percent of buyers of censoring-type music are between the ages of ten and
fourteen (Zucchino 9). Parents seemingly enjoy complaining about the trashy
music their children listen to, but if parents feel that strongly about it,
they should check the music their children purchase either before or after
their children purchase the album (preferably before) (Editors 10). People and
musicians alike, agree that it violates the first amendment, ” freedom of
speech” (Rosen et al. 10). Since most of the lyrics to that type of music are
inaudible anyway, what is the point? (Editors 10). These supposedly, awful,
“backward messages” would be very hard to detect because approximately ninety-
five percent of music players cannot play things backwards (Editors 10). By
stating such a thing, advocates of censorship suggest that when played
backwards, secret messages are unearthed that normally would not be heard when
music is played like it should be played. The censorship action of taking the
music off the shelves takes away the privilege of buying that music for people
who have different values and who want to listen to that music. If the music
bothers someone, turn it off; if the album offends someone, complain to the
band or ignore them; if a video disgusts someone, change the channel. The
options for censorship are there, use them. Not every person in the world is a
moral freak. The government takes censorship too far because most of the
senator’s wives are members or “associates” of PMRC. In most music stores,
listening booths have been erected in order for customers to listen to the
music before purchasing it, so that they did not buy “objectionable” music or
music that they personally found offensive. Also, radio stations cannot please
everyone all the time. Meaning that some of the music played might be
objectionable to some, but everyone’s thoughts and ideas on “objectionable”
music differ. Therefore making it virtually impossible to please the entire
public at the same time. Not all alternatives to censorship are inept and
unreasonable. “Toning down” lyrics is an option to musicians, especially big-
time sellers. Maybe if more parental involvement became incorporated in their
children’s lives, which includes music, the need for censorship would decrease.
Labels placed on albums acknowledging the use of explicit or vulgar language
alert people who prefer not to hear those sort of words. Printing the lyrics
inside the albums was also a suggestion made to musicians. Musicians might
also start to consider the majority age group in which they are popular, and if
the group is of younger ages, nine to fourteen, for them to consider the “moral
health of children in America” when writing lyrics. Lastly, if what the
listener is listening to does not appease them, the off and stop buttons are
there for a purpose. If the radio is a problem, turning the station will do
just fine.
Most ratings and labels are unnecessary evils we have to live with. Musicians
feel these will eventually lead to more and more censorship, such as taking
away the first amendment rights and telling them they may not sing certain
lyrics because it is “offensive” or rated R. As quoted way back in 1985, Frank
Zappa feels it:
Opens the door to and endless parade of moral quality-control programs based on
Things Certain Christians Don’t Like. What if the next bunch of Washington’s
Wives demands a large yellow J based on the material written and performed by
Jews. . .? (Zucchino 9).
During the summer of 1985, the women of PMRC, managed to get eight percent of
the music industry to place PG labels on albums with lyrics or pictures thought
to be sexually explicit and/or promoting violence, suicide, rape, the occult,
or drug abuse. (Eight percent is about twenty-four companies) (Zucchino 9).
The label reads :”Parental Advisory – Explicit Lyrics,” (Zucchino 1). As if the
PG rating was not enough, the PMRC felt it had been watered down too much. So
they asked that it be raised to R (Zucchino 9). Also, because they already had
the PG label they wanted, they felt they could get more, so they tried for four
additional labels: D/A for drugs and alcohol, V for violence, O for occult, and
X for vulgar and explicit language (Zucchino 9). Plus, they wanted a panel of
all industry types [such as artists, songwriters, executives, producers,
distributors, broadcasters, retailers, et cetra] and consumers to draw the
guidelines of what qualifies for this rating, instead of the people who
actually write these “dirty records” (Zucchino 8).
Stanley Gortikov, president of the Recording Industry Association of America
(RIAA), suggested that the PMRC develop its own rating system for songs, lyrics,
and albums, as the Catholic Church had done for movies (Zucchino 3). He felt
insulted that the PG rating was shoved back into his face as not being good
enough. Even the PG rating was “approached with trepidation,” and yet they had
the audacity to push and push for more. A “review panel” in itself is a first-
stage form of “ad hoc censorship,” to him. After two meetings with the PMRC
women, Gortikov had been pressured into trying to get ALL recording companies
to place the PG rating label on certain albums (Zucchino 8). For that, Frank
Zappa, Dee Strider (lead singer of Twisted Sister), and Danny Goldberg ( a rock
manager and lyric libertarian), accused Gortikov of “caving in” to PMRC
(Zucchino 8). The PMRC realizing that it was strongly influencing Gortikov,
took advantage of that and pushed for further extensive ratings (Zucchino 8).
Ratings ultimately provide no benefit to the children they are meant to protect.
In fact, they seriously threaten the artists’ freedom of expression and
everyone’s freedom of choice (Editors 13). Currently, songs identified as
“objectionable” contain sexual, violent, or occult imagery or lyrics. But once
the restriction of language, for any reason, becomes possible, that could be
extended to include politically unorthodox lyrics (Editors 13).
Radicals and people who believe they can change the country constantly try to
convince the American public that censorship is a very good thing and it is
“healthy.” People were born with minds for a reason, to use them and make
choices for themselves. Censoring music takes away that whole purpose. If we
had been born without brains and not able to make choices for ourselves, then
maybe censorship might be necessary. Ratings, labels, and censoring in any
form are all unnecessary evils that society needs to relinquish, besides that, a
brain’s purpose for creation involved choice and decision making, let people
take advantage of their privilege.