Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Informed consent quizlet
Informed consent in healthcare
The doctrine of informed consent
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Informed consent quizlet
POPULAR MUSIC UNDER SIEGE
Beginning in the 1980s, religious fundamentalists and some parents' groups have waged a persistent campaign to limit the variety of cultural messages available to American youth by attacking the content of some of the music industry's creative products. These attacks have taken numerous forms, including a call by the Parents' Music Resource Center (PMRC) for the labeling of recordings whose themes or imagery relate to sexuality, violence, drug or alcohol use, suicide or the "occult," and prosecutions of record companies and storeowners for producing or selling albums that contain controversial songs.
After years of pressure from the PMRC and a series of Senate hearings in 1985, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) introduced, in 1990, a uniform labeling system using the logo, "Parental Advisory - Explicit Lyrics." The RIAA initiated this system without providing record companies with any standards, criteria or guidelines for determining what albums should be labeled. That decision is left completely up to the companies, which have chosen to label only selected rock and rap albums and not recordings of country music, opera or musical comedy that may also contain controversial material.
Dissatisfied with the RIAA's labels, many would-be censors have demanded even more limits on the sale of music with controversial lyrics. As a result, legislators have introduced bills in more than 20 states in recent years that would require warning labels far more detailed than the RIAA's. Some proposed laws would go beyond mandatory labeling and actually ban the sale to minors of music deemed to be objectionable.
Until 1992, none of this legislation had passed, although in 1991 a bill in Louisiana failed by only one vote. In 1992, however, the state of Washington passed a law that required storeowners to place "adults only" labels on recordings a judge had found to be "erotic"; the law also criminalized the sale of any labeled CD or tape to a person under age 18. Fortunately, the law was never enforced because a few months after passage a state court declared it unconstitutional.
Even though Washington's "erotic music" law failed, the battle over proposals to label or otherwise restrict certain music sales will probably continue. The groups and individuals who have been attacking popular music want to impose their personal moral and political standards on the rest of us. The American Civil Liberties Union is working hard to prevent the achievement of that goal, which would imperil the First Amendment rights of musicians, and of all Americans, to create, perform and hear music of our own choosing.
The PMRC still wouldn’t rest there they wanted more censorship, but unknown to them the Parental advisory stickers had positive and negative reactions. Soon after the stickers were put on albums huge retailers were refusing to sell them, record companies were forced to create “clean” albums to gain their profit back. But at the same time people were starting to buy more albums because of the sticker, it gave “minors” more incentive to buy albums that contained explicit content.
Just the fact that Pandora practically comes with a warning label as a being harmful shows
The RIAA just wants the public to know that what is going on is not only wrong, but illegal. There are ways around it, use them. Singers and songwriters make something we consider to be highly valuable. You can listen to CD's in your house, in your car, and while working out. It is a very widely used form of entertainment. When you buy a CD you are getting your money's worth. Walking away from this article the reader has two choices; keep on downloading, risk getting caught and fined, depreciate the value of the music being made by forcing singers and songwriters to find day jobs, or stop downloading and buy the valuable music used greatly every day.
To at least some people, however, Jack Valenti, the man responsible for devising the Motion Picture Association of America and the National Association of Theatre Owners, is leading the effort, as editorialist James Wall put it, "to protect children" (1227). Valenti wrote, "The voluntary Movie Rating System has one objective: to issue advance cautionary warnings to parents so they can make their own decisions about what movies their children should or should not see. No one -- appointed, anointed, or elected -- ought to insert themselves into individual parental decisions" (87). But the film classification system, designed to assist parents in making decisions about their offspring's film patronage, often thwarts that very purpose and, in the process, actually stifles the creativity and honesty of the film industry as well.
In 1968 Jack Valenti, the president of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), established the Classification and Ratings Administration (CARA) in an effort to reduce the amount of objectionable material in film. Before 1968, the MPAA required that all films follow the guidelines of the Production Code. The Production Code stipulated what was and was not appropriate to appear in films. In 1966, the MPAA elected Jack Valenti president and he changed the code to a rating system based on the amount of objectionable content in a film. The rating system went through several amendments until the current rating system. A controversy arose when The Weinstein Co. film Blue Valentine received an NC-17 rating for a sexually explicit scene involving the main characters in the film. The controversy over the rating of the film stirred up the question of the effectiveness of the MPAA rating system. Critics were already questioning the effectiveness of the MPAA, but the recent controversy helped to stimulate those questions. The rating system that the MPAA enforces on films is ineffective.
In today?s society, we value and learn to tolerate different cultures and people. Sometimes people end up expressing themselves differently as well. This country is based on the idea that we may express ourselves any way we want to, be it religion, organizing, writing, or speaking. Music has been a popular form of expression for centuries. These days, in the country best known for freedom, some people are trying to censor it the freedom of music. Music should not be censored along with any other form of expression otherwise what we and artists say are being controlled. If we value freedom, then that includes what we may say and how we say it even in musical form.
Today’s kids are growing up faster and maturing at a faster rate than ever before. Twenty years ago it would be impossible to show breasts in a PG-13 movie. Today, kids are being taught the fasts of life younger than anyone could of imagined. This is all due to older brothers, the Internet and schools teaching kids about sex at the age of twelve. If everything else is changing except the rating’s no one is going to obey the law.
Many bills have been passed to stop explicit messages in music from getting out. Censorship limits the amount of lyrics that get out to the community about violence. (History of Music Censorship) It may also limit anything in music that a community might find offensive to its values or beliefs. The lyrics presented in some songs are not appropriate for young adults. Some say music censorship goes against the First Amendment. It stops artists from expressing how they may feel. The profit on albums often goes down because of censorship. Censorship constantly targets rap and hip hop, and they are usually hit the hardest. (Forms of Music Censorship)
The United States of America seems to be protected by a very important historical document called the Constitution. Despite the fact that it was written and signed many years ago, the American people and their leaders still have faith in the Constitution. One of the major statements of the Constitution is the First Amendment, freedom of speech. Although it is difficult to decide what is offensive and what is not, it is clear to see that songs of rape, violence, bigotry, and songs containing four letter words are completely unnecessary for susceptible minds to acknowledge. It is reasonable to say that more people listen to music everyday and for that reason, music tends to be more influential. The American people should consider the idea of censorship of music lyrics that influence violence. We as Americans, have the voice to make artists think about the harm that their lyrics can cause their listeners and possibly change their damaging style. I think it would benefit the American people to research the effects of music lyrics on people, debate the findings of the research, and discuss the consequences and possible solutions for the problem. Those who see no problem with the explicit and vulgar lyrics of today's music use The United States Constitution to back up their rights. This very Constitution was adopted by a convention of the States on September 17, 1787 (12) and has been a ruling thumb in the actions of the United States Government. The current date is April 21, 1999—that's 212 years later! This is where the very popular freedom of speech amendment comes into play. This Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exe...
The ESRB rating system was created in 1994 in response to violent video games like Doom, Mortal Kombat, and Night Trap. The ESRB rating system is meant to protect those under the ages of each rating, eC (Early Childhood) through A (Adult, 18+). While it is not illegal to sell Adult or even Mature games to minors, most retailers like Gamestop and Target refuse to sell them to those under 18. Also, console manufacturers will usually not allow a game to be produced if it is unrated, or if it refuses to be rated. The ESRB rating system is a system that rates games based on how ‘adult theme...
Music censorship has been a major problem plaguing America for over fifty years. In 1957, Elvis Pressley was only allowed to be filmed from the waist up on the Ed Sullivan show (Nuzum 1). Plenty of controversy has taken places between then and now, but more recently it has become much more prominent in the media, and people and organizations are beginning to actually take a stand. For example, Island Records (owned by Disney) dropped the Insane Clown Posse just after their release of The Great Milenko and MTV actually refused to play Madonna's video for Justify My Love because it was considered too sexually explicit (Nuzum 1).
Music’s role on society has changed drastically through the course of its history as it has become ever so increasingly expansive. Many of the previous musical movements were only for the wealthy as entertainment
The music industry’s history is a convoluted mess. There is no real consensus on what the music industry IS and what paths it has taken. Were the Beatles the greatest band to ever exist? Maybe. Is there a hyper objectification of women throughout the “men’s club” that is the music industry? Probably. It’s this hard to define, frankly confusing business that is worth roughly $130 billion dollars today. With it’s flimsy and opaque edges, can the music industry ever be called into question on its wrongdoings? The racist undertone throughout its history may force it to. With the music industry as an ever growing business that seems to change almost every decade, the one thing that has not changed throughout time is an undercurrent of racism that
Music has always been a basic form of expression. From Antonin Dvorak, to Eminem, to even ancient, tribal music, it has been a medium through which individuals convey their thoughts and expressions. Today this medium is under attack. Everywhere we turn, everything we do and say is being scrutinized. We are being told what to say. We are being spoon-fed our emotions. No longer are we allowed to think freely, openly. All the censors out there are on the prowl for another piece to rip to shreds because it doesn't fit their description of what is decent and moral. What they fail to realize is that we don't make the music for them... We do it for release.
Every human possesses some guaranteed basic freedoms and rights, whether it is the freedom of speech, or the freedom to express themselves. However, the government seems to be increasingly determined to limit these freedoms, using censorship to confine these rights that we usually take for granted. The most important facet of media in general is that it allows people to express themselves freely. In fact, this freedom of expression that music allows us is one of the primary reasons why it exists. Sadly, many of the current artists have forgotten that, but nonetheless, censorship seems to always be there to limit the expression of those who choose to place deeper messages in their songs.