affected by the unemployment problem, over 80% of this group were unemployed, and the police (Wicke, 1995:p.140-41) It was this social unrest that made the British public elect the right-wing conservative party of Margaret Thatcher in 1979, in the belief that such a government could resolve these problems.

53

10.1. The United Kingdom during the Thatcher Years

Unfortunately this was not the case, as in the first term of Margaret Thatcher’s term the economical recession continued. Inflation and unemployment continued rising in the following years, with more violent riots occurring in the Brixton area in London in April 1981. (Seldon and Daniel, 2000:p.18) Again here like in Reagan’s America the social division between rich and poor started to rise during this period, with the Thatcher government focusing on its foreign policy, the invasion of the Falkland Islands in 1982 and the political problems of Northern Ireland, (Seldon and Daniel, 2000:p.20) along with trying to establish a highly conservative Christian moral agenda in British society. This sociological background played a vital role in advocating censorial efforts against popular musician’s that dealt with such themes.

10.2. The Attempts to Censor Punk Rock in the 1970s and 1980s

It can be argued that punk rock emerged because of the social problems that British society was facing at the time. But punk rock was attacked as immoral and as having a negative influence of teenagers, the teenagers that were socially abandoned by the government and society in general. (Wicke, 1995:p.145) Although Britain was facing enormous economic problems, Mary Whitehouse the predominant spokesperson of the National Viewers and Listeners Association (NVALA) had other priorities in mind: “Christian values are basic to the health and wellbeing of our nation” (Whitehouse, 1985:p.158 cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.219) It was such priorities that triggered the whole attempts to censor punk music. Whitehouse saw that punk music was dangerous because of its rebellious message towards teenagers and attempts were made to regulate the musical genre.

54

10.2. The Attempts to Censor Punk Rock in the 1970s and 1980s

Even though NVALA (cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.219) admitted that:” We have not done any substantial research on pop music” they pushed for the prosecution of punk records because they argued that: “The whole pop scene, with its emphasis on the “counter-culture” has done more than anything to destroy the manners upon which western society has been based…… (Whitehouse, 1977:p.38 cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.219)

The rhetoric of NVALA attacked punk rock throughout the years as it was portrayed in the previous chapter with the prosecution of AntiNowhere League’s “So What”. Another serious attempt to the work of the Sex Pistols will be presented next.

10.3 The Censorial Efforts Against The Sex Pistols

In 1976 the Sex Pistols released their song “Anarchy in the UK” (Cloonan, 1996:p.116), a song that strongly portrayed the socioeconomic climate in Britain. The song was strongly attacked because of its negative message to youths by NVALA and was eventually banned by radio stations while at the same time the band was dropped by its record label EMI. (Cloonan, 1996:p.137) In addition to that the band was further marginalized because of an interview they held on Thames “Today Program” in the same year. (Cloonan, 1996:p.137) During this interview the host of the program Mr. Grundy urged the band to say something offensive and the band replied with such statements as “You dirty bastard” that were never heard before on British television. This incident sparked more controversy and more censorial efforts that occurred in 1977 with the release of “God Save the Queen” and “Never Mind the Bollocks” In 1977 the band released the song “God Save the Queen” at the same time as the Silver Jubilee celebrations. The song was highly critical of the monarchy system in the UK and nationalism and was eventually banned by the BBC on its release for being in “gross bad taste” (Cloonan, 1996:p.117) 55

10.3 The Censorial Efforts Against The Sex Pistols

Furthermore the charts were compromised by the recording industry so that the song would not reach the number one spot. (Petley, 1998:p.17) During the same year the album ‘Never Mind the Bollocks Here’s the Sex Pistols’ by the Sex Pistols was released and it sparked controversy because it contained the word “Bollocks” in its title along with the whole rebellious image of the Sex Pistols. (Petley, 1998:p.17) After substantial efforts by groups such as NVALA, to censor the album, the album was prosecuted in 1977, under the Indecent Advertisements Act of 1889, which states that no work containing indecent material can be displayed in public. (Indecent Advertisements Act of 1889 cited in Flood, 1991: p.438) The prosecution failed in court when an English professor testified that the word “bollocks” was “a thousand year old Anglo-Saxon word which originally meant a small ball.” (Kingsley, 1977 cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.76) All of these efforts show that the political establishment was fearful of the whole message of the punk movement as portrayed by the slogan “No Future” that questioned the sociopolitical conditions of the time. Once again the censorial efforts were socially driven by the cultural and political elites that could not solve the social problems of society and that tried to scapegoat the Sex Pistols and the punk movement for clearly stating these conditions. In the remaining of this chapter some other censorial efforts that occurred in the UK and the reasons behind them will be examined.

56

10.4. The Case of Spectrum Records and Crass in the United Kingdom

Spectrum records, a record shop in the city Northwich in the UK, was raided by police in August 1984, after a concerned father complained to the police about “obscene” albums that were sold in the store. (Petley, 1998:p.17) During the raid the police seized albums by the bands Crass, the Dead Kennedys, Icons of Filth and Crucifix. (Cloonan, 1996:p.79) The owner was charged under section 3 of the 1959 Act and was fined after found guilty of selling Crass’ album “Penis Envy” that was found to be obscene. (Cloonan, 1996:p.79) The band, Crass appealed in order to get the verdict reversed and to defend the rights that retailers and distributors had to sell their work without fears of prosecution. (Cloonan, 1996:p.79) The bands’ legal team opted to prove that the court applied the wrong test regarding obscenity. The judge presiding the case noted that the material were “crude, vulgar and they consist to a large extent of abusive rubbish but they don’t tend to deprave and corrupt”. (Cloonan, 1996:p.80) The judge concluded that “bad language does not satisfy the test of obscenity” (Cloonan, 1996:p.80), and once again the case failed in court with the important distinction though that the band’s album “Penis Envy” was and still is illegal to distribute and stock because it was found to be obscene. (Cloonan, 1996:p.80) Of course this case has different undertones. The band believed that they were prosecuted because of their political statements against the Falkland war, which the band stated that the war was a “real obscenity”. (Crass, 1984 cited in Cloonan, 1996:p.80) More specifically the band believed that they were prosecuted because of the political message that their song, “How does it feel (to be the mother of 1000 dead)” that attacked the government and the Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, personally about their actions regarding the Falkland war. (Street, 1986: p.17)

57

10.4. The Case of Spectrum Records and Crass in the United Kingdom

At the time conservative MP Timothy Eggar stated that the bands “Vicious, scrupulous attack on the Prime Minister and the Government” (Eggar, 1984 cited in Street, 1986:p.17) was highly immoral and legally obscene. The band was also attacked about its political statements found in their song, “Sheep farming in the Falklands” that was investigated by a parliamentary committee, because it used radio broadcasts from parliament that breached the parliamentary privilege. (Street, 1986: p.17) This is another case of political censorship in Margaret Thatcher’s Britain.

10.5. The case of Eastern Bloc and A Flux of Pink Indians in the United Kingdom

Another case of popular music censorship occurred in the Manchester area in September 1987, when the record store Eastern Bloc was raided after a complaint by “a member of the public” regarding obscene material being displayed in the shop. (Cloonan, 1996:p.82) During the raid the album “The Fucking Cunts Treat As Like Pricks” by the band a Flux of Pink Indians that was released four years before the raid was seized under the Obscene Publications Act of 1959. (Cloonan, 1996:p.82) The raids were put in place under the guidance and supervision of James Anderton, the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police. (Holden, 1993:p.12) As all the other examples that were given, the motives behind these raids were “morally motivated. Mr. Anderton was a devoted Christian that often claimed that God gave him direct orders about such things. (Anderton, 1987 cited in Holden, 1993:p.12) The police prosecuted the shop for the display of obscene material in September 1988. (Holden, 1993:p.12)

58

10.5. The case of Eastern Bloc and A Flux of Pink Indians in the United Kingdom

The case was dropped after apparent signs that it would be lost in court, because as it was stated in the case of Earache Records, there is no provision dealing with album covers in the 1959 Act. Even though the prosecution of the album was unsuccessful the censors succeeded in their efforts to ban the distribution of the album, as many record retailers including such influential retailers as HMV refused to stock the album because of the case. (Cloonan, 1996:p.81) Again by this case it is evident that even though it is considerably hard to prosecute any material under the 1959 Act, censors succeed in limiting the distribution of such material by retailers because of fears that they might be threatened with prosecution for stocking such material and being displayed in the public eye as depraving and corrupting their consumers and especially their younger consumers.

10.6. The Prosecution and Censorship of Acid House in Thatcher’s Britain

A case that sparked another moral panic in the United Kingdom was the case of Acid House music and its prosecution by the Thatcher government which resulted in government regulation against the musical genre that occurred in the late 1980s. After extensive media coverage of drug taking in Acid House parties in London and the rest of the United Kingdom, that resulted in a moral panic, the “authoritarian populism” policies (Hill, 2002: p.89) of Margaret Thatcher’s government started a “cultural war” against the musical genre. The government tried to pass legislation to regulate the Acid house parties because of the drug taking that was taking place in those parties, the noise pollution that they caused, the location of these parties which mainly occupied rural wealthy areas of Britain and the potential threat that the “mob” that frequented the parties could cause to society.

59

10.6. The Prosecution and Censorship of Acid House in Thatcher’s Britain

A police unit called Pay Party Unit was formed in September 1989 to deal with unlicensed parties. (Hill, 2002: p.89) This was followed by multiple arrests of party organizers after the entertainment act that was passed in 1990. (Hill, 2002: p.99) This legislation put higher sentences such as higher fines and imprisonment to party organizers in order to reduce the number and the scale of these parties. (Hill, 2002: p.89) This legislation was further reinforced with the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act set by Thatcher’s successor conservative government in 1994. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, legally defined acid house and dance music in general as music that is”wholly or predominantly characterized by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats” (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, Part V, section 63 (1) (b) cited in Street, 2003:p.118) and contained specific clauses about the restriction of amplification of such music.(Hill, 2002: p.93) This Act restricted the number of people that could attend such parties and placed further restriction in the licensing of such parties. As it was analyzed earlier in this chapter, the rationale behind the attack on Acid house music did not intend, as it was promoted to the public and the media, to protect society and young people from the dangers of these parties that included drug taking but an attack on the whole liberal dance music subculture that was seen as corrupting youth and further alienating them from conservative moral views. As many other attacks on popular music and culture, that can be found in this research project, historically, any new form of popular culture is considered as a threat to social order and is feared by the conservative political elites. This was clearly the case with Thatcher’s rhetoric of “Authoritarian Populism” that attempted to enforce a “new regime of social discipline and leadership from above”. (Hill, 2002: p.98) Thatcher’s government tried to impose this by circulating certain moral rhetorics in the media, which were further enhanced by tougher legislation. (Hill, 2002: p.98)

60

10.6. The Prosecution and Censorship of Acid House in Thatcher’s Britain

By these methods that tried to develop fear about the dangers of popular culture such as the Acid house subculture, Thatcher’s government was, unfortunately to a degree successful of gaining public support. According to Hill (2002:p.98) this success can be seen as: “A response to conservative anxieties around a perceived breakdown of law and order in the 60s and 70s, that Thatcherism in part emerged in response to, and again the integral role that popular culture was regarded as playing in this breakdown.” (Hill, 2002: p.98)

10.7. The case of Earache Records in the United Kingdom: Censorship of Record Covers

In March 1991, in the city of Nottingham in the UK the police raided Earache Records, a label specializing in death and speed metal looking for “obscene articles and associated documentation kept for gain”. (Cloonan, 1996:p.83) During the raid large amounts of stock were seized by the police including the albums “Reek of Putrification” and “Symphonies of Sickness” by the band Carcass and “Hallucinating Anxiety” by the band Cadaver. (Cloonan, 1996:p.83) All the material seized was prosecuted under the Obscene Publications Act of 1959 for their record covers that displayed gore scenes and nudity. (Cloonan, 1996:p.83) The case against Earache Records failed in court in the same year of its prosecution because there is not a provision in the Act that states that record covers can be prosecuted for obscenity. (Cloonan, 1996:p.83) This case clearly portrays the censorial efforts that occur regarding the issue of record covers. The issue of censorship of record covers is not new, and efforts of censoring record covers emerged in various instances throughout the years.

61

10.7. The case of Earache Records in the United Kingdom: Censorship of Record Covers

One of the first efforts to censor record covers occurred in 1968, when the Rolling Stones cover of their “Beggar’s Banquet” album was objected by their record labels, London Records in the United States and Decca in the United Kingdom.. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.185) The album cover was deemed inappropriate by the record labels because it displayed a toilet full of graffiti. Some of the graffiti in the toilet was deemed offensive as it stated such phrases as “Lyndon loves Mao”, “John loves Yoko” and “God rolls his Own”. (Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.186) Eventually the album cover was rejected and a plain cover with the title of the album replaced it. Mick Jagger stated at the time: “We don’t find it at all offensive, so we stand by it…If we allow them to dictate to us what we can and cannot do in the way of packaging next they are going to tell us what to sing” (Jagger, 1968 cited in Martin and Segrave, 1998:p.186)

Jagger clearly stated the problem of any censorial effort, that when any material is censored then the doors are widely open for more and more material to be censored.

62

10.8. The case of Niggers With Attitude and their album “Efil4zaggin” in the United Kingdom.

The hip hop band, Nigger With Attitude (NWA) was used to harassment and efforts of censorship in the United States. Their first album ‘Straight out of Compton” which included the song “Fuck tha Police” was prosecuted by the FBI in the United States. (Cloonan, 1996:p.87) But it was in the United Kingdom that their album “Efil4zaggin” (Niggers for Life spelled backwards) was prosecuted in 1991. The police raided and seized 12000 copies of the album by its distributors. (Cloonan, 1996:p.87) The raid occurred because of record dealer’s complaint to New Scotland Yard about the obscene nature of the album. Again the media coverage of this story was what sparked the raid which coincidentally occurred after an article about the album appeared in the conservative newspaper the Daily Mail. (Cloonan, 1996:p.88) This case differs from other cases because it is the first obscenity case to emerge out of the United Kingdom, where the accused band was signed to a major record label, Island Records. (Cloonan, 1996:p.88) The album was prosecuted under section 3 of the 1959 Obscene Publications Act because of its obscene and violent lyrical content. (Cloonan, 1996:p.88) In November 1991 the album was cleared of the obscenity charges after Island Record executives, backed up the album in court with expert witnesses that the album even though offensive, was clearly stating social issues and it triggered social commentary. The court found that although the album was offensive it did not have the tendency to “deprave and corrupt”. (Cloonan, 1996:p.89) Island’s Record lawyers argued in court that, “The potential to be offended is one of the prices that we pay for a free society” and when the album was compared with pornography in court the defense argued that “This record arouses fear, concern and distance. It does not arouse lust.” (Cloonan, 1996:p.89)

63

10.8. The case of Niggers With Attitude and their album “Efil4zaggin” in the United Kingdom.

The band won the case because they had the strong support of their record label, that stood up for their music, by presenting rational arguments in court, as mentioned above, that proved without any reasonable doubt that the album’s social commentary even though offensive, it was clearly stating the social ills that could be found in American society such as the discrimination and prosecution by the police of African Americans. This was clearly the case with another case that sparked controversy in the United States, this time, the case of hip hop artist Ice-T’s album “Cop Killer” that will be examined in the next paragraph.

11. The 1990s: The case of Gangsta Rap- Ice-T’s “Cop Killer”

A case that emerged in June 1992 in the United States involved the controversy that the song by hip hop artist Ice-T “Cop Killer”, (see appendix eleven for the lyrics of the song), was accused of promoting violence against the police. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.22) What is worth noting about the case of “Cop Killer” is that, the controversy surrounding it is significantly important. The song was released in March 1992 but it took until June of the same year for the song to emerge in the media and spark controversy. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.41) This of course is by no way coincidental. By analyzing the events that occurred during that period of time in the United States some very interesting issues emerge. The case was a reaction to an event that took the United States by storm in April 1992, the riots that emerged in Los Angeles and their extensive media coverage. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.41)

64

11. The 1990s: The case of Gangsta Rap- Ice-T’s “Cop Killer”

What sparked the Los Angeles riots was the beating of Rodney King, an African American, by officers of the Los Angeles police department. The beating was filmed by a passer by and was repeatedly showed on television. The officers accused of the beating were acquitted by a court jury on the 29th of April 1992. (Levy, 1996:p.234-236) After their acquittal riots started in south central Los Angeles, an area mostly inhabited by African Americans with a significant proportion of that population, 50%, of aged sixteen and over being unemployed and under the poverty line. South Central was an impoverished area ruled by criminal gangs and forgotten by America. (Levy, 1996:p.234236) “Cop Killer” was accused of heightening tensions between the black population and the police when the song according to Ice-T, its composer, was about “fighting back and getting even, about taking charge and not just resisting”. (Ice-T 1992 cited in Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.41) After threats by police organizations and the media, Ice-T’s record label Warner dropped the song from the album and banned its distribution. This resulted in a lengthily battle between the artist and his record company that resulted in the cancellation of his record contract that further damaged the artists’ career and personal integrity. (Ice-T 1994 cited in Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.41) This case raises some very important issues that keep emerging when the issue of censorship of popular music is discussed. Firstly the issue of the musical genre gangsta rap constantly being attacked as corrupting the youth, the role that record labels have in the whole censorship issue and the connection between social conditions and their relationship to the whole censorship issue, issues that will be further examined in the next chapters.

65

11.1. The Censorship of Gangsta Rap in the 1990s

The musical genre was attacked in the 1990s mainly in the USA and here in the UK because of its violent lyrical theme, that dealt with gang related themes and sexually explicit material that according to some in sighted violence and “immoral” behavior amongst black teenagers. The whole debate about gangsta rap escalated in 1994, in the USA, when hearings where held in February 23, 1994, by the Senate Juvenile Justice Subcommittee, on February 23 of the same year. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.25) These hearings bare a lot of similarities with the hearings that occurred in 1985 by the PMRC. Record industry executives tried to defend the publication of such music on First Amendment grounds while social scientists and child psychologists called for regulation of the music genre on the grounds that it was threatening to adolescents and sparked violent behavior. During the hearings Nicholas Butterworth, a journalist of the television channel, MTV compared gangsta rap with the music that emerged during the Vietnam war, and defended the genre as simply stating the social ills of society just like the Vietnam antiwar movement stated the problems of American society during that time. A rating system was again suggested but eventually turned down. (Richardson and Scott, 2002:p.186)

66

11.2. An Analysis of the Hearings on Gangsta Rap

Again during the hearings, the whole issue about morality in society and social responsibility was strongly debated by a pressure group: the National Political Congress of Black Women (NPCBW) led by C. Delores Tucker. (Cloonan and Garofalo (eds) 2003:p.227) The National Political Congress of Black Women had strong ties with the ruling political elites, just like the PMRC, and this time it was African American Baptist Christians that tried to promote their moral code on society. Compared to the PMRC hearings though, these hearings drew little media attention. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.25) In addition to that during these hearings any effort of regulation was hard to justify because of the testimonies of leading social scientists that testified that the social problems of society where to blame for the escalating levels of violence in the African American community, and not any kind of music. During the hearings Dr Robert Phillips the Deputy Medical Director of the American Psychiatric Association, stated that the impoverished living conditions of a large proportion of the African American population was the key factor in violent behavior and further testified that “rap was merely the latest iteration of themes prevalent in popular culture”. (Phillips, 1994 cited in Richardson and Scott, 2002:p.186) Furthermore Congresswoman Maxine Waters reinforced that statement when she testified that rap was merely portraying the every day life of a significant proportion of the African American population that lived under the poverty line. (Richardson and Scott, 2002:p.186) What these hearings clearly show again, is that the whole issue of censorship is socially conditioned and any form of music cannot be blamed for the social ills in society. By comparing this case with the case of the PMRC one can clearly see that 1990s America was politically very different from 1980s America but socially nothing had really changed.

67

11.2. An Analysis of the Hearings on Gangsta Rap

Even though a more liberal Democratic government was in power during the 1990s the social problems that emerged after the incompetence of the Christian right were clearly evident and unfortunately would not go away. Now that the connection between censorship and social conditions has been established and analyzed, a different kind of censorship, market censorship, based on economical reasons will be further examined

12. Market Censorship: The Role of the Recording Industry in the Censorship Debate

The recording industry plays a vital role in the whole issue of censorship in popular music. In democratic societies, only record companies have the ability to censor records prior to their release due to mainly economic reasons such as lack of commerciality. (Cloonan, 1996:p.42) In addition to that record retailers, distributors and the media in general play a vital role in the issue of censorship because of the way their industry is structured. According to Jansen (1991:p.163) the organizational structure of the recording industry and the media in capitalist economies just like any other forms of production, is formally totalitarian. What is worrying these days is the concentration of the record industry and the media in fewer and fewer hands. With the above powers that the recording and media industries hold it is quite evident that material that is deemed uncommercial can and is easily marginalized, thus censored. Various examples of record industry and market censorship have occurred throughout the years that clearly demonstrate the power, ability and consequences of market censorship as it will be analyzed in this chapter.

68

12.1. Examples of Market Censorship in the UK

After the introduction of the “Parental Advisory- Explicit Lyrics” label on records with objectionable material, various retailers refused to sell such records, thus restricting the access of such material to the general public. In the UK such retailers like Boots and HMV, one of the biggest record retailers in the country, compiled lists of records that they would not stock due to their objectionable message. (Cloonan, 1996:p.65) It is worth mentioning here that all the records on these lists were records, which held the advisory label. Most of the albums released by Earache records (see chapter ten), records by extreme heavy metal and hardcore punk bands such as Crass and the AntiNowhere League, were not stocked by these record retailers. Both of these retailers stated that they were bound by the Obscene Publications Act not to stock such albums along with the responsibility they held as respectable members of society to protect children interests. (Cloonan, 1996:p.69) What is questionable here is that none of the records censored were deemed legally obscene, thus there was no justification for not stocking these albums under legal obligations. The real reason behind these censorial efforts was the fear that these record retailers held, that if they stocked such material there would be accused by “respectable” members of society of putting their profit ahead of social responsibility. This notion, they feared, would jeopardize their profit margins, the real reason behind this form of censorship, not social responsibility or anything alike.

69

12.2. Examples of Market Censorship in the USA

Just like the UK, in the USA WaxWorks, a large music retailer that operated more than one hundred music outlets in the country refused to sell albums that held the warning label. (Goldberg 1990) In addition to that Wal-Mart, which operated more than one thousand stores, and Sears another large record outlet did not stock records with the label. (Blecha, 2004:p.115) It is quite evident that these efforts by large record outlets marginalized material and restricted the public’s access to such material.

12.3. Examples of Record Label Censorship

As mentioned in the introduction of this chapter record labels play a vital role in the whole issue of censorship. Various examples on the role of record labels regarding the issue can be spotted throughout the years. The case of Ice-T’s song “Cop Killer’ that was analyzed in chapter eleven clearly shows this. Warner, his record label, dropped the song from his album “Body Count”, and offered no support to the arguments put forward by the artist regarding the issue. Furthermore Warner marginalized the album by not promoting it sufficiently like it promoted previous albums by the artist. Warner eventually cancelled the artist’s record contract and thus further compromised not only the artist’s career but also his personal integrity. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.41)

70

13. Broadcasting and Censorship: The Censorial Efforts of the BBC in the UK Some highly controversial record bans were imposed in the UK from the BBC’s Radio 1 station that mainly plays popular music. Even though Alex Jones- Donelly (cited in Duffy, 2004) radio 1’s music editor categorically stated that “These days Radio 1 does not go in for banning records.” (Donelly cited in Duffy, 2004), the station often made some controversial record bans that will be examined further in this chapter. What is more worrying though is that the BBC through its radio stations, such as radio 1 often marginalized material by not playing it rather that overtly ban it. (Cloonan, 1996:p.104) In the 1930s it was jazz that was excluded from its program in the 1950s it was rock n roll, in the 1960s it was American R&B. (Cloonan, 1996:p.104) During the1970s though Radio 1, turned its views towards political songs and songs that advocated drug taking, just like the USA. (see chapters five and nine) (Flood, 1991: p.439)It was during this period that the overt banning of certain songs occurred due to their highly political message. One of the prime examples of such songs was Paul McCartney’s song, “Give Ireland Back to the Irish”, because of its political statement about the problem of Northern Ireland. Radio 1’s executives argued that the BBC as a public broadcaster could not take a political stand on any issue and that was why such songs as the above were banned (Flood, 1991: p.439) The political ban in 1981 of Heaven 17’s “We don’t need the fascist groove” that contained such lyrics as “Reagan fascist guard” and “Stateside Cowboy Guard” is another example of a song banned because of its political message. (Cloonan, 1996:p.117) Apart from its political bans, one of the most famous songs banned by Radio 1 was Frankie Goes to Hollywood’s “Relax” because of its homosexual message. (Duffy, 2004) This ban was highly controversial because the station played the song for months before it realized its “offensive” message. In January 1984, Radio 1’s DJ Mike Read was playing the song during peak-time in the chart rundown show, when he took a look at the lyrics of the song and suddenly realized the homosexual references in the lyrics. (Duffy, 2004)

71

13. Broadcasting and Censorship: The Censorial Efforts of the BBC in the UK

After this sudden realization the song was overtly banned from all television and radio stations. The ban resulted in the song rocketing to number one on the singles charts for four weeks, (Duffy, 2004) making the authors of the song forever grateful for the free publicity and exposure they received by Radio 1’s ban. What this incident clearly shows is that the banning of any song by any broadcaster gives a song further exposure to the public spotlight and helps promote the message of the song rather than restricting it from the public. Furthermore what these bands clearly state is the relationship between current events and the banning of songs. Songs that are related to current controversial events are banned at the time of the events occurring, but played without any restriction by broadcasters when the events are no longer in the public spotlight. This view will be further reinforced in the next chapter that deals with censorship of popular music today.

14. Censorship of Popular Music in the Post 9/11 World

With the turn of the century social attitudes toward offensive material were becoming more and more “relaxed”. These liberal attitudes though were again changed, after the 9/11 attacks in the USA that literally shocked the world, because of the fact that for the first time America was attacked on its own soil. The whole western world felt threatened by this new terrorist threat and this new “fear” was in evidently going to have an effect on popular music as well. The introduction of the Patriot Act in the USA, after 9/11, an Act that stripped many privacy rights by the citizens of the country would obviously have some very negative effects on popular music. (Fischer, 2003:p.3) Some of the provisions of the Patriot Act allow: investigators have access to the publics’ records such as bookstore and library records, can monitor any kind of communication, can restrict the public’s access to government, and detain suspected terrorists without cause, charge, or access to legal counsel. (Nuzum, 2005:p.22)

72

14. Censorship of Popular Music in the Post 9/11 World

It is quite obvious that this Act limits civil liberties, as any individual can be monitored for “unpatriotic” threatening behavior towards the state. This is quite evident by Cloonan’s (2004:p.12) statement that: “Popular music was going to respond to the events of 11 September and those responses were bound to be diverse and to produce further reactions including controversy and the arousing of all sorts of emotions.” (Cloonan, 2004:p.12)

As popular musician’s responded to 9/11, often expressing their political views, such as the illegality of the Iraq war and the attack of civil liberties they were often attacked as being dissidents and unpatriotic. (Cloonan, 2004:p.13) Various examples of this attitude to restrict views that were deemed dissident will be examined in the next paragraphs. After the events of 9/11, Clear Channel, a corporation that owns more than one thousand radio stations in the USA released a list of 156 records which radio station DJs were encouraged not to play because of their political message. (Cloonan, 2004:p.14) The songs were banned by these stations, a clear form of censorship, even though Clear Channel denied this, by stating that the sensitive feelings of the public regarding the events and the message of some songs should be respected. (Nuzum, 2005:p.28) No member of the public though publicly stated this belief. The list included all the songs by the band Rage Against The Machine because of the left-wing views, John Lennon’s “Imagine”, and a very peculiar inclusion, “Walk Like An Egyptian” by the Bangles a 1980s novelty hit. The band’s guitarist, Vicki Peterson stated that: “This has got to be a joke…The healing power of music and especially some of those songs is comforting in times like these” (Peterson, 2001 cited in Nuzum, 2005:p.28)

73

14. Censorship of Popular Music in the Post 9/11 World

From the guitarist’s statement it is quite obvious that the inclusion was very peculiar as the song was a novelty song, and Egypt did not have nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. In addition to that the statement that music has a healing power to some individuals, further contradicts the banning of these songs as some of them, like John Lennon’s “Imagine” talked about peace and love in the world. The band Rage Against The Machine, that saw all of its songs banned on the list and its website closed down after “numerous calls from the Secret Services complaining about the anti-American sentiments expressed there” (Cloonan, 2004:p.14) also released a statement: “If our songs are ‘questionable’ in any way, it is that they encourage people to question the kind of ignorance that breeds intolerance which can lead to censorship and the extinguishing of our civil liberties, or at its extremes can lead to the kind of violence we witnessed”. (Morello, 2001 cited in Nuzum, 2005:p.28)

Another highly publicized case regarding the censorship of popular musicians occurred in 2003 when Natalie Maines the lead singer of the country band Dixie Chicks stated in a London concert in 2003 that: “We’re ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas.” (Maines, 2003 cited in Cloonan, 2004:p.24) After this statement, that criticized the Bush administration because of its part in the Iraq war, record burnings of the bands material, occurred in various states, along with the overt banning of the bands’ songs by many broadcasters (Cloonan, 2004:p.24) These cases are the clearest example of censorship of popular music in the post 9/11 world, cases that clearly state the danger of the restriction and oppression of freedom of speech, cases that bring back in memory actions taken by totalitarian states, cases that remind the oppression of jazz music and the burning of “objectionable” material by Hitler’s Germany, cases that remind the prosecution of western popular music in Stalin’s Soviet Union.

74

14. Censorship of Popular Music in the Post 9/11 World

Now that an extensive analysis of censorial efforts that occurred in the last forty years in the USA and the UK have been analyzed, a critical analysis of the whole issue of censorship will be examined.

15. A Critical Analysis of the Issue of Censorship

During this chapter this author will make the statement that any censorial efforts are based on fears, held by sociopolitical elites that some forms of expression, such as popular music threaten the moral code that they try to impose on society. Furthermore this chapter will state that any form of censorship is damaging to any democratic society as they restrict the right that every individual has to freedom of expression. Finally this chapter will state that any form of censorship exposes “objectionable” material to certain groups, like children, that would not seek or be exposed to such material if it was not for the efforts to censor such material.

15.1. The Dangers of Establishing a Moral Code on Society

One of the most problematic aspects of censorship regarding morality in society is the issue of who is entitled to censor and on what grounds? According to Hampshire and Blom-Cooper (1977:p.58) “no person is competent or able to be given the task of censoring material because of their immoral message.” Because of the reason that every person comes from a different sociological background, it is highly problematic for that person to establish a moral code on society, a moral code that is derived and strongly influenced by the persons’ upbringing and character.

75

15.1. The Dangers of Establishing a Moral Code on Society

In addition to that, any society that is governed under a moral code introduced by a certain political elite can and is arguably considered totalitarian, as the moral code of that elite dictates to the rest of society what to believe, what to listen to and most importantly what to think. Furthermore the issue of taste and aesthetics comes in place, where any person who is in charge of censoring material has his/her own views on the matter This problem is clearly stated by Schauef (1982:p.31) who stated that: If the state were to propose suppressing bad literature, or bad art, we would be quick to argue against this on the ground that judgments about artistic matters are ones of which there is little certainty and little agreement about what is good and what is bad. We could consistently still hold that there are objective standards for aesthetic evaluation, for that means saying some things are good and others bad. Standards in aesthetics are more highly variable that are standards in most other subjects. Here the danger of suppressing that which may at some future time be considered good or valuable presents a powerful argument for allowing the expression of the currently unacceptable opinion. (Schauef, 1982:p.31)

Another problem that emerges from the above statement is the problem of social and moral standards changing from time to time. As social structures have changed throughout human history and will continue to change in the future (Shepherd, 1991: p.43), what is deemed acceptable or obscene is also changing, thus making it even more difficult to justify the censorship of any material such as popular music.

76

15.2 The Meaning and Significance of Popular Music and Freedom of Expression in Society As the meaning of music is socially conditioned (Frith, 1983:p.10) and as music, an art form, holds a mirror to society (Lombardi, 1991:p.2) music that depicts violence, for example, barely reflects the social ills of society, it does not cause them. Popular music is culturally and socially significant (Campbell, 1991:p.218) because just like any art form it has the ability to depict the current conditions of society. By trying to censor it, the issue of freedom of expression emerges, an issue that is far more dangerous for any democratic society than some songs depicting material of a violent or explicitly sexual nature. In order for censorship to be justified in any way, it has to be proven that censorship solves a problem in society, for example if censoring music that is harmful towards children, the harm will go away. (McCormick, 1977:p.31) As it was analyzed in chapter eight the argument that certain music is harmful towards children is highly unjustified. What is harmful to society, though are the effects of censorial efforts. First and foremost any form of censorship reduces free expression in any society, and secondly gives the censor, either be governmental or private, unlimited powers to regulate the publics’ expression. This argument is further reinforced by McCormick’s statement: If censorship is supported by a sound instance of the harm argument, it does not follow that the censorship is justified. For censorship to be justified, the harm which it will prevent must be worse than the harm caused by the censorship itself. (McCormick, 1977:p.33)

Finally censorship exposes “offensive” material to vulnerable groups such as children, as it was clearly shown by the case of the PMRC and the case of gangsta rap, where both of the “extreme” musical genres, heavy metal and gangsta rap, were only known and listened to by their respective subcultures before being exposed to the public light by the two censorial campaigns.

77

16. Conclusion

To come to a conclusion, censorial efforts are dangerous and threatening in any democratic society. All censorial efforts being driven by certain political elites such as the Christian right had the sole purpose of making society abide under a certain moral and political agenda set forward by a vocal minority towards the majority of society. What these efforts clearly showed were the dangers of any form of censorship that limits free expression in society and restricts the artistic expression of popular musicians while at the same time exposes potentially offensive material to groups that would have never been exposed to such material if it was not for these censorial efforts. Often popular music was and is used as a scapegoat for all the social ills in society, by these political elites, which prefer to finger point “immoral” people instead of trying to find a solution for these social ills. Finally the issue of child protection from obscene material can be dealt with more effectively by family and social education rather than by government or voluntarily regulation that is often hard to be maintained by the judiciary system in any democratic society. The problem can be solved easily: If anyone is offended by any song or album being played on the radio, or sold in any shop, all he/she has to do is change the radio station or refuse to buy the album. Fortunately we still live in a democratic society, where we all have the freedom to choose what want and do not want to listen too.

Word Count: 6654, 14890

78

Bibliography

Books

ARNETT, J.J., 1996. Metal Heads: Heavy Metal Music and Adolescent Alienation. Colorado: Westside

BLECHA, P., 2004. Taboo Tunes: A history of banned bands and censored songs. San Francisco: Backbeat

CLOONAN, M., 1996. Banned! Censorship of popular music in Britain:1967-1992. London: Ashgate

CLOONAN, M. (ED) AND GAROFALO, R. (ED), 2003. Policing Pop. Philadelphia: Temple

FRITH, S., 1983. Sound Effects: Youth, Leisure and the Politics of Rock. London: Constable

GORE, T., 1987. Raising PG kids in an X-Rated Society. Nashville: Abnigdon

GRACYK, T., 2001. I Wonna Be Me: Rock Music and the Politics of Identity. Philadelphia: Temple

HEINS, M., 1998. Sex, Sin and Blasphemy: A Guide to America’s Censorship Wars. New York: The New Press

79

Books

HULL, M.E, 1999. Censorship in America: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO JANSEN, S.C., 1991. Censorship: The knot that binds power and knowledge. Oxford: Oxford

KOSTELANETZ, R., 1997. The Frank Zappa Companion: Four Decades of Commentary. London: Omnibus

MARTIN, L., AND SEGRAVE, K., 1998. Anti-Rock. Hampden: Archon

O’HIGGINS, P., 1972. Censorship in Britain. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons

SCHAUER, F., 1982. Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge

SHEPHERD, J., 1991. Music as social text. Cambridge: Polity

STREET, J., 1986. Rebel Rock. New York: Blackwell

THOMPSON, K., 1998. Moral Panics. London: Routledge

WEINSTEIN, D., 1991. Heavy metal: A Cultural Sociology

WICKE, P., 1995. Rock Music: Culture, Aesthetics and Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge

WINFIELD, B.H (ed) AND DAVIDSON, S., (ed) 1999. Bleep! Censoring rock and rap music. London: Greenwood

80

Journals

BERRY, C. AND WOLIN, D., 1986. Regulating Rock Lyrics: A new wave of Censorship. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 23 (2), 595-619

BLOCK, P.A., 1990. Modern Day Sirens: Rock Lyrics and the First Amendment. Southern California Law Review, 63 (3), 777-832

CAMPBELL, E., 1991. Music and the First Amendment: Was the 2-Live Crew Lively? Nova Law Review, 15 (1), 160-231

CHASTANGER, C. 1999. The Parent’s Music Resource Center: From information to censorship. Popular Music, 18 (2), 179-192

CLOONAN, M., 1995. Popular music and Censorship in Britain: An Overview. Popular Music and Society, 19 (3), 75-104

CLOONAN, M., 1998. Massive Attack. Index on Censorship. 27 (6), 184-186

D’ENTREMONT, J., 1998. The Devil’s Disciples. Index on Censorship. 27 (6), p.32-48

FLOOD, M.J., 1991. Lyrics and the Law: Censoring of Rock and Roll in the US and Great Britain. New York Law School Journal of International and Comparative Law, 12 (3), 412-445

FRIEDLAND, S.I., 1991. Race, Rap and the Community Standards Test of Obscenity: The Community of Culture. Nova Law Review, 15 (1), 119-159

81

Journals

HAMPSHIRE, S., AND BLOM-COOPER, L., 1977. Censorship?. Index on Censorship, 6 (4), 55-64

HOLDEN, D., 1993. Pop go the censors. Index on Censorship, 22 (5&6), 11-15 INGLIS, I., 2006. The Ed Sullivan Show and the (Censored) Sounds of the Sixties. The Journal of Popular Culture. 39 (4), 558-575 KAUFAN, W.B, 1986. Song Lyric Advisories: The Sound of Censorship. Cardozo Art and Entertainment Law Journal, 5, 225-263

LACOURSE, E., et al. 2001. Heavy Metal Music and Adolescent Suicidal Risk. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 30 (3), 321-332.

LEWIS, P.C., 1992. The Effects of Parental Advisory Labels on Adolescent Music Preferences. Journal of Communication. 42 (1), 106-113 LYNXWILER, J., AND GAY, D., 2000. Moral Boundaries and Deviant Music: Public Attitudes toward heavy metal and rap. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 21, 63-85 MARTIN, B., 2004. "… And You Voted For That Guy": 1980s Post-Punk and Oppositional Politics. Journal of Popular Music Studies . 16 (2), 142-174 MCCORMICK, K., 1977. Censorship: Some Philosophical issues. Index on Censorship, 6 (2), 31-38

82

Journals

MCDONALD, J.R., 1988. Censoring rock lyrics: A historical analysis of the debate. Youth and Society, 19 (3), 294-313

MCLEOD et al. 2001. Behind the Third-Person Effect: Differentiating Perpetual Processes for Self and Other. Journal of Communication, 51 (4), 678-695

M. S.S., 1975. Filthy Words, the FCC, and the First Amendment: Regulating Broadcast Obscenity. Virginia Law Review, 61 (3), 579-642

PETLEY, J., 1998. Smashed Hits. Index on Censorship. 27 (6), 11-19

RICHARDSON, J.W., and SCOTT, K.A., 2002. Rap Music and its Violent Progeny: America’s Culture of Violence in Context. The Journal of Negro Education. 71 (3), 175192

STREET, J., 2003. Fight the Power: The Politics of Music and the Music of Politics. Government and Opposition, 38 (1), 113-130

83

Websites

DUFFY, J., 2004. Banned on the Run. [online] Available from: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/339582 3.stm [Accessed 12 January 2007]

FISCHER, P.D., 2003. What if They Gave a Culture War and Nobody Came? Prospects for Free Musical Expression in the United States [online]. Freemuse. Available from: http://www.freemuse.org/sw3753.asp [Accessed 14 February 2007]

HEINS, M., et al, 2001. Violence and the Media: An exploration of cause, effect and the First Amendment. [online] First Amendment Center. Available from: http://www.freedomforum.org/publications/first/violenceandmedia/violenceandthemedia. pdf [Accessed 28 December 2006]

LOMBARDI,V., 1991. Music and Censorship. [online] Available from: http://www.noisebetweenstations.com/personal/essays/music_censorship.html [Accessed 4 May 2006]

NUZUM, E., 2005. ‘Singing in the Echo Chamber’: Music Censorship in the US after September 11 [online]. Copenhagen, Freemuse Available from: http://www.freemuse.org/sw12173.asp [Accessed 5 February 2007]

84

Appendix

1. Prince’s “Darling Nikki”- Lyrics and Music

The lyrics for the song “Darling Nikki” by Prince that was purchased for Mrs. Gore’s eleven year old daughter (Gore, 1987:p.17) and sparked the censorial efforts has controversial lyrical content. The controversy was about the line in the song that talks about a girl masturbating found in the first verse. The full lyrics of the song can be found here for the reader to further analyze and make up his own mind about how offensive and obscene it is. Furthermore the song can be found in track one (1) of the CD supplied with this research paper. (see appendix 12)

1.1 Song: Darling Nikki, Artist: Prince, Album: Purple Rain (1984)

I knew a girl named Nikki I guess you could say she was a sex fiend I met her in a hotel lobby Masturbating with a magazine She said howd you like to waste some time And I could not resist when I saw little nikki grind

She took me to her castle And I just couldnt believe my eyes She had so many devices Everything that money could buy She said sign your name on the dotted line The lights went out And nikki started to grind

85

1.1 Song: Darling Nikki, Artist: Prince, Album: Purple Rain (1984)

Nikki

The castle started spinning Or maybe it was my brain I cant tell u what she did to me But my body will never be the same Her lovin will kick your behind Oh, she’ll show you no mercy But she’ll shonuff shonuff show u how to grind

Darlin Nikki

Woke up the next morning Nikki wasnt there I looked all over and all I found Was a phone number on the stairs It said thank u for a funky time Call me up whenever u want to grind

Oh, Nikki, ohhhh

Come back Nikki, come back Your dirty little prince Wanna grind grind grind grind grind grind grind grind grind Hello, how are you? Im fine. cause I know That the lord is coming soon, coming, coming soon.

86

2. Twisted Sister’s “Under the Blade”- Lyrics and Music

The song by the band Twisted Sister “Under the Blade” that was accused by the PMRC, and Mrs. Gore personally, allegedly talked about bondage and masturbation while it was clearly evident by its author, Mr. Dee Snider that it did talk about the fear of surgery amongst most of people. (Weinstein, 1991:p.256) For the reader to judge for himself/herself the full lyrics of the song can be found here. The actual song can be found in track two (2) of the CD supplied with this research project. (see appendix 12)

2.1 Song: Under the Blade, Artist: Twisted Sister, Album: Under the Blade (1982)

A glint of steel, a flash of light You know you're not going home tonight Be it jack or switch, doctor's or mind Nowhere to run, everywhere you'll find You can't escape from the bed you've made When your time has come, you'll accept the blade!

You're cornered in the alley way, you know you're all alone You know it's gonna end this way, the chill goes to the bone Now here it comes that glistening light, it goes into your side Blackness comes, tonight's the night, blade is gonna ride

Cause you're under the blade Oh, you're under the blade

87

2.1 Song: Under the Blade, Artist: Twisted Sister, Album: Under the Blade (1982)

It's not another party head, this time you cannot rise Your hands are tied, your legs are strapped, a light shines in your eye You faintly see a razor's edge, you open your mouth to cry You know you can't, it's over now, blade is gonna ride

A glint of steel, a flash of light You know you're not going home tonight Be it jack or switch, doctor's or mind There nowhere to run, everywhere you'll find You can't escape from the bed you've made When your time has come, you'll accept the blade!

You've tried to make it to the front, now you're pinned against the side A monster stands before you now, its mouth is open wide The lights go on, the night explodes, it tears into your mind When the night does end, you'll come again, the blade is gonna ride

Here it comes, baby Now you're under it You're going down, down, down, down, down, down Down, down, down, down, down, down, down

88

3. Denisoff’s Research- The Lyrics and Music to P.F. Sloan’s “Eve of Destruction”

R.S Denisoff’s (1972) highly influential research in the issue of lyric interpretation amongst teenagers used P.F. Sloan’s (1965) song “Eve of Destruction”, a song of warning about the threat of a nuclear or any other war. (Sloan, 1965 cited Block, 1990: p.786) For the reader to try and interpret the song in his/hers own way the lyrics of the song are supplied here. The music for the song can be found in track three (3) of the CD supplied with this research project. (see appendix 12)

3.1 Song: Eve of Destruction, Artist: P.F Sloan, Album: Released as a single (1965)

The eastern world, it is exploding Violence flarin’, bullets loadin’ You’re old enough to kill, but not for votin’ You don’t believe in war, but what’s that gun you’re totin’ And even the Jordan River has bodies floatin’

But you tell me Over and over and over again, my friend Ah, you don’t believe We’re on the eve of destruction.

Don’t you understand what I’m tryin’ to say Can’t you feel the fears I’m feelin’ today? If the button is pushed, there’s no runnin’ away There’ll be no one to save, with the world in a grave [Take a look around ya boy, it's bound to scare ya boy]

89

3.1 Song: Eve of Destruction, Artist: P.F Sloan, Album: Released as a single (1965)

And you tell me Over and over and over again, my friend Ah, you don’t believe We’re on the eve of destruction.

Yeah, my blood’s so mad feels like coagulatin’ I’m sitting here just contemplatin’ I can’t twist the truth, it knows no regulation. Handful of senators don’t pass legislation And marches alone can’t bring integration When human respect is disintegratin’ This whole crazy world is just too frustratin’

And you tell me Over and over and over again, my friend Ah, you don’t believe We’re on the eve of destruction.

Think of all the hate there is in Red China Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama You may leave here for 4 days in space But when you return, it’s the same old place The poundin’ of the drums, the pride and disgrace You can bury your dead, but don’t leave a trace Hate your next-door neighbor, but don’t forget to say grace And… tell me over and over and over and over again, my friend

90

3.1 Song: Eve of Destruction, Artist: P.F Sloan, Album: Released as a single (1965)

You don’t believe We’re on the eve Of destruction Mm, no no, you don’t believe We’re on the eve of destruction.

4. An Overview of Miller v California (1973)

The case that specified the legal definition of obscenity in America, was Miller v California (1973) Miller mailed unsolicited adult books in a media campaign in 1973 in California. (Hull, 1999:p.91) He was convicted of violating the state’s obscenity laws, because the books he mailed were found to be obscene under the states’ “community standards”. The court here for the first time gave a definition of obscenity while stating that obscene materials are stripped from their First Amendment Rights. (Hull, 1999:p.91) Chief Justice Warren C. Burger that ruled the case stated that: This case involves the application of a State’s criminal obscenity statute to a situation in which sexually explicit materials have been thrust by aggressive sales action upon unwilling recipients who had in no way indicated any desire to receive such materials. This court has recognized that the States have a legitimate interest in prohibiting dissemination or exhibition of obscene material when the mode of dissemination carries with it a significant danger of offending the sensibilities of unwilling recipients or of exposure to juveniles… It is in this context that we are called on to define the standards which must be used to identify obscene material that a State may regulate without infringing on the First Amendment as applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.. Under a National Constitution, fundamental First Amendment limitations on the powers of the States do not vary from community to community, but this does not mean that there are, or should or can be, fixed, uniform national standards of precisely what appeals to the “prurient interest” or is “patently offensive”. These are essentially questions of fact, and our Nation is simply too big and too diverse for this Court to reasonably expect that such standards could be articulated for all 50 States in a single formulation, even assuming the prerequisite consensus exists. When triers of fact are asked to decide whether “the average person, applying contemporary community standards” would consider certain materials “prurient”, it would be unrealistic to require that the answer be based on some abstract formulation. (Burger, 1973 cited in Hull, 1999:p.91-92)

91

4. An Overview of Miller v California (1973)

A continuation of Chief Justice Warren C. Burger’s statement: The adversary system, with lay jurors as the usual ultimate factfinders in criminal prosecutions, has historically permitted triers of fact to draw on the standards of their community, guided always by limiting instructions on the law. To require a State to structure obscenity proceedings around evidence of a national “community standard” would be an exercise in futility… Sex and nudity may not be exploited without limit by films or pictures exhibited or sold in places of public accommodation any more than live sex and nudity can be exhibited or sold without limit in such public places. At a minimum, prurient, patently offensive depiction or description of sexual conduct must have serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value to merit First Amendment protection. For example, medical books for the education of physicians and related personnel necessarily use graphic illustrations and descriptions of human anatomy. In resolving the inevitably sensitive questions of fact and law, we must continue to rely on the jury system, accompanied by the safeguards and judges, rules of evidence, presumption of innocence, and other protective features provide, as we do with rape, murder, and a host of other offenses against society and its individual members. One can concede that the “sexual revolution” of recent years may have had useful byproducts in striking layers of prudery from a subject long irrationally kept from needed ventilation. But it does not follow that no regulation of patently offensive “hard core” materials is needed or permissible; civilized people do not allow unregulated access to heroin because it is a derivative of medicinal morphine. (Burger, 1973 cited in Hull, 1999:p.91-92)

From the judge’s statement one can see the difficulty in establishing any material as obscene. The judge stated that the country was to big for a national definition of obscenity, thus leaving variable standards for each State to decide, something very problematic as it is impossible for any individual to apply his/her own “community standards” to the whole of a community. Furthermore the judge mentioned the recent “sexual revolution” of the time that changed social attitudes thus identifying the constant changes in social attitudes and morality that further complicate the implementation of this law. In addition to that, it is highly complex to deem any material as being obscene because of the notion that it has to lack any “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value” as any publication even a pornographic one can be arguably seen as art due to the sociological conditions of our times, where different individuals perceive various material with different aesthetical judgements.

92

4. An Overview of Miller v California (1973)

Finally as mentioned earlier the world is constantly changing and perceptions are constantly changing making this definition of obscenity obsolete as it very difficult to apply the social attitudes that were in place in 1973 with the social attitudes of our modern times.

5. An Overview of FCC v Pacifica Foundation (1978)

In 1978, the standup comedian George Carlin, in a New York radio stations’ afternoon program delivered his monologue “Filthy Words” which mainly used “dirty” words such as “fuck”, “shit”, “cunt” and “cock”, in every day language in a comedic fashion. (Kaufan, 1986:p.250) Even though the station issued an advisory warning before the broadcast, complaints were made to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) about the obscenity of the program and its unsuitable time slot. (Kaufan, 1986:p.250) The FCC sued the Pacifica Foundation, the owner of the radio station to court, for broadcasting of offensive obscene material, while the foundation accused the FCC of exercising censorship. The court ruled that: “the broadcast was indecent and illegal, under statutes forbidding obscene, indecent material being broadcasted”. (FCC v Pacifica Foundation 1978, cited in Hull, 1999:p.92)

Furthermore the court ruled that the FCC was not exercising censorship and after this case the court ruled that broadcasters could not broadcast obscene material during hours that children were listening to the radio, putting in place a “safe harbor” for children between the hours of ten pm and six am. (Hull, 1999:p.92)

93

6. 2 Live Crew’s “As Nasty As They Wonna Be”- Lyrics and Music

A lyrical and musical example will be given here, to the reader, from 2 Live Crew’s album, “As Nasty As They Wonna Be” the first album that was legally found to be deemed obscene. (Campbell, 1991:p.175) The song from the album “Me so Horny” will be given as an example here, as it was one of the most “offensive” songs on the album. The reader has the ability to judge for himself/herself if the song has the ability to “deprave and corrupt” and if the song appeals to his/hers “prurient interest”. The actual song can be found on track four (4) of the CD supplied with this research project. (see appendix 12) Before going over to the lyrics, it is worth mentioning here that a large amount of the lyrical content was sampled by Stanley Kubrick’s movie “Full Metal Jacket”. The sample was taken from the scene where the protagonist of the film is trying to make a deal with a prostitute.

6.1 Song: Me So Horny, Artist: 2 Live Crew, Album: As Nasty As They Wonna Be (1989)

(sample from full metal jacket) ”-What'll we get for ten dollars? -Every 'ting you want -Everything? -Everything” Ooh! don't do that, baby! ahh! Hold on this! oh, sock it to me! aaahh! Ooohh!

94

6.1 Song: Me So Horny, Artist: 2 Live Crew, Album: As Nasty As They Wonna Be (1989) (sample from full metal jacket) ”Ahh! me so horny! Me love you long time!”

Sittin' at home with my dick on hard So I got the black book for a freak to call Picked up the telephone, then dialed the 7 digits Said, "Yo, this marquis, baby! are you down with it?" I arrived at her house, knocked on the doo Rnot having no idea of what the night had in store I'm like a dog in heat, a freak without warning I have an appetite for sex, 'cause me so horny

Girls always ask me why I fuck so much I say "what's wrong, baby doll, with a quick nut?" 'Cause you're the one, and you shouldn't be mad I won't tell your mama if you don't tell your dad I know he'll be disgusted when he sees your pussy busted Won't your mama be so mad if she knew I got that ass? I'm a freak in heat, a dog without warning My appetite is sex, 'cause me so horny

95

6.1 Song: Me So Horny, Artist: 2 Live Crew, Album: As Nasty As They Wonna Be (1989) You can say I'm desperate, even call me perverted But you say I'm a dog when I leave you fucked and deserted I'll play with your heart just like it's a game I'll be blowing your mind while you're blowing my brains I'm just like that man they call Georgie puddin' pie I fuck all the girls and I make 'em cry I'm like a dog in heat, a freak without warning I have an appetite for sex, 'cause me so horny. (sample from full metal jacket) ”Ahh! hold on this! oh, sock it to me!” (sample from full metal jacket)

It's true, you were a virgin until you met me I was the first to make you hot and wetty-wetty You tell your parents that we're goin' out Never to the movies, just straight to my house You said it yourself, you like it like I do Put your lips on my dick, and suck my asshole too I'm a freak in heat, a dog without warning My appetite is sex, 'cause me so horny (sample from full metal jacket) ”Fuckie suckie. me fuckie suckie.”

96

7. Judas Priest’s “Better by you Better than Me”- Lyrics and Music

The song that was accused of brainwashing the two teenagers of committing suicide was “Better by you Better than Me” from the album “Stained Glass”. (Block, 1990: p.788) The prosecutors identified the repeated message “Do it, Do it” when the song was played backwards, something that was not proven in court thus the band and their music were acquitted. (Block, 1990: p.788) The lyrics of the song are given here to the reader, along with the song that can be found in track five (5) of the supplied CD, (see appendix 12), in order for the reader to judge for himself/herself if the lyrics are encouraging suicide or if there is a hidden message in the song.

7.1 Song: Better by you Better than Me, Artist: Judas Priest, Album: Stained Glass (1978)

You could find a way to ease my passion You listen to the blood flow in my veins You hear the teaching of the wind Tell her why I’m alive within I cant find the words My mind is dead Its better by you better than me

Guess you’ll have to tell her how I tried To speak up thoughts I’ve held so inside Tell her now I got to go Out in the streets and down the shore Tell her the worlds not much living for Its better by you better than me

97

7.1 Song: Better by you Better than Me, Artist: Judas Priest, Album: Stained Glass (1978)

Everybody, Everybody knows Everybody, Everybody knows Better by you better than me

You can tell what I want it to be You can say what I only can see Its better by you better than me

Guess Ill have to change my way of living Don’t wanna really know the way I feel Guess Ill learn to fight and kill Tell her not to wait until They’ll find my blood upon her windowsill Its better by you better than me

Everybody, Everybody knows Everybody, Everybody knows Better by you better than me You can say what I only can see You can tell what I want it to be Its better by you better than me Better by you better than me

You can tell what I want it to be You can say way all they can see Better by you better than me

98

8. Ozzy Osborne‘s “Suicide Solution”- Lyrics and Music The lyrics of Ozzy Osborne’s “Suicide Solution” will be presented to the reader here, in order for the reader to interpret the lyrics himself/herself. As mentioned earlier the song was accused of encouraging a teenager to commit suicide and was prosecuted for this reason. Of course the case failed in court. (Block, 1990: p.808) The song can be found on track six (6) on the supplied CD. (see appendix 12)

8.1 Song: Suicide Solution, Artist: Ozzy Osborne, Album: Blizzard of Ozz (1980)

Wine is fine but whiskeys quicker Suicide is slow with liquor Take a bottle and drown your sorrows Then it floods away tomorrows

Evil thoughts and evil doings Cold, alone you hang in ruins Thought that you’d escape the reaper You cant escape the master keeper

Cause you feel like you’re living a lie Such a shame whose to blame and you’re wondering why Then you ask from your cask us there life after birth What you sow can mean hell on this earth

Now you live inside a bottle The reapers traveling at full throttle Its catching you but you don’t see The reaper is you and the reaper is me

99

8.1 Song: Suicide Solution, Artist: Ozzy Osborne, Album: Blizzard of Ozz (1980)

Breaking laws, knocking doors But there’s no one at home Made your bed, rest your head But you lie there and moan Where to hide, suicide is the only way out Don’t you know what its really about

9. Anti Nowhere League‘s “Suicide So What”- Lyrics and Music

The lyrics to the song “So What”, the first song to be declared legally obscene in the UK will be presented here, on order for the reader to judge for himself/herself if the song has the ability to “deprave and corrupt”. The song can be found on track seven (7) of the CD supplied with this research project. (see appendix 12)

9.1 Song: So What, Artist: Anti Nowhere League, Single (1982)

Well, I’ve been to Hastings and I’ve been to Brighton I’ve been to Eastbourne too So what, so what And I’ve been here, I’ve been there I’ve been every fucking where So what, so what So what, so what, you boring little cunt

Well, who cares, who cares what you do Yeah, who cares, who cares about you, you, you, you, you

100

9.1 Song: So What, Artist: Anti Nowhere League, Single (1982)

Well, I’ve fucked the queen, I’ve fucked Bach I’ve even sucked an old mans cock So what, so what And I’ve fucked a sheep, I’ve fucked a goat I rammed my cock right down its throat So what, so what So what, so what, you boring little fuck

Well, who cares, who cares what you do And, who cares, who cares about you, you, you, you, you

And I’ve drunk that, I’ve drunk this I’ve spewed up on a pint of piss So what, so what I’ve had skunk, I’ve had speed I’ve jacked up until I bleed So what, so what So what, so what, you boring little cunt

Well, who cares, who cares what you do Yeah, who cares, who cares about you, you, you, you, you, you

101

9.1 Song: So What, Artist: Anti Nowhere League, Single (1982)

I’ve had crabs, I’ve had lice I’ve had the clap and that ain’t nice So what, so what I’ve fucked this, I’ve fucked that I’ve even fucked a school girls twat So what, so what So what, so what, you boring little fuck

Well, who cares, who cares what you do And, who cares, who cares about you, you, you, you, you, you

So fucking what!

10. Crass‘“Sheep Farming in the Falklands”- Lyrics and Music

The band Crass was one of the primary targets of censors in the UK because of so called obscene lyrics. Of course the band was prosecuted because of its anarchic political beliefs. (Cloonan, 1996:p.80) A perfect example of a song by the band being prosecuted because of its political message that personally attacked Margaret Thatcher for her involvement in the Falkland’s War is “Sheep Farming in the Falklands”. The song lyrics can be found in this chapter and the song can be found on track eight (8) of the CD. (see appendix 12)

102

10.1 Song: Sheep Farming in the Falklands, Artist: Crass, Album: Yes Sir, I Will (1983)

Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming

Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming Fuck off to the Falklands for your sea-faring fun Big man's jerk off dreamland, looking down the barrel of a gun

Friggin' in the riggin' another imperialist farce Another page of British history to wipe the national arse The royals donated Prince Andrew as a show of their support Was it just luck the only ship that wasn't struck was the one on which he fought?

Three cheers for good old Andy, let's take a pic for his mum And stick it up the royal, stick it up the royal, stick it up the royal album Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming

Onward Thatcher's soldiers, it's your job to fight... "And, you know, I don't really give a toss if the cause is wrong or right, My political neck means more to me than the lives of a thousand men, If I felt it might be of use to me I'd do it all over again.

103

10.1 Song: Sheep Farming in the Falklands, Artist: Crass, Single (1982)

The Falklands was really a coverup job to obscured the mistakes I've made, And you know I think gamble I took could certainly be said to have paid. With unemployment at an all-time high and the country falling apart I, Winston Thatcher, reign supreme in this great nations' heart."

Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming While the men who fought her battles are still expected to suffer Thatcher proves in parliament that she's just a fucking nutter

The iron lady's proved her metal, has struck with her fist of steel Has proved that a heart that is made out of lead is a heart that doesn't feel Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming

Now Thatcher says... "Oh raunchy Ron, we've fought our war Now it's your turn to prove yourself in El Salvador I've employed Micheal Heseltine to deal with P.R. He's an absolute prick, but a media star

He'll advocate the wisdom of our cruise missile plan Then at last I'll have a penis just like every other man They can call it penis envy, but they'll pay the price for it... But the peasants are hungry Mags, "Let them eat shit"

104

10.1 Song: Sheep Farming in the Falklands, Artist: Crass, Single (1982)

Sheep farming in the Falklands, re-arming in the fucklands Fucking sheep in the homelands, her majesty's forces are coming Who the fuck cares, we're all having fun? Mums and dads happy as their kids play with guns

The media loved it, when all's said and done... "Britain's bulldog's off the leash" said the Sun As the Argies and Brits got crippled or died The bulldog turned around and crapped in our eyes.

Brit wit, hypocrite, don't you yet realise You're not playing with toys, you're playing with lives... You piss straight up in your self-righteous rage Wilfs, goms and gimps in the nuclear age

Four minute warning, what a shock, Well balls to you rocket cock You're old and you're ill and you're soon going to die You've got nothing to lose if you fill up the skies You'd take us all with you, yeah, it's tough at the top You slop bucket, shit filled, puss ridden, death pimp snot..YAH FUCK

105

11. Ice-T’s ‘“Cop Killer”- Lyrics and Music

Ice-T’s song “Cop Killer” was banned because of its violent lyrics against the police. (Winfield and Davidson, 1999: p.41) The song’s lyrics are presented next for the listener to interpret in his/hers own way, and the song can be found on track nine (9) of the supplied CD. (see appendix 12) 11.1 Song: Cop Killer, Artist: Ice-T, Album: Body Count (1992) Cop killer! yeah!

I got my black shirt on. I got my black gloves on. I got my ski mask on. This shits been too long. I got my twelve gauge sawed off. I got my headlights turned off. Im bout to bust some shots off. Im bout to dust some cops off. Im a cop killer, better you than me.

Cop killer, fuck police brutality! Cop killer, I know your familys grieving, (fuck em!) Cop killer, but tonight we get even, ha ha.

I got my brain on hype. Tonightll be your night. I got this long-assed knife.

106

11.1 Song: Cop Killer, Artist: Ice-T, Album: Body Count (1992) And your neck looks just right. My adrenalines pumpin. I got my stereo bumpin. Im bout to kill me somethin. A pig stopped me for nuthin!

Cop killer, better you than me. Cop killer, fuck police brutality! Cop killer, I know your mommas grieving, (fuck her!) Cop killer, but tonight we get even, yeah!

Die, die, die pig, die! Fuck the police Yeah!

Cop killer, better you than me. Im a cop killer, fuck police brutality! Cop killer, I know your familys grieving, (fuck em!) Cop killer, but tonight we get even, ha ha ha ha, yeah!

Fuck the police! Break it down.

107

11.1 Song: Cop Killer, Artist: Ice-T, Album: Body Count (1992)

Fuck the police, yeah! Fuck the police, for darryl gates. Fuck the police, for rodney king.

Fuck the police, for my dead homies. Fuck the police, for your freedom. Fuck the police, dont be a pussy. Fuck the police, have some muthafuckin courage. Fuck the police, sing along.

Cop killer

Cop killer! whaddyou wanna be when you grow up? Cop killer! good choice. Cop killer! Im a muthafucking Cop Killer Cop killer, better you than me. Cop killer, fuck police brutality! Cop killer, I know your mommas grieving, (fuck her!) Cop killer, but tonight we get even!

108

12. CD Track list

All songs mentioned above can be found on the supplied cd. The track list of the CD: 1. Prince-Darling Nikki 2. Twisted Sister-Under the Blade 3. P.F Sloan- Eve of Destruction 4. 2 Live Crew-Me so Horny 5. Judas Priest-Better by You Better than Me 6. Ozzy Osborne-Suicide Solution 7. Anti Nowhere League-So What 8. Crass- Sheep Farming in the Falklands 9. Ice-T-Cop Killer

109

13. Learning Agreement

Paraskevas Hadjikyriacou 10069/BRA 0306 Industry Perspectives/ RA203 Learning Agreement Censoring popular music in Western Democracies: Challenging the right to free speech. A critical history 1967-present Word Count: 2480

110

Table of Contents Introduction

1

Rationale

1, 2

Theoretical background

2-5

Methodology

5

Discussion

6-8

Expected Outcomes

9

Bibliography

10

Time-Task Allocation

11

111

Censoring popular music in Western Democracies: Challenging the right to free speech. A critical history 1967-present

1. Introduction

For this research project I decided to research and study a subject that is of great interest to me and often attracts conflicting views in our so called democratic society. My research project will be about censoring popular music in Western democracies from 1967 until this date. This research project will present a historical, legal and cultural analysis of censorship in popular music; identify the different groups that try to censor popular music and the reasons behind their efforts to censor popular music. Furthermore this research project will try to identify the relationship between censorship and the right that every individual has to free speech and discuss the consequences that censorship of popular music has in our democratic society.

2. Rationale

The reason why I chose this particular subject for the research project is because censorship is such an important and controversial issue in a democratic society where, everyone has the right to free speech but at the same time some regulations are implied to control what is being broadcasted in order not to offend the public in general and particularly vulnerable groups such as children. In addition to this I decided to focus my research on a particular time period from 1967 till this day because it was during the 1960s that such musical genres such as rock n roll emerged who were more controversial lyrically and in their overall image. Although censorship was always present in one form or another in any civilized society, it was during the late 1960s to the mid 1990s that censorship in music became a very controversial and debatable issue.

112

This was due to the new musical genres that emerged such as rock n roll, gangsta rap and heavy metal along with the political status of that certain period both in the United States and the United Kingdom which saw a rise in neo conservative governments in the formal with the Nixon, Reagan and Bush senior administration and in the latter with the Thatcher administration. (Blecha, 2004: p.56) Of course at the same time period certain pressure groups, such as the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) in the United States and the National Viewers and Listeners Association (NVALA) in the United Kingdom emerged, that called for regulation of lyrical content especially, that portrayed themselves as protectors and regulators rather than censors. (Cloonan, 1996: p.217) So it is important to acknowledge these circumstances and see how they affected the whole issue of censorship in music. In addition to that it is equally if not more important to ask a question: do censors achieve their goal of protecting the general public from “obscene” material, or do they make the material they are trying to censor stronger by giving it more publicity and exposure? Finally what effect does censorship has regarding the right that all individuals have to free speech?

3. Theoretical background

In order to understand my chosen subject and complete this research project successfully I will have to analyze historical, legal and cultural aspects that address the issue of censorship in music. I have identified certain books that address these issues and will be in great help for me in completing the research project. Martin Cloonan (1996) presents a critical history of the censorship of popular music in Britain between 1967 and 1992. This book will be in great help for me as it presents a comprehensive history of censorship in England; outlines the philosophical and historical characteristics of censorship while presenting certain case studies that help the reader understand the legal aspects of this debate.

113

Cloonan (1996: p.13) analyzes and explains the Obscene publication act of 1959, which is the main act used to regulate and censor publications in Britain, and shows how it is implied in UK law with the case studies that he presents. Additionally he analyzes the different forms of censorship and the different groups that are participating in censorial efforts. (Cloonan, 1996: p.29) Furthermore he writes about censorship in broadcasting, both on radio and on television, and presents certain incidents regarding censorship that occurred in the time period that he analyzes. (Cloonan, 1996: p.99) Cloonan and Garofalo’s (2003) book, “Policing pop”, is also a great resource for my research as it analyzes and defines censorship in music. This book defines the levels of censorship in thematic categories, presents the various groups that act as censors and the reasons behind their actions and finally analyzes some case studies regarding the issue. This book is en excellent resource as it analyzes legal cases that emerged in the United States, in the United Kingdom and in Germany. A very interesting case study that is analyzed in this book is the German Nazi punk scene that emerged in Germany in the late 1970s and gained enormous publicity after the collapse of the communist eastern bloc in the beginning of the 1990s. This case serves as a very interesting example of how censorship is a fragile and problematic subject. Even if the above scene provoked public opinion by inciting hatred against ethnic minorities, it was an underground scene that became stronger and gained publicity after a strong media campaign against it. With high profile articles in Der Spiegel magazine such as “Punkculture from the slums: Brutal and ugly” in 1992; and on television, MTV dedicated a whole day to the topic in 1993, this shows that this scene emerged from the underground and was exposed in the mainstream by the media. The media was responsible for the expansion of the scene as statistics before 1993 showed that they were thirty such bands and after 1999 the number of these bands increased to more than one hundred. After this media campaign the German government restricted the distribution of such music that resulted in the music being distributed in Scandinavian countries and the

114

Czech Republic. So a scene that started in Germany and was mainly based there, expanded in other countries due to the above measures from the German government. (Cloonan and Garofalo, 2003: p.151-187) The book also talks about another very interesting issue that bares significance and hasn’t been addressed so far in my proposal, the issue of censorship from and within the record industry. (Cloonan and Garofalo, 2003: p.17-20) In addition to the above this book talks about censorship cases in the United States that emerged from the activities of the Parents Music Resource Center, a group formed by Tipper Gore, which is very interesting and crucial for my research. (Cloonan and Garofalo, 2003: p.59) Tipper Gore’s (1987) book, “Raising PG kids in an X-Rated society”, will be another very valuable resource as it is written by one of the main protagonists of the censorship debate in the United States. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, Tipper Gore was one of the founding members of the Parents Music Resource Center, a pressure group that called for regulation on popular music in the United States. This resulted to a high profile senate hearing in 1985 that resulted in an agreement by the Recording industry of America to put an advisory warning sticker on cds with explicit lyrical content. (Cloonan and Garofalo, 2003: p.25) Peter Blecha’s ((2004) book, “Taboo Tunes: A history of banned bands and censored songs”, will also help the development of my research as it presents examples of censorship throughout the world and focuses especially on censorship examples in the United States. Winfield’s and Davidson’s (1999) book, “Bleep: Censoring rock and rap music”, will also be part of my research as it uses examples of how various groups tried to censor gangsta rap and heavy metal music. The journal “Index on censorship”, will allow me to dwell deeper in the whole issue of censorship in music from a philosophical and critical point of view. Although this journal does not only deal with the issue of censorship in music it will help me understand the

115

whole concept behind the reasons why certain groups censor certain forms of art, music and ideas in general. These are some of the sources that will help me complete my research.

4. Methodologies

For this research project I will use qualitative research. The qualitative research will be used to gather information regarding the historical, legal and cultural aspect of censorship in music. I will research the historical background of censorship in general and focus on censorship in music through out the years to see how it has evolved. I will compare the historical aspects with the cultural aspects of each period and try to see how the political and social climate affected the public perception about censorship. Finally I will analyze the various forms of legislation that emerged and how this affected the public perception of censorship in music. With this method I will have the chance to make comparisons between the information gathered, in order to help me generate a theory that will help me answer my research question. Furthermore my research will be based on the analysis of different case studies, which I will compare to one another, in order to establish a relationship between them. As my subject is theoretical and the amount of time to complete it is minimal, my methodology will be based solemnly on secondary sources.

116

5. Discussion

A definition of censorship

In order to understand the subject, a definition of censorship must be given. Of course defining censorship has been and still is problematic, as judgments on what to censor generally rest upon prevailing norms. (Cloonan and Garofalo, 2003: p.15) The most appropriate definition, in my opinion, regarding censorship in music is Cloonan’s (1996: p.23) definition Censorship is the attempt to interfere, either pre or post publication, with the artistic expressions of popular musicians, with a view to stifling, or significantly altering, that expression. This includes procedures of marginalization, as well as the overt banning, of such expressions. Note that this includes market, as well as moral, censorship.

So Cloonan (1996) here gives a very interesting definition of censorship in music as he talks about the attempt to interfere in an artistic expression of an individual, in this case of a popular musician, in order to alter his expression. From this first point arises the first question. How is it justifiable, in a democratic society where everyone has the right to free speech, to alter someone’s expression? To answer this question certain factors must be taken into account. How, why and who is trying to censor the artistic expression?

How to censor: Levels of censorship

There are three basic levels of censorship: prior restraint, restriction and suppression. Prior restraint is mostly executed by record companies that refuse to release material from artists they have already signed. This as you will see in the following paragraphs can happen because of certain reservations that record companies face, after pressure from certain groups, to release material that contains obscene language, sexual content or offensive material to certain religious or social groups. (Cloonan and Garofalo , 2003: p.17)

117

Restrictions can be imposed by banning certain songs from being played on the radio. By this measure certain artistic material is not banned entirely but kept from being openly available to the public. (O’Higgins, 1972: p.12) Suppression involves attempts by governments or their legal systems to enforce a moral and political code. (Blecha, 2004: p.57) This is the most extreme level of censorship as an artistic work is overtly banned.

Who censors: Pressure groups, governments, record labels

Most of the attempts to censor music come from civil pressure groups that call for voluntarily restrain of artistic works from record companies on moral grounds or government regulation by promoting court actions against certain recordings material. (Winfield (ed) and Davidson (ed), 1999:p.12) A good example of a pressure group is the Parents Music Resource Center as mentioned in chapter three. Governments through legislations try to ban certain material from being published. The Obscene publication act of 1959, in the United Kingdom is often used to try and restrict material from being published. On the other hand the 1st Amendment in the United States makes this difficult as it states that everyone has the right to free speech regardless of his ethnicity, his religion or his political persuasions. (Blecha, 2004: p.74) Finally as mentioned in the previous paragraph record labels often refuse to release material and sometimes drop their artists for producing certain musical works that are considered offensive.

118

Motives behind censorship

There are four main motives behind the urge to censor: political, cultural, moral and religious. Political motives try to stop the political expression of certain groups usually carried out by governments. Cultural motives, try to oppress and persecute a segment of society for expressing its cultural identity through the use of a particular language or musical genre associated with that identity. Moral motives, that try to persuade society that there is moral decay that has harmful effects on society. Religious motives that focus on either music’s inherently spiritual character or its associations with religious beliefs outlawed by the government. (Cloonan, 1996: p.29) The main motive behind censorship in my opinion though, is that of fear. Every society has a fear of subjects that it does not comprehend or subjects that threaten its so called status quo. A very good example is the whole punk movement in the United Kingdom in the late 1970s with bands such as the Sex Pistols which questioned authority and the so called “British values”.

Does censorship has a positive or negative effect?

After analyzing the concept of censorship, the levels of censorship and the certain groups that try to impose censorship it is important to address the issue of its effectiveness. By censoring a certain musical genre such as gangsta rap or heavy metal, censors put it in the spotlight and make it more accessible to the general public. (Winfield (ed) and Davidson (ed), 1999:p.21-28) It is unjustified to argue that for example, censors try to ban the musical genres mentioned above to protect vulnerable groups such as children, as the chances of children seeking this kind of extreme music and become exposed to it are slim. On the other hand by putting it in the spotlight expose is inevitable.

119

6. Expected Outcomes With the conclusion of my research I expect the following outcomes to emerge: Censorship has a negative impact on culture and society in general as a democratic society can not be considered democratic, if every individual member of that society does not have the right to free speech. Censors often make the material that they are trying to censor available to the general public by exposing it through the media spotlight. This results in further publicity and exposure of the “offensive material” to vulnerable groups such as children who would not have had the chance to listen and view this material if it was not presented to them by the mainstream media. Finally, even if some forms of music are “offensive” and extreme to some individuals, those individuals have the choice to reject it by not buying the music or by not listening to it when it is broadcasted. All it takes is to change the channel or switch it off.

Word Count: 2480

120

Bibliography

BLECHA, P., 2004. Taboo tunes: A history of banned bands and censored songs. San Francisco: Backbeat

CLOONAN, M., 1996. Banned! Censorship of popular music in Britain:1967-1992. Hants: Ashgate.

CLOONAN, M. AND GAROFALO, R., eds, 2003. Policing pop. Philadelphia: Temple

GORE, T., 1987. Raising PG kids in an X-Rated society. Nashville: Abingdon

KORPE, M., ed, 2004. Shoot the singer! Music censorship today. London: Zed

O’HIGGINS, P., 1972. Censorship in Britain. London: Nelson

OWEN,U., BIAFRA, J., PAGLIA, C., eds, 1998. Index on censorship: Smashed hits, the book of banned music. London: Index on censorship

NUZUM, E., 2001. Parental advisory: Music censorship in America. New York: Perennial

WINFIELD, B.H. AND DAVIDSON, S., eds, 1999. Bleep! Censoring rock and rap music. London: Greenwood

121

Time-Task Allocation

Month 1: Gather sources from the internet, the British library and the Barbican library. Categorize my sources into historical, cultural and legal. Try to find an easy way of filing the sources gathered.

Month 2: Locate the books I am going to read and start reading, starting with historical books that will give me a broad overview of my subject. Study the historical sources thoroughly and document the sources

Month 3: Locate books on the cultural aspect of censorship. Study the cultural sources thoroughly and document them. Compare them with the historical sources.

Month 4: Study relative legal cases regarding censorship. Compare the legal cases. Start structuring and compiling my ideas in order to generate a theory to answer my research question

Month 5: Start structuring my essay. Start writing my essay.

Month 6: Write the first drafts of my essay. Edit the drafts and complete the essay.

122

Images

The Founding Members of the PMRC (Taken from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/73/PMRC.jpg)

The Parental Advisory Label (Taken from http://www.djprashant.com/images/parental%20advisory.bmp)

123

Mary Whitehouse-The Predominant Spokesperson of NVALA (Taken from http://www.nndb.com/people/527/000066329/whitehouse-angry-granny.jpg)

The cover of Anti Nowhere League’s “So What” (Taken from http://www.recordstore.co.uk/images/covers/ANL-WHAT.jpg)

124

The cover of 2 Live Crew’s “As Nasty As They Wanna Be” (Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:As_Nasty_As_They_Wanna_Be_cover.jpg)

125

Acknowledgments

First and foremost this research project is dedicated to all musicians that have been prosecuted and attacked for their art and often seen their fundamental right of freedom of expression taken away from them. I would like to say a big thank you to my other half, Theodora for supporting all of my decisions these past few years and standing beside me for the good and more often bad times of my life. I would like to thank my parents and grandparents for supporting me throughout my studies and more specifically my mum for always believing in me and my granny Elli for always giving me that much needed pocket money. A big thank you also goes out for auntie Androulla for putting up with me these two years and for my uncle Pete and auntie Doulla for helping me in every step of the way. I would also like to thank Andrea and Dafni for all of their love and support. More specifically I would like to thank Andrea for the proofreading of this paper and for all of the support and knowledge I gained from him throughout my teenage life. I would also like to thank my uncle Costas for the vast amounts of knowledge he offered my throughout my life and for always helping me think for my self and constructively criticize everything around me. I would like to thank Giorgio for all his guidance throughout the last six months. Finally I would like to say a big thank you to all the guys from Handheld Audio for welcoming me in the “wonderful” world of the music industry and always giving me time off work for studying. And always remember, as Maynard James Keenan says: “Censorship is Cancer”.

126

Cover Image taken from: (http://radicalgraphics.org/albums/Censorship/censorship.sized.jpg)

127